I disagree. I have looked closely at the pass frame by frame and it is clear that the forward motion of the pass is an optical illusion created by the fact that Traille was tackled while the ball was in the air - thus he became stationary - after it had been passed, and Michalak was going forward. Traille clearly released the ball laterally to Michalak who was just behind him and he was looking back at him as he released the ball, and his hand was in front of the ball. According to what this video is saying that is a legitimate legal backwards pass. But even if it was marginally forward, I do not accept that France's victory was tainted, because NZ got away with a forward pass, a line out throw which was clearly not straight and an illegal tackle.
If all passes were judged relative to movement over the ground then most running passes would be forward and a running game of rugby would not be possible. The pass must be judged relative to the players; basically if a player passes the ball, the ball remains behind him (or would be behind him if his momentum is not stopped by a tackle) until it is caught by the next player. Simples
So how can you say with any certainty that 'the ball would have remained behind him' if he wasn't tackled? And what if the thrower actually sped up immediately after throwing the ball forward, so that the ball appears to remain behind him? Not simple at all, by a long stretch.
You can certainly see in the example that the ball is rifling/ spinning the whole time and the point is not pointing forwards, suggesting a legal pass.
It makes perfect sense. It should be flat or back out of the hands momentum(force of nature) takes the ball forward. The same applies if there is a strong wind, if you pass it back but the wind (force of nature) blows the ball forward any amount of distance, it is not a foward pass. If the ball spills forward it is forward. If at the point the ball is released it is going backwards out of the hands it does not matter where it ended up., but with control
You are completely correct. The rule is that the ball must come backwards out of the hands, but after that, it may go anywhere, including forward. Finally, someone who understands!
Momentum is not a force of nature any more than throwing is: after the ball leaves the hands in any pass it's moving due to a combination of the players forward momentum plus the momentum he imparted to the ball with his hands.
The R.U.Decided: "Yes, but it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground, but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by the hand or arm of the player passing the ball, which must be at the discretion of the referee."
Running parallel to the sideline is the simple case. When a player starts from the left sideline located on the other half of the field and runs towards the posts, if he passes the ball to his right, the distance to cover to the goal increases, if he passes to his left, it decreases.
Fantastic to see common sense on forward passes by the IRB. While some of our Northern bretheren would love to see every pass followed by a scrum, the majority of rugby supporters like to see positive play rewarded. While you can moan about specific passes, the fact is the team was good enough to create the play.
Except the ball often has momentum from the player's forward movement plus from the hands and it can very difficult to tell how much of each is involved: so you'll keep getting reasonable people disagreeing. If you stick to the ball not being allowed to travel forward then an overhead shot will have all reasonable people agreeing whether the pass was legal or not.
Great soon it will be like American Football with the ball slung forty yards forwards. Watch the ball now being put into the scrum. It i is put in crooked and the scrums keep collapsing. Australians always had trouble with their props . Weak backbones perhaps. Funny this disregard for forward passes. Why are the refs so pernickety at lineouts even on a windy day. But now 'not straight' is OK if defenders don't compete, so Hooker can sling it straight or directly to the.Scrum Half.
@rahowhero backward as in toward your own try line, not relative to where you face. The point of this video is, "did the passer aim the ball more toward his own tryline or toward the opposition tryline?" as oppose to "where did the ball end up relative to the passer".
In the National Federation of State High School Associations (American football rules), it's about the initial direction of the ball as it leaves the passer's hands; it's not about how the passer imparts the motion. In the other American and Canadian rule sets, it's about where it touches the ground, an official, or another player relative to the release point. But it's still relative to the field in all cases.
Law 12 DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line. If the ball didn't move it would still have 'relative velocity', it's to do with co-ordinates and frames of reference, I think they're confusing it with 'what scientists call' momentum? By law 12, if it moves towards the opposition goal line it is forward, otherwise a knock on in the tackle is just conservation of linear momentum.
Exactly. If they're looking at the arm motion used by the player relative to his body, they're sure not consistent about it! Knocking the ball on when tackled in most cases wouldn't be a throw forward at all, because the player's arms didn't move relative to his body, and technically it can't be called a knock-on because the player had possession of it, it could only be a throw-forward or nothing. Seeing which way the ball was moving when the player releases it may be hard to judge, but there surely are plenty of hard cases if you go by the IRB's current, para-legal standard, because the player may be facing in various directions relative to the ground. IRB's being hypocritical pretending they're going by their own actual law book here.
@PsychoTemplar The law clearly states that the ball must be passed deliberately forward out of the hand of the passer to be a forward pass. If the passer throws the ball laterally, or backwards in regards to his or her own position, it is not a forward pass. Whether the ball travels forward does not matter at all, only that it does not travel forward of the passers position out of their hand.
Very difficult to ref. How do you measure the speed someone is running and therefore whether the ball is moving forward because of his speed? The only certainty is whether the ball moves towards the dead ball line. This would be far easier to ref. Otherwise whenever a player is running forward and passes the ball forward you will have observers saying it was backwards. What, is the camera going to focus on the hands to see if the motion is forwards?
I have mixed feelings about this. In my opinion the game of rugby is much better and more fun if the rule is enforced in the way the video suggests. On the other, the way Law 12 is written clearly contradicts it: "A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line." It doesn't say that "'forward' means further forward than the player's momentum." It says towards the opposing team's dead ball line, which doesn't depend on the player's momentum. If they want to enforce according to the player's momentum, that's great, but then they should change the rule so that it's written the way it's enforced.
+Michael Lubin That is how the rule is written, the rule says throws the ball forward. If you release at a 90 degree angle you are not passing it forward. Momentum is secondary.
+Tythais By any clear understanding of "towards the opposing team’s dead ball line," if the ball gets closer to the opposing team's dead ball line after release, then it's going towards the opposing team’s dead ball line. If they wanted to say "in the DIRECTION OF the opposing team’s dead ball line relative to the passer's motion at the moment of release," they should have said that. I'm beginning to suspect, from some of the comments posted here and in other places where this is debated, that the people who favor the permissive interpretation put forward in this video have enough political power within World Rugby to make their interpretation prevail, at least for international matches, but not enough to actually change the rule. There are even whispers of a hemispheric split, with the North favoring a more constrictive interpretation. If this is true - and I don't know if it is - it would explain why there is this strange discrepancy between the official rule and its official interpretation.
+Michael Lubin But the focus is on the action, the balls direction of release not its direction of motion, as suggested by the words 'throw' and 'release'. It nowhere says 'the balls direction of motion must not be forward'. A player travelling forward can release a ball backwards and have it travel forward, as counter-intuitive as it seems. Plus, if the rule was interpreted incorrectly, it would be almost impossible not to throw a forward pass at speed unless it was short or you were running backwards. This would ruin the game.
+Tythais The word "release" doesn't occur in Law 12. And it would be pretty hard to define a "throw forward" without the word "throw." Precisely because the rule doesn't spell out any details, the logical interpretation is the simplest one - that "towards the opposing team’s dead ball line" means "the ball moving closer to the opposing team’s dead ball line." I agree that if it was interpreted this way, it would mess up the game. You can say what you like about the way the rule is written, and try to squeeze a meaning out of it where it implies the way the player threw it relative to himself rather than the ball's motion relative to the ground, but it really doesn't say that. I just wish they would change the rule so it wouldn't be so confusing. They used to have something like this in baseball. According to the rulebook, a pitch is high if it's above the batter's armpits, but it used to be that most umpires would call it high if it was above approximately their bellybuttons. It varied from umpire to umpire and went on like that for years and years. They don't seem to call it that way as much any more. I just like it when a game has the honesty to make the rules match up with how they're interpreted, and with as much clarity as possible. That is not true of Rugby Union's Law 12 by the most generous interpretation.
+Michael Lubin There is a difference between the ball being thrown forward and traveling or moving forward so using the words "throw" and "pass" means that the only thing that matters is how the ball leaves the hands. It can travel towards the opponent's dead ball line but as long as it was passed/thrown backwards then it is not a forward pass. There is no need to mention anything about momentum in the law because it is not the job of the rule book to explain the physics of it, even though it is not obvious and would avoid the need for videos like this. At least that would be my defense of the wording of the law but I'll admit it certainly isn't obvious.
@saintkevinNL Yes I realize that Total Rugby is an IRB channel but in there own rule book, (which you can read for yourself in IRBdotCOM QUOTE from IRB laws - Law 12 page 2 "'Forward' means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line" No reference is made to the relative posistion of the players or the how the ball leaves the hand QUOTE AGAIN "'Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line"
Bull! The only reference in the laws is in relation to the dead-ball line, which is part of the field and a fixed line of reference... There is no reference in the laws to relative motion or any word to the effect of "relative to the player"... What if the player is running at an angle? What if he is running toward his own try-line? Does forwards than become backwards?
The first, second and fourth examples, at the beginning, were all forward, as the players were either moving at a rightangle to the running direction or passed after they were stopped and were no longer moving forward.
The law states "... 'Forward' means towards the opposing team's dead ball line." The reference for the motion forward is defined relative to a static plane; the field, not intention of the hands. The problem with this is that the law doesn't allow for relative velocity thus the view provided in the video needs a ref to subjectively judge relative players velocity, point of release and relative motion outside of the law. No wonder there is confusion and differences between interpretations.
@johnmatthewryan59 . The Law is ambiguous in its wording. "DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD: A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line." This can just as easily be interpreted as "forward" being the direction the player passes relative to himself and not the direction the ball travels over the ground. This is not a new debate. In 1949, when the RFU was still the caretaker of the Laws they were asked about this.
@johnmatthewryan and others. You are assuming that "forward" in the law refers to the direction of travel of the ball. It does not refer to that. It refers to the direction of motion of the passer's hands. That it what most people do not understand about this law, and what the video is trying to explain.
Since the word closest to "forward" is "ball", why wouldn't it be about the direction of the ball, rather than the passer's hand? "Hand" isn't even mentioned in the definition.
finishing my last comment (could not fit it all), yes a coach makes the play call, but the team must adjust it from there. for example, the defense must recognize the offensive formation and make a play adjustment based on formations, etc. The offensive line must recognize a blitz, and from what gap they are shooting, recognize a cross, a possible safety blitz., it is no walk in the park. and by the way an NFL play sounds like this "x-left two zebra bouncer post Tuesday, on one, BREAK!"
I think they used to interpret the rule more strictly in the 80s and 90s. I.e. static field analysis vs relative velocity analysis. It only matters that it's consistent across the board for each year of competition.
Well, you say he hasn't thrown the ball forward, but it left his hands and travelled forward, which may well be the definition of throwing the ball forward. Lol. I get it, but not sure I agree with the rule, lots of players pass running at speed and it arrives behind where they passed it from.
That's because of inertia (to put it _very_ simply, the resistance to change in motion), not an active attempt. What we're seeing are lateral passes, which _passively_ result in ball advancement. Forward passes actively send the ball toward the goal. If you still don't agree, well, I'd recommend watching a game of American football and compare ball movement. Chances are, ball advancement won't simply be chalked up to inertia, but deliberately attempting to throw the ball closer to the goal.
What if the ball is thrown backwards by a fast-moving player (hence the ball moves forwards from the point of the throw) and caught by a player who was in front of the fast-moving player at the point the throw was made? The pass has been thrown backwards but has gone to a player in front of the passer at the point the pass was made, so what'd the ruling be there?
Incorrect. They'd have to slow down or even stop in order to catch the ball when it arrives to them. But they wouldn't be offside. They would be offside if the ball was KICKED.
Kolby......No that's not right, if you are ahead of a player when they kick OR pass you are offside if you then attempt to play the ball. It's not just kicking that causes players to be offside. Consider the accidental offside rule, that penalizes players for touching a ball that was last touched by their team mate who was behind them regardless of whether or not it was kicked or passed.
You can fling your body at people as much as you like in Rugby. Brian Lima is case in point. The only difference is that you can't make 'big hits' by illegally headbutting people with a giant crash helmet.
It happens in Rugby as well. Possibly not as much as AF but I'm not sure. Rugby is more about endurance where AF is just explode for a few seconds. Both entertaining and very physical sports.
that's BS., At 2:20 he says the ball didn't come out of the players hand forward, but it does. Forget about where the player who passes the ball ends up, the ball left his hands and went forward from that point, it's not firkin rocket science.
Velocity should not enter into it. There is a technique for throwing the ball, that technique is a skill and if applied correctly eradicates the speed he is traveling at. This is a game played by humans not theoretical machines. If the passer is NOT to make a forward pass he has to adjust the angle at which he throws the ball. The only way that "law" would be in any way correct would be if it was shown he was unable to adjust his throw to compensate. This law makes a mockery of the game.
Now I totally understand what you're saying: any time the ball goes forward during a pass made by Ireland it was due to momentum imparted by the players speed, anytime it goes forward by a player playing against Ireland it due to momentum imparted by the hands of the passer. So glad I got that cleared up. I'm saying that to make the point that when fans watch a game that's how they'll see it for their team, that's the problem with not just saying anything which travels forward is a forward pass.
I get the momentum stuff and the motion relative to the players etc. But we've had passes where the passing player has been standing still, the ball has clearly gone towards the opposition goal line and the ref has ruled it came backwards out of the hands. How does that work? Does it matter which way the player is facing?
I don't know. I think that you would find that without padding the game would not be nearly the same and not as fun to play. It really is fun (just not as fun as rugby).
anyone going on about the relevance of the ground youre completely wrong from the go its about the direction the ball is PASSED not where it goes afterwards because its uncontrolable...THUMBS UP SO EVERYONE KNOWS
and its wrong, stupid rugby rules, its still forward. you can easily pass backwards and tell if its forward or not, when i pass on the halfway line my player can receive that pass on the halfway line, its not forward, he can also receive the pass before the line. quite easily see a forward pass or not, rugby thinks its so hard, they chickened out and made out of the hand bulshit to give themselves an out. But now you have an even worse game because of its tackling high , even tho in almost every contact its high anyway. Scott barrett got a cleanout that was like a ballistic missile , yet he receives a yellow for a contact to the shoulder of a player. crazy rugby
I agree with comments below, if they want momentum to be considered they need to state so in the law. The video example above opens a huge can of worms, because a heavily looping trajectory could mean a player throwing the ball high, looping and clearly forward pass (even an NFL style pass), if both players then accelerate enough the ball would be caught with the receiving player still behind the passer.
The referees - like judges in court - are free to interpret the law how they see fit, and the international rugby referee's boss has openly interpreted the rule to allow for the momentum of the players....Why would the way it's written in the rules be of concern to you? It's the interpretation of the laws that is important and that interpretation has been made very clear to all players and coaches in world rugby...If they can live with it then it's hard to see what your problem is really.
In a game with some confusing rules the one fundamental a fan could hang a hat on was the ball must go backwards. But no some passes can go forwards legally ... and some not, depending on position of players. Zero chance of consensus on big calls. Watched video above and to me both passes look forward, but I'm wrong, both legal.
Yep but it can look odd. A player can legally pass a ball from the field of play that crosses the try line during flight before being caught and touched down for a try. Legal but I'd like to see a ref award it in a world cup final.
Couldn't agree more. If you stick to the ball can't travel forward then an overhead camera will having all reasonable people agreeing. The argument that the ball must travel forward when players are both running fast is nonsense, passes that don't go forward between fast moving players happen all the time.
So... someone can run towards their own try line and then hurl the ball behind them, to a player 20m nearer the opposition's line? And that's not a forward pass because it was thrown backwards relative to the passer's motion?
there's a difference....the player receiving the pass is closer to the the opposition try line so it will directly count as forward. however, in cases like shown in the video, if the ball is thrown backwards relative to the thrower AND if the receiver is behind the thrower then it's not forward
@jeffrey89095 How can you suggest that it would be defying the laws of physics, Not every pass made by a player running at full speed, travels forward (in relation to the field) If forward relates to the player and not the ground then forward would depend on which way the player was facing You are right about one thing Jeffery, I have no Idea who I'm talking to, but with relation to the forward pass rule, you are WRONG
The fault in their reasoning is relative motion between the ball and players which are not fixed points. It is the movement of the ball relative to the ground ie movement towards the opponents dead ball line. A bit of David Blaine illusion .
people are seriously not getting this..if u eg dive over the try line and lose the ball it would go forwrd imediatly from where you lost it.a pass is not forward if it is aimed and at its origin goes backwards where it goes after is uncontrollabe as the BALL WILL travel with the same velocity as the player who passed it LEARN WHAT VELOCITY IS ITS SPEED IN A GIVEN DIRECTION so unless players are supposed to defy basic physics then this video is correct.
The fact that a referee refers a decisions upstairs for an isolated, calm and measured decision to then inevitably communicate to the TMO "let me tell you what I think..." from a screen 50-100 meters away with external influence is a disgrace. The referee is not certain - he consults the TMO - the TMO gives a decision. Simple. By stating his opinion he then puts enormous pressure on the TMO to agree with him. Not fair and not in the spirit of the game...
If you pass the ball at the right angle, more directed backward the faster you're running and the further you're passing, the ball's trajectory can be controlled. That's how you can to players far away when you're both running at full pelt.
2024 and SO many people still do not understand this simple law. Alot seem to be fans are other sports maybe a forward pass is about the ball there, not in rugby or league it aint.
I agree with Total Rugby. The thrower is not passing the ball forward, neither is the receiver in front of the thrower....So you can't call that a forward pass.....HELL NO!!
I believe this is a rule from "World Rugby": "Law 12: Knock-on or Throw Forward. 12.1. A knock-on occurs when a player loses ball possession, or contacts the ball with a hand or arm, and the ball goes forward to touch the ground or another player before this player gains, or regains, possession. FORWARD MEANS TOWARDS THE OPPOSING TEAM'S DEAD-BALL LINE." No Einstein involved there and that's good 'cause these refs aren't Einsteins by any stretch of the imagination.
Question: "If a player passes to one of his own team who is in line with him parallel to the dead ball line, both players running towards the opponents goal line, must not the pass be a forward pass in relation to the ground, owing to their forward movement?"
The statements made in this video are not supported by the actual rules as described on laws.worldrugby.org. In fact, none of the scenarios mentioned in this video are covered. It simply states (in the definitions section of the site) that "forward" = towards the opposition's dead ball line.. so I've no idea where the rubbish in this video comes from??? In fact, it would be almost impossible for any ref to apply the rules as they are described in this video
Just to show you it's still ruled the traditional way in American football, in a search of TH-cam for "forward pass" the one that's returned just above this one is this: NFL Rules Illegal Forward Pass - TH-cam . I know I've seen better examples on video or TV where the announcers were even more demonstratively showing the direction of the pass with telestrator. Notice that the announcer was complimenting the player on turning his body well enough to assure what he thought was a backwards pass; if that's a point of skill in American football, why isn't it one in rugby? Why should the referee just allow them the pass based on the player's running forward too fast and straight to make the ball travel backward? In Federation rules (used in most interscholastic games) it's about the direction of the ball as it leaves the passer's hand, so wind can't convert a forward pass to a backward one or vice versa. In NCAA and NFL rules it's about the point of release vs. the place it touches a player, the ground, or an official. In Football Canada and CFL, I don't recall offhand; they call an illegal forward pass an "offside pass" although the player receiving it isn't necessarily offside.
@@catprog This is a very common situation during plays described as "pitch-or-keep option", so that discrimination needs to be made, and an official is well advised to try to stay level with the ballcarrier when such a play is under way downfield.
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 not really if you go off the ball traveling level or backwards to the next player, not in regards to say a player passing whilst running at high speed and the next receiver is also running at the same speed who then recieves the baĺl "level" Have it so the ball must travel backwards regardless of terminal velocity, otherwise technically the ball is going forward in my mind
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 also 1:35 wouldnt that mean teams could run at defence, throw the ball in the air and continue their run forward past defending line, and 1 of his teammates could grab the ball in behind the defence?
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 No, he just has to put enough compensatory backwards force on the ball. This is the way passes are judged in American and Canadian football, which inherited the same wording as the IRB is still using, only the IRB has switched its meaning without ever saying so.
In a normal situation the ball is aimed backwards but once it is realeased the speed the passer is travelling at Eg:12mph then the ball will have a velocity of 12mph in the direction he was running so unless rugby players are meant to defy the laws of physics then this is not a forward pass
@@goodmaro if forward passes were dictated by start and stop position it would kill the game, passes would have to be thrown so hard and so backwards it would kill attacking play. Every single try youve ever seen from any back running straight and throwing a flat pass would be chalked out.
@@jeffrey89095 And yet that's how things were just decades ago. They did so much else in the interim to favor attacking play, why couldn't they at least leave this understanding alone, or at least write it into the laws in some way people could understand it as such?
@@goodmaro because nobody ever stopped to consider what backwards meant. Under the old laws two identical passes would be ruled differently based on a player being tackled. That's inherently unfair. The new rule when referred correctly removes arbitrary decision making once the direction of the pass out of the hands is clear. As for writing its inherently not a very simple concept but the rule itself is fairly clear once you have an understanding of what momentum is.
@@jeffrey89095 But they weren't supposed to be ruled differently, they were just being ruled on the wrong basis. In American and Canadian football, which started with the same concept of "forward" as is still in the IRB laws the way they're *written,* backwards passes are *not* ruled differently depending on the progress of the player after he gets rid of the ball. American, Canadian, Rugby Union, and Rugby League football all used this same concept, but in recent decades RU (and apparently RL) have been pretending it means something else.
if u throw a ball out a car travelling at 90kmh north then the ball will continue going 90kmh north before deaccelerating if u throw the ball behind u strongly the ball will still end up going forward relative to the ground NOT YOU hence you have not thrown the ball forward making the pass ok as the ball has travelled forward IT HAS NOT BEEN PASSED FORWARD there is huge diferance between where the ball is passed and where the ball goes afterwards. the pass is backwards!!!!ITS ABOUT THE PASS
Great & clear explanation ! Something to have in mind everytime you watch a rugby game.
Send this video to the tmo of the Blues vs Highlanders game
That was a very helpful explanation. I did not realise that.
That said, that French pass v the all blacks at 0:07 was forward by ANY measure!
No doubt.
And certainly a happy ending to that game.
So is the pass at 0:21 which should be especially obvious since the passer doesn't move at all yet passes towards the goal line.
I disagree. I have looked closely at the pass frame by frame and it is clear that the forward motion of the pass is an optical illusion created by the fact that Traille was tackled while the ball was in the air - thus he became stationary - after it had been passed, and Michalak was going forward. Traille clearly released the ball laterally to Michalak who was just behind him and he was looking back at him as he released the ball, and his hand was in front of the ball. According to what this video is saying that is a legitimate legal backwards pass. But even if it was marginally forward, I do not accept that France's victory was tainted, because NZ got away with a forward pass, a line out throw which was clearly not straight and an illegal tackle.
@@algraham7177 you are dreaming my friend
It appears that you don't make all your panel referees watch this, at least not in New Zealand.
Diabolical at the moment.
Excellent explanation!!
If all passes were judged relative to movement over the ground then most running passes would be forward and a running game of rugby would not be possible.
The pass must be judged relative to the players; basically if a player passes the ball, the ball remains behind him (or would be behind him if his momentum is not stopped by a tackle) until it is caught by the next player. Simples
@HA HA HA AH OH AH AH HA HA you're wrong, it's totally in accordance with the rules
So how can you say with any certainty that 'the ball would have remained behind him' if he wasn't tackled? And what if the thrower actually sped up immediately after throwing the ball forward, so that the ball appears to remain behind him? Not simple at all, by a long stretch.
Great stuff. Thank you.
Would've been good if you had drawn a line to show the arc of the ball's travel in your example.
Yep, no arc, just angled forward right from the start and through to the very end. Forward pass.
You can certainly see in the example that the ball is rifling/ spinning the whole time and the point is not pointing forwards, suggesting a legal pass.
It makes perfect sense. It should be flat or back out of the hands momentum(force of nature) takes the ball forward.
The same applies if there is a strong wind, if you pass it back but the wind (force of nature) blows the ball forward any amount of distance, it is not a foward pass. If the ball spills forward it is forward. If at the point the ball is released it is going backwards out of the hands it does not matter where it ended up., but with control
You are completely correct. The rule is that the ball must come backwards out of the hands, but after that, it may go anywhere, including forward. Finally, someone who understands!
Momentum is not a force of nature any more than throwing is: after the ball leaves the hands in any pass it's moving due to a combination of the players forward momentum plus the momentum he imparted to the ball with his hands.
@@houndofzoltan ok, Law of nature. Physics. You don't add anything to the discussion about the law of rugby.
@@barrynichols2846 Lol. Nobody likes being wrong.
@@houndofzoltan again, a non contribution to the discussion at hand
The R.U.Decided: "Yes, but it is pointed out that the definition of a throw-forward is not decided on relation to the ground, but on the direction of the propulsion of the ball by the hand or arm of the player passing the ball, which must be at the discretion of the referee."
Easy answer, turn your back and throw it up the field
Running parallel to the sideline is the simple case. When a player starts from the left sideline located on the other half of the field and runs towards the posts, if he passes the ball to his right, the distance to cover to the goal increases, if he passes to his left, it decreases.
get this to Wayne Barnes he needs to be enlightened
11 years later, after FRA-NZL WC opening match.
The player was not running. He just passed forward
Fantastic to see common sense on forward passes by the IRB. While some of our Northern bretheren would love to see every pass followed by a scrum, the majority of rugby supporters like to see positive play rewarded. While you can moan about specific passes, the fact is the team was good enough to create the play.
Except the ball often has momentum from the player's forward movement plus from the hands and it can very difficult to tell how much of each is involved: so you'll keep getting reasonable people disagreeing. If you stick to the ball not being allowed to travel forward then an overhead shot will have all reasonable people agreeing whether the pass was legal or not.
Great soon it will be like American Football with the ball slung forty yards forwards.
Watch the ball now being put into the scrum. It i is put in crooked and the scrums keep collapsing. Australians always had trouble with their props . Weak backbones perhaps.
Funny this disregard for forward passes. Why are the refs so pernickety at lineouts even on a windy day. But now 'not straight' is OK if defenders don't compete, so Hooker can sling it straight or directly to the.Scrum Half.
@rahowhero backward as in toward your own try line, not relative to where you face. The point of this video is, "did the passer aim the ball more toward his own tryline or toward the opposition tryline?" as oppose to "where did the ball end up relative to the passer".
In the National Federation of State High School Associations (American football rules), it's about the initial direction of the ball as it leaves the passer's hands; it's not about how the passer imparts the motion. In the other American and Canadian rule sets, it's about where it touches the ground, an official, or another player relative to the release point. But it's still relative to the field in all cases.
Law 12 DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD
A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line.
If the ball didn't move it would still have 'relative velocity', it's to do with co-ordinates and frames of reference, I think they're confusing it with 'what scientists call' momentum? By law 12, if it moves towards the opposition goal line it is forward, otherwise a knock on in the tackle is just conservation of linear momentum.
Exactly. If they're looking at the arm motion used by the player relative to his body, they're sure not consistent about it! Knocking the ball on when tackled in most cases wouldn't be a throw forward at all, because the player's arms didn't move relative to his body, and technically it can't be called a knock-on because the player had possession of it, it could only be a throw-forward or nothing.
Seeing which way the ball was moving when the player releases it may be hard to judge, but there surely are plenty of hard cases if you go by the IRB's current, para-legal standard, because the player may be facing in various directions relative to the ground. IRB's being hypocritical pretending they're going by their own actual law book here.
Great video!!! I give it a 5 star rating and a big LIKE! ;)
@PsychoTemplar The law clearly states that the ball must be passed deliberately forward out of the hand of the passer to be a forward pass. If the passer throws the ball laterally, or backwards in regards to his or her own position, it is not a forward pass. Whether the ball travels forward does not matter at all, only that it does not travel forward of the passers position out of their hand.
Very difficult to ref. How do you measure the speed someone is running and therefore whether the ball is moving forward because of his speed? The only certainty is whether the ball moves towards the dead ball line. This would be far easier to ref. Otherwise whenever a player is running forward and passes the ball forward you will have observers saying it was backwards. What, is the camera going to focus on the hands to see if the motion is forwards?
Can someone please get this video to Wayne Barnes... apparently he didn't get the memo... from his boss!
@JAW007JAW Yes cause the ball went forward compared to the passer. He chucked it in front of him so relative velocity doesn't come into account here
I have mixed feelings about this. In my opinion the game of rugby is much better and more fun if the rule is enforced in the way the video suggests. On the other, the way Law 12 is written clearly contradicts it:
"A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward.
‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line."
It doesn't say that "'forward' means further forward than the player's momentum." It says towards the opposing team's dead ball line, which doesn't depend on the player's momentum. If they want to enforce according to the player's momentum, that's great, but then they should change the rule so that it's written the way it's enforced.
+Michael Lubin That is how the rule is written, the rule says throws the ball forward. If you release at a 90 degree angle you are not passing it forward. Momentum is secondary.
+Tythais By any clear understanding of "towards the opposing team’s dead ball line," if the ball gets closer to the opposing team's dead ball line after release, then it's going towards the opposing team’s dead ball line. If they wanted to say "in the DIRECTION OF the opposing team’s dead ball line relative to the passer's motion at the moment of release," they should have said that.
I'm beginning to suspect, from some of the comments posted here and in other places where this is debated, that the people who favor the permissive interpretation put forward in this video have enough political power within World Rugby to make their interpretation prevail, at least for international matches, but not enough to actually change the rule. There are even whispers of a hemispheric split, with the North favoring a more constrictive interpretation. If this is true - and I don't know if it is - it would explain why there is this strange discrepancy between the official rule and its official interpretation.
+Michael Lubin But the focus is on the action, the balls direction of release not its direction of motion, as suggested by the words 'throw' and 'release'. It nowhere says 'the balls direction of motion must not be forward'. A player travelling forward can release a ball backwards and have it travel forward, as counter-intuitive as it seems.
Plus, if the rule was interpreted incorrectly, it would be almost impossible not to throw a forward pass at speed unless it was short or you were running backwards. This would ruin the game.
+Tythais The word "release" doesn't occur in Law 12. And it would be pretty hard to define a "throw forward" without the word "throw." Precisely because the rule doesn't spell out any details, the logical interpretation is the simplest one - that "towards the opposing team’s dead ball line" means "the ball moving closer to the opposing team’s dead ball line." I agree that if it was interpreted this way, it would mess up the game. You can say what you like about the way the rule is written, and try to squeeze a meaning out of it where it implies the way the player threw it relative to himself rather than the ball's motion relative to the ground, but it really doesn't say that. I just wish they would change the rule so it wouldn't be so confusing.
They used to have something like this in baseball. According to the rulebook, a pitch is high if it's above the batter's armpits, but it used to be that most umpires would call it high if it was above approximately their bellybuttons. It varied from umpire to umpire and went on like that for years and years. They don't seem to call it that way as much any more.
I just like it when a game has the honesty to make the rules match up with how they're interpreted, and with as much clarity as possible. That is not true of Rugby Union's Law 12 by the most generous interpretation.
+Michael Lubin There is a difference between the ball being thrown forward and traveling or moving forward so using the words "throw" and "pass" means that the only thing that matters is how the ball leaves the hands. It can travel towards the opponent's dead ball line but as long as it was passed/thrown backwards then it is not a forward pass. There is no need to mention anything about momentum in the law because it is not the job of the rule book to explain the physics of it, even though it is not obvious and would avoid the need for videos like this. At least that would be my defense of the wording of the law but I'll admit it certainly isn't obvious.
@saintkevinNL Yes I realize that Total Rugby is an IRB channel but in there own rule book, (which you can read for yourself in IRBdotCOM
QUOTE from IRB laws - Law 12 page 2 "'Forward' means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line"
No reference is made to the relative posistion of the players or the how the ball leaves the hand
QUOTE AGAIN "'Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line"
Bull! The only reference in the laws is in relation to the dead-ball line, which is part of the field and a fixed line of reference... There is no reference in the laws to relative motion or any word to the effect of "relative to the player"... What if the player is running at an angle? What if he is running toward his own try-line? Does forwards than become backwards?
The first, second and fourth examples, at the beginning, were all forward, as the players were either moving at a rightangle to the running direction or passed after they were stopped and were no longer moving forward.
The law states "... 'Forward' means towards the opposing team's dead ball line." The reference for the motion forward is defined relative to a static plane; the field, not intention of the hands.
The problem with this is that the law doesn't allow for relative velocity thus the view provided in the video needs a ref to subjectively judge relative players velocity, point of release and relative motion outside of the law. No wonder there is confusion and differences between interpretations.
@johnmatthewryan59 . The Law is ambiguous in its wording. "DEFINITION: THROW FORWARD: A throw forward occurs when a player throws or passes the ball forward. ‘Forward’ means towards the opposing team’s dead ball line." This can just as easily be interpreted as "forward" being the direction the player passes relative to himself and not the direction the ball travels over the ground. This is not a new debate. In 1949, when the RFU was still the caretaker of the Laws they were asked about this.
And what was their answer then?
depends how fast the passer is running,
Please show the 2023 RWC Final try
@johnmatthewryan and others. You are assuming that "forward" in the law refers to the direction of travel of the ball. It does not refer to that. It refers to the direction of motion of the passer's hands. That it what most people do not understand about this law, and what the video is trying to explain.
Since the word closest to "forward" is "ball", why wouldn't it be about the direction of the ball, rather than the passer's hand? "Hand" isn't even mentioned in the definition.
finishing my last comment (could not fit it all), yes a coach makes the play call, but the team must adjust it from there. for example, the defense must recognize the offensive formation and make a play adjustment based on formations, etc. The offensive line must recognize a blitz, and from what gap they are shooting, recognize a cross, a possible safety blitz., it is no walk in the park. and by the way an NFL play sounds like this "x-left two zebra bouncer post Tuesday, on one, BREAK!"
its forward if the player is in front of the passer or catches it in front
I think they used to interpret the rule more strictly in the 80s and 90s. I.e. static field analysis vs relative velocity analysis. It only matters that it's consistent across the board for each year of competition.
tweeted this to waynebarnes
Well, you say he hasn't thrown the ball forward, but it left his hands and travelled forward, which may well be the definition of throwing the ball forward. Lol. I get it, but not sure I agree with the rule, lots of players pass running at speed and it arrives behind where they passed it from.
That's because of inertia (to put it _very_ simply, the resistance to change in motion), not an active attempt. What we're seeing are lateral passes, which _passively_ result in ball advancement. Forward passes actively send the ball toward the goal. If you still don't agree, well, I'd recommend watching a game of American football and compare ball movement. Chances are, ball advancement won't simply be chalked up to inertia, but deliberately attempting to throw the ball closer to the goal.
What if the ball is thrown backwards by a fast-moving player (hence the ball moves forwards from the point of the throw) and caught by a player who was in front of the fast-moving player at the point the throw was made? The pass has been thrown backwards but has gone to a player in front of the passer at the point the pass was made, so what'd the ruling be there?
I'm pretty sure that would be forward still, as the receiving player was in front of the passer (offside), it's a lot like soccer.
I hope I'm right...
If a player is in front of the ball when the pass is made, they are offside.
Muzza C You are correct.
Incorrect. They'd have to slow down or even stop in order to catch the ball when it arrives to them. But they wouldn't be offside. They would be offside if the ball was KICKED.
Kolby......No that's not right, if you are ahead of a player when they kick OR pass you are offside if you then attempt to play the ball. It's not just kicking that causes players to be offside. Consider the accidental offside rule, that penalizes players for touching a ball that was last touched by their team mate who was behind them regardless of whether or not it was kicked or passed.
Why do in most cases of passing the ball goes backwards when a player is running forward. Where is momemtum in the above mentioned case.
You can fling your body at people as much as you like in Rugby. Brian Lima is case in point.
The only difference is that you can't make 'big hits' by illegally headbutting people with a giant crash helmet.
It happens in Rugby as well. Possibly not as much as AF but I'm not sure.
Rugby is more about endurance where AF is just explode for a few seconds.
Both entertaining and very physical sports.
This decision was published in "THE HISTORY OF THE LAWS OF RUGBY" by Sir Percival Royds in 1949
Do you think a pop pass can ever go forward and still be legal?
Aint no Velocity in the pass at 0:21? So is it considered forward?
that's BS., At 2:20 he says the ball didn't come out of the players hand forward, but it does. Forget about where the player who passes the ball ends up, the ball left his hands and went forward from that point, it's not firkin rocket science.
+Mikey David Wrong. The video is correct.
Velocity should not enter into it. There is a technique for throwing the ball, that technique is a skill and if applied correctly eradicates the speed he is traveling at. This is a game played by humans not theoretical machines. If the passer is NOT to make a forward pass he has to adjust the angle at which he throws the ball. The only way that "law" would be in any way correct would be if it was shown he was unable to adjust his throw to compensate. This law makes a mockery of the game.
Now I totally understand what you're saying: any time the ball goes forward during a pass made by Ireland it was due to momentum imparted by the players speed, anytime it goes forward by a player playing against Ireland it due to momentum imparted by the hands of the passer. So glad I got that cleared up. I'm saying that to make the point that when fans watch a game that's how they'll see it for their team, that's the problem with not just saying anything which travels forward is a forward pass.
what did you comment?
very good video.
I get the momentum stuff and the motion relative to the players etc. But we've had passes where the passing player has been standing still, the ball has clearly gone towards the opposition goal line and the ref has ruled it came backwards out of the hands. How does that work? Does it matter which way the player is facing?
It is the direction out of the hand.
I don't know. I think that you would find that without padding the game would not be nearly the same and not as fun to play. It really is fun (just not as fun as rugby).
Someone please forward this to Marius Jonker too 🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
anyone going on about the relevance of the ground youre completely wrong from the go its about the direction the ball is PASSED not where it goes afterwards because its uncontrolable...THUMBS UP SO EVERYONE KNOWS
and its wrong, stupid rugby rules, its still forward. you can easily pass backwards and tell if its forward or not, when i pass on the halfway line my player can receive that pass on the halfway line, its not forward, he can also receive the pass before the line. quite easily see a forward pass or not, rugby thinks its so hard, they chickened out and made out of the hand bulshit to give themselves an out. But now you have an even worse game because of its tackling high , even tho in almost every contact its high anyway. Scott barrett got a cleanout that was like a ballistic missile , yet he receives a yellow for a contact to the shoulder of a player. crazy rugby
The Welsh supporters should watch this Video…
was 0:06 a forward pass?
Im here after the Stormers vs Crusaders game.
@JAW007JAW yes it is
Your comment above, in the description, is totally incomprehensible... Did you use an automatic translator?
I agree with comments below, if they want momentum to be considered they need to state so in the law. The video example above opens a huge can of worms, because a heavily looping trajectory could mean a player throwing the ball high, looping and clearly forward pass (even an NFL style pass), if both players then accelerate enough the ball would be caught with the receiving player still behind the passer.
Momentum HAS to be considered. Why should it be mentioned in the law when it is so obvious?
The referees - like judges in court - are free to interpret the law how they see fit, and the international rugby referee's boss has openly interpreted the rule to allow for the momentum of the players....Why would the way it's written in the rules be of concern to you? It's the interpretation of the laws that is important and that interpretation has been made very clear to all players and coaches in world rugby...If they can live with it then it's hard to see what your problem is really.
In a game with some confusing rules the one fundamental a fan could hang a hat on was the ball must go backwards. But no some passes can go forwards legally ... and some not, depending on position of players. Zero chance of consensus on big calls. Watched video above and to me both passes look forward, but I'm wrong, both legal.
Is not complicated: the ball has to travel BACK relative to the thrower.
Yep but it can look odd. A player can legally pass a ball from the field of play that crosses the try line during flight before being caught and touched down for a try. Legal but I'd like to see a ref award it in a world cup final.
Couldn't agree more. If you stick to the ball can't travel forward then an overhead camera will having all reasonable people agreeing. The argument that the ball must travel forward when players are both running fast is nonsense, passes that don't go forward between fast moving players happen all the time.
So... someone can run towards their own try line and then hurl the ball behind them, to a player 20m nearer the opposition's line? And that's not a forward pass because it was thrown backwards relative to the passer's motion?
+Wolfinator234 Wait, I misread that comment.
+Wolfinator234 No because the ball was thrown towards the opponent's dead ball line.
there's a difference....the player receiving the pass is closer to the the opposition try line so it will directly count as forward. however, in cases like shown in the video, if the ball is thrown backwards relative to the thrower AND if the receiver is behind the thrower then it's not forward
The motion of the hands has to be behind the player passing.
@jeffrey89095 How can you suggest that it would be defying the laws of physics, Not every pass made by a player running at full speed, travels forward (in relation to the field)
If forward relates to the player and not the ground then forward would depend on which way the player was facing
You are right about one thing Jeffery, I have no Idea who I'm talking to, but with relation to the forward pass rule, you are WRONG
That's true, and most players releasing the ball at the back of a maul would be in a jam!
The fault in their reasoning is relative motion between the ball and players which are not fixed points. It is the movement of the ball relative to the ground ie movement towards the opponents dead ball line. A bit of David Blaine illusion .
people are seriously not getting this..if u eg dive over the try line and lose the ball it would go forwrd imediatly from where you lost it.a pass is not forward if it is aimed and at its origin goes backwards where it goes after is uncontrollabe as the BALL WILL travel with the same velocity as the player who passed it LEARN WHAT VELOCITY IS ITS SPEED IN A GIVEN DIRECTION so unless players are supposed to defy basic physics then this video is correct.
A lot of pseudo-know-all rugby fans should watch this!
The fact that a referee refers a decisions upstairs for an isolated, calm and measured decision to then inevitably communicate to the TMO "let me tell you what I think..." from a screen 50-100 meters away with external influence is a disgrace. The referee is not certain - he consults the TMO - the TMO gives a decision. Simple. By stating his opinion he then puts enormous pressure on the TMO to agree with him. Not fair and not in the spirit of the game...
it is true unfortuantely. It is really a theory, but I think doctors have been looking into it,
I type in 'Wayne Barnes' and 'Wayne Barnes forward pass' automatically comes up, lol.
0:05 that has left his hands foward he isnt moving fast hes being tackled and they are right next to each other
yeah that one is quite simply forward by any interpretation
How is it possible that bryce lawrence can become a test referee without knowing this rule? I am gobbsmacked!
Then again, you can just pass backwards a bit more, so that the ball doesn't travel forward at all?....and there are plenty of examples of that.
...and rugby will be poorer for it.
All minor variations of whichever rigid set play they're told to enact by the coaching staff.
That's a forward pass if I ever saw one
On the last one he actually directed in the pass infront of him...
Good vid
@inglotto Frog clearly threw it forward. Watch the explanation again.
@wholemullet The direction refers to the pass itself, not the ball trajectory since only the pass can be controlled.
If you pass the ball at the right angle, more directed backward the faster you're running and the further you're passing, the ball's trajectory can be controlled. That's how you can to players far away when you're both running at full pelt.
Russell Wilson MVP 2017
Thanks, craking video, it's all about kinetic energy!!
@JAW007JAW he threw it forward even without the influence of velocity. Just look at his hands.
Reiko was robbed!
2024 and SO many people still do not understand this simple law. Alot seem to be fans are other sports maybe a forward pass is about the ball there, not in rugby or league it aint.
I agree with Total Rugby. The thrower is not passing the ball forward, neither is the receiver in front of the thrower....So you can't call that a forward pass.....HELL NO!!
All depends how fast your running. somtimes momentum can carry the ball forward when running at pace. Anyone with a rugby brain will know this.
Of course - but how do you measure it with total certainty?
I believe this is a rule from "World Rugby": "Law 12: Knock-on or Throw Forward. 12.1. A knock-on occurs when a player loses ball possession, or contacts the ball with a hand or arm, and the ball goes forward to touch the ground or another player before this player gains, or regains, possession. FORWARD MEANS TOWARDS THE OPPOSING TEAM'S DEAD-BALL LINE." No Einstein involved there and that's good 'cause these refs aren't Einsteins by any stretch of the imagination.
Yeah but they are wicked good kickers. And the fact that we wear pads does not even matter much. We can hit harder BECAUSE we are wearing pads.
This confirms JDV to Lambie was not forwards!!!
Question: "If a player passes to one of his own team who is in line with him parallel to the dead ball line, both players running towards the opponents goal line, must not the pass be a forward pass in relation to the ground, owing to their forward movement?"
Yes. But you could just say that the receiving player should be behind so that it won't be forward relative to the ground.
Tim Sheens brought me here.
you could say the same about cricket and a goal keeper in football.
The statements made in this video are not supported by the actual rules as described on laws.worldrugby.org. In fact, none of the scenarios mentioned in this video are covered. It simply states (in the definitions section of the site) that "forward" = towards the opposition's dead ball line.. so I've no idea where the rubbish in this video comes from???
In fact, it would be almost impossible for any ref to apply the rules as they are described in this video
@wholemullet You realize Total Rugby is an official IRB channel? You know, the organisation who came up with the law in the first place ...
Just to show you it's still ruled the traditional way in American football, in a search of TH-cam for "forward pass" the one that's returned just above this one is this: NFL Rules Illegal Forward Pass - TH-cam . I know I've seen better examples on video or TV where the announcers were even more demonstratively showing the direction of the pass with telestrator. Notice that the announcer was complimenting the player on turning his body well enough to assure what he thought was a backwards pass; if that's a point of skill in American football, why isn't it one in rugby? Why should the referee just allow them the pass based on the player's running forward too fast and straight to make the ball travel backward?
In Federation rules (used in most interscholastic games) it's about the direction of the ball as it leaves the passer's hand, so wind can't convert a forward pass to a backward one or vice versa. In NCAA and NFL rules it's about the point of release vs. the place it touches a player, the ground, or an official. In Football Canada and CFL, I don't recall offhand; they call an illegal forward pass an "offside pass" although the player receiving it isn't necessarily offside.
How many throws in American football are thrown while running compared with rugby?
@@catprog This is a very common situation during plays described as "pitch-or-keep option", so that discrimination needs to be made, and an official is well advised to try to stay level with the ballcarrier when such a play is under way downfield.
Why dont they just make it simple and make the ball travel level or backwards regardless of terminal velocity
Because then every time a player wants to pass he will have to come to a complete stop.
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 not really if you go off the ball traveling level or backwards to the next player, not in regards to say a player passing whilst running at high speed and the next receiver is also running at the same speed who then recieves the baĺl "level"
Have it so the ball must travel backwards regardless of terminal velocity, otherwise technically the ball is going forward in my mind
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 also 1:35 wouldnt that mean teams could run at defence, throw the ball in the air and continue their run forward past defending line, and 1 of his teammates could grab the ball in behind the defence?
@@wannenburgwannenburg3695 No, he just has to put enough compensatory backwards force on the ball. This is the way passes are judged in American and Canadian football, which inherited the same wording as the IRB is still using, only the IRB has switched its meaning without ever saying so.
@JAW007JAW no it wasnt
Even with this video people still can’t seem grasp it yet lol
In a normal situation the ball is aimed backwards but once it is realeased the speed the passer is travelling at Eg:12mph then the ball will have a velocity of 12mph in the direction he was running so unless rugby players are meant to defy the laws of physics then this is not a forward pass
You don't have to defy the laws of physics, you just have to throw the ball backwards hard enough to compensate for your forward motion.
@@goodmaro if forward passes were dictated by start and stop position it would kill the game, passes would have to be thrown so hard and so backwards it would kill attacking play. Every single try youve ever seen from any back running straight and throwing a flat pass would be chalked out.
@@jeffrey89095 And yet that's how things were just decades ago. They did so much else in the interim to favor attacking play, why couldn't they at least leave this understanding alone, or at least write it into the laws in some way people could understand it as such?
@@goodmaro because nobody ever stopped to consider what backwards meant. Under the old laws two identical passes would be ruled differently based on a player being tackled. That's inherently unfair. The new rule when referred correctly removes arbitrary decision making once the direction of the pass out of the hands is clear.
As for writing its inherently not a very simple concept but the rule itself is fairly clear once you have an understanding of what momentum is.
@@jeffrey89095 But they weren't supposed to be ruled differently, they were just being ruled on the wrong basis. In American and Canadian football, which started with the same concept of "forward" as is still in the IRB laws the way they're *written,* backwards passes are *not* ruled differently depending on the progress of the player after he gets rid of the ball. American, Canadian, Rugby Union, and Rugby League football all used this same concept, but in recent decades RU (and apparently RL) have been pretending it means something else.
came here after Reiko's stunning try was denied smh.
all of this is true but needs to be re written in the laws of rugby
if u throw a ball out a car travelling at 90kmh north then the ball will continue going 90kmh north before deaccelerating if u throw the ball behind u strongly the ball will still end up going forward relative to the ground NOT YOU hence you have not thrown the ball forward making the pass ok as the ball has travelled forward IT HAS NOT BEEN PASSED FORWARD there is huge diferance between where the ball is passed and where the ball goes afterwards. the pass is backwards!!!!ITS ABOUT THE PASS