Its certainly going to be interesting when its first trialed thats for sure. If it improves the game for the fans i'm all for it, if it doesn't I'm not.
Sorry Rabbits, but I have to disagree. I'm all in favour of anything that will cut down on the number of forward passes in the game.
Some teams (usually the faster ones) regularly chance a forward pass knowing that the touch judges are very reluctant to call a pass forward, so I don't think it levels itself out. Certainly here in the SuperLeague I know which teams are the leading exponents.
We will be heading down the slippery slope that is Rugby Union unless we use technology to cut out the forward pass.
To tackle the fear of a higher number of scrums, award a penalty (as for a deliberate forward pass) and you'll find that the players will stop doing it.
Souths.
An old timer talking here,if only we could get back to when the forwards used to be having a bit of biff in the middle when the ball had been won from the scrum and then they left the backs to it.
I can rember the time when the attacking team for instance would win a scrum on one side of the field (lets just say the right) on the half way line and the left winger would be well inside his own 25 yard line.
There must have been a 25 degree angle between the starting point of the attack and the players on the other side of the field.
Bring back some form of contested scrums and you would'nt see so many forward passes.
Open to healthy argument.
theo I agree, I too loved the contested scrums with a bit of biff and your hooker was probably the most valuable player on the field especially if he was capable of winning 1 or 2 scrums against the feed.
On saying that, rugby league needed to change because there was something like 20+ different scrum penalties that could be given at any one time and to lose a game besides a final because of a lousy scrum penalty was so un-fair. (for the benefit of the young one's you could take a shot at goal from a scrum penatly back then)
If you recall we used to have something like a 16-14 scrum count per game, now we only get a 7-5 or there about's ........less scrums and more ball movement makes it more attractive for the idiot box & spectators alike...IMO
Souths.
I have looked at what you say and I will go with you on most things,but we hav'nt addressed what the article was about. Forward Passes.
At present the amount of forward passes going unpunished (note I did not say undetected) is barmy.
I think the reason for this is No1 the TV people want to see the game moving all the time and No 2 the Ref and Linesmen are terrified of being shown up in case replays show them to have made a mistake.
If the RL wanted to tackle the problem it could be done,by instructing the officials to blow up for every suspected forward pass untill players and coaches got the message.
This would proberbly lead to a few messy matches at first,but it may cause the attacking team to line up more like they used to do. Also by lying a bit deeper and running on to the ball it would give them more options when they reach the defensive line.
Where more often than not at present we have teams facing each other with only a few yards between them trying to push their way through.
Wether the TV people would allow this is questionable and maybe I am alone in this,but it is something different to consider.
stop the forward passes if it is possible then lets stop them their is far to many
Rabbitohs, im totally with you. Im all for technology helping a ref make the right decision but definatly dont think technology should MAKE the decision.
Video replays allow a qualified ref to make a decision, what this is implying is a machine detects a pass is forward and makes the descision for the ref. If a ref can overrule then what is the point in having it
An incorrect decision from a ref i can accept, a machine i cannot and there will be instances where the system would get it wrong, for example, momentum rule with a flick pass, how can a chip in the ball judge the momentum of a player if he flick the pass in one touch or knocks back a kick unless there is GPS in all the players shirts, also what if the gps in the ball breaks and a ref sees a boarderline pass he would have called forward but doesnt get the buzz and lets it go.
Technology assisting refs is great, technology being refs is unfair
what next micro chips in players heads to detect the high tackles that go unpunished.....
When the video ref first came in I was suspicious of some smarty coming along with his own technoligy able to bring up the green try sign on the scoreboard, it hasn't happened yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if/when it does.
I'm all for changes in life with technoligy but I've got my doubts about it in sport.
I feel if there is a technological way of doing something there will always be a technological way for some smart-**** to undo it.
On saying that, I would hate to see a team lose a grand/final on a forward pass that was missed by the officials, I still feel the linesman should be able to help the referee a hell of a lot more but like theo said, they don't won't to be castigated for being wrong.
It will be interesting to see how the trial goes if/when it does.....cheers
What is this - April 1st???
GPS technology can only determine what direction something is travelling, and as we all know, a ball is ALLOWED to travel forwards over the ground providing it has not been propelled 'forwards' from the passing player. (The word 'forwards' in this context having a totally different meaning to 'forwards over the ground' )
A simple accelerometer would be sufficient for this and there would be no need for GPS technology at all so I can only assume this is a wind -up - or (deliberate?) misrepresentation.
essenby......they are actually talking satelite.....where they can detirmen if the ball does leave the fingers in a forward motion......personally it is all a bit much for me, I say give those fairies with the flags some responsibility....if only they would grow some balls and make a decision once and for all.
Technoligy has scared them to the point of being proven wrong.
Satellite - as in Satellite Camera? Now I KNOW you taking the 'P'. The chances of an unobstructed vertical view (without which we're talking opinion and interpretation again!) are probably less that those of the average man in the street understanding why a ball can be thrown backwards yet appear to travel forwards.
Satelite micro chip placed in every ball........don't shoot the messenger, I'm not a lover of it at all.....
Page 1 of 1
First
Previous
1
Next
Latest
Sign in if you want to comment
When is enough - enough
Page 1 of 1
posted on 4/8/11
Its certainly going to be interesting when its first trialed thats for sure. If it improves the game for the fans i'm all for it, if it doesn't I'm not.
posted on 4/8/11
Sorry Rabbits, but I have to disagree. I'm all in favour of anything that will cut down on the number of forward passes in the game.
Some teams (usually the faster ones) regularly chance a forward pass knowing that the touch judges are very reluctant to call a pass forward, so I don't think it levels itself out. Certainly here in the SuperLeague I know which teams are the leading exponents.
We will be heading down the slippery slope that is Rugby Union unless we use technology to cut out the forward pass.
To tackle the fear of a higher number of scrums, award a penalty (as for a deliberate forward pass) and you'll find that the players will stop doing it.
posted on 4/8/11
Souths.
An old timer talking here,if only we could get back to when the forwards used to be having a bit of biff in the middle when the ball had been won from the scrum and then they left the backs to it.
I can rember the time when the attacking team for instance would win a scrum on one side of the field (lets just say the right) on the half way line and the left winger would be well inside his own 25 yard line.
There must have been a 25 degree angle between the starting point of the attack and the players on the other side of the field.
Bring back some form of contested scrums and you would'nt see so many forward passes.
Open to healthy argument.
posted on 5/8/11
theo I agree, I too loved the contested scrums with a bit of biff and your hooker was probably the most valuable player on the field especially if he was capable of winning 1 or 2 scrums against the feed.
On saying that, rugby league needed to change because there was something like 20+ different scrum penalties that could be given at any one time and to lose a game besides a final because of a lousy scrum penalty was so un-fair. (for the benefit of the young one's you could take a shot at goal from a scrum penatly back then)
If you recall we used to have something like a 16-14 scrum count per game, now we only get a 7-5 or there about's ........less scrums and more ball movement makes it more attractive for the idiot box & spectators alike...IMO
posted on 5/8/11
Souths.
I have looked at what you say and I will go with you on most things,but we hav'nt addressed what the article was about. Forward Passes.
At present the amount of forward passes going unpunished (note I did not say undetected) is barmy.
I think the reason for this is No1 the TV people want to see the game moving all the time and No 2 the Ref and Linesmen are terrified of being shown up in case replays show them to have made a mistake.
If the RL wanted to tackle the problem it could be done,by instructing the officials to blow up for every suspected forward pass untill players and coaches got the message.
This would proberbly lead to a few messy matches at first,but it may cause the attacking team to line up more like they used to do. Also by lying a bit deeper and running on to the ball it would give them more options when they reach the defensive line.
Where more often than not at present we have teams facing each other with only a few yards between them trying to push their way through.
Wether the TV people would allow this is questionable and maybe I am alone in this,but it is something different to consider.
posted on 5/8/11
stop the forward passes if it is possible then lets stop them their is far to many
posted on 5/8/11
Rabbitohs, im totally with you. Im all for technology helping a ref make the right decision but definatly dont think technology should MAKE the decision.
Video replays allow a qualified ref to make a decision, what this is implying is a machine detects a pass is forward and makes the descision for the ref. If a ref can overrule then what is the point in having it
An incorrect decision from a ref i can accept, a machine i cannot and there will be instances where the system would get it wrong, for example, momentum rule with a flick pass, how can a chip in the ball judge the momentum of a player if he flick the pass in one touch or knocks back a kick unless there is GPS in all the players shirts, also what if the gps in the ball breaks and a ref sees a boarderline pass he would have called forward but doesnt get the buzz and lets it go.
Technology assisting refs is great, technology being refs is unfair
posted on 5/8/11
what next micro chips in players heads to detect the high tackles that go unpunished.....
posted on 6/8/11
When the video ref first came in I was suspicious of some smarty coming along with his own technoligy able to bring up the green try sign on the scoreboard, it hasn't happened yet, but I wouldn't be surprised if/when it does.
I'm all for changes in life with technoligy but I've got my doubts about it in sport.
I feel if there is a technological way of doing something there will always be a technological way for some smart-**** to undo it.
On saying that, I would hate to see a team lose a grand/final on a forward pass that was missed by the officials, I still feel the linesman should be able to help the referee a hell of a lot more but like theo said, they don't won't to be castigated for being wrong.
It will be interesting to see how the trial goes if/when it does.....cheers
posted on 10/8/11
What is this - April 1st???
GPS technology can only determine what direction something is travelling, and as we all know, a ball is ALLOWED to travel forwards over the ground providing it has not been propelled 'forwards' from the passing player. (The word 'forwards' in this context having a totally different meaning to 'forwards over the ground' )
A simple accelerometer would be sufficient for this and there would be no need for GPS technology at all so I can only assume this is a wind -up - or (deliberate?) misrepresentation.
posted on 10/8/11
essenby......they are actually talking satelite.....where they can detirmen if the ball does leave the fingers in a forward motion......personally it is all a bit much for me, I say give those fairies with the flags some responsibility....if only they would grow some balls and make a decision once and for all.
Technoligy has scared them to the point of being proven wrong.
posted on 10/8/11
Satellite - as in Satellite Camera? Now I KNOW you taking the 'P'. The chances of an unobstructed vertical view (without which we're talking opinion and interpretation again!) are probably less that those of the average man in the street understanding why a ball can be thrown backwards yet appear to travel forwards.
posted on 10/8/11
Satelite micro chip placed in every ball........don't shoot the messenger, I'm not a lover of it at all.....
Page 1 of 1