Silverwood calls for honesty from Sky pundit Cummings

[wall_of_voodoo]

I think you are all missing the point Silverwood is making.

It isn't about having ex-referees explaining decisions or not and explaining the rules to the uninitiated. This is about a wrong decision being made on the field and Cummings agreeing with the decision even though it was blatantly wrong. Nothing wrong with Cummings stating an on-field decision is wrong - just that he rarely does.

The penalty for wire when we were attacking is exactly the case in point and no one can explain how both the ref on the day and Cummings both say Wigan caused some (or any) obstruction enough to give wire the penalty.

[SJ]

Easy solution for forward passes....... overhead camera....... the lines dont lie

They do if you're running.

just follow the path of the ball mike...... imo forward is forward

I ussually watch the direction from the "passer's hands.

[morley pie eater]

At the risk, or certainty, of being misunderstood/shot down in flames, here goes on forward passes:

1. Stevo's famous "momentum rule" doesn't exist in those terms, but he was more-or-less right.

2. You need to try to understand something called "relative motion":
Suppose you're on a train, standing in the aisle with a tennis ball in your hand. You toss it straight up and then catch it. It simply goes straight up and down.

BUT...now consider that the train is passing through a station. Someone on the platform is watching. They see the ball thrown up, coming down and being caught. In the time this happens, the train (and therefore the ball) has travelled 20 metres forward.

The motion of the ball is vertical to anyone in the train carriage. But it moves 20 metres forward to someone on the platform.

As far as I'm aware, the rules state the the ball must not be passed forward relative to the players. If they're running at 8 minutes to a mile (fairly slow), that's 3.33 metres per second. So if player B receives the ball from player A, who is 1 metre ahead of him the whole time, and the pass takes 1 second hand-to-hand, the ball travels 1 metre backwards relative to the players, but 2.33 metres forward relative to the pitch, the white lines, and the speccies.

At 4 minute mile speed, they'd cover 6.66 metres per second, and the ball, whilst going back 1 metre between players would therefore go forward 5.66 metres relative to a spectator.

Clear? Clear as mud probably.

(Don't read on if you think the above is garbage.)

If you like a challenge, work this one out. An ant is crawling at 0.1 metre per sec in a straight line.

The straight line is a spoke of a bicycle wheel. The bike is doing 4 metres per sec in a straight line.

But the wheels motion is circular.

The bike is on the deck of a ship, travelling at 30km per hour in a straight line East to West.

The earth is rotating at 360° per day West to East.

Observed from the moon, what is the ant's speed and direction.

[SJ]

My post solves any motion you mention or Stevo's "momentum rule"what counts is the direction of throw by the passing made by the player that isn't toward his opponents try line. !........or is it???

[SJ]

In none
relative terms and maintaining its original velocity the ants velocity will remain constant

[Firestarter]

They do if you're running.

just follow the path of the ball mike...... imo forward is forward

I ussually watch the direction from the "passer's hands.

if we forget the players and concentrate on the ball was my point sj...... i do understand your point as well

[Mike]

just follow the path of the ball mike...... imo forward is forward

I ussually watch the direction from the "passer's hands.

if we forget the players and concentrate on the ball was my point sj...... i do understand your point as well

If you're sprinting through a gap and pass the ball to someone behind you, it will always be forward w.r.t. the ground. You'd have to chuck it backwards faster than you were going forwards.

[Levrier]

Easy solution for forward passes....... overhead camera....... the lines dont lie

This one has been done to death. Would someone like to link the video explanation. At the moment the rule is that the ball must go backwards relative to player releasing rather than the ground. If you want it the other way all supporting players would have to stand at 45degrees to the player with the ball or even directly behind them.

[Firestarter]

Easy solution for forward passes....... overhead camera....... the lines dont lie

This one has been done to death. Would someone like to link the video explanation. At the moment the rule is that the ball must go backwards relative to player releasing rather than the ground. If you want it the other way all supporting players would have to stand at 45degrees to the player with the ball or even directly behind them.

you can actually be in front of the passer and reach backwards for the ball..... forward is forward..... the only way a ball can go back then forward is wind....... maybe bring back penalties for deliberate forward passes..... i just want to see consistency with this and also the diabolical play the ball

[Mike]

Easy solution for forward passes....... overhead camera....... the lines dont lie

This one has been done to death. Would someone like to link the video explanation. At the moment the rule is that the ball must go backwards relative to player releasing rather than the ground. If you want it the other way all supporting players would have to stand at 45degrees to the player with the ball or even directly behind them.

you can actually be in front of the passer and reach backwards for the ball..... forward is forward..... the only way a ball can go back then forward is wind....... maybe bring back penalties for deliberate forward passes..... i just want to see consistency with this and also the diabolical play the ball

You really are saying that all forward passes should be judged relative to the ground, not the player's motion?

You're ready for all passes in the game right now to be given as forward when the players are running towards the opponents line right? Its a physical fact, not a hypothesis, but you're just ignoring it.