Last week every newspaper, sports news web site and Rugby League media program across the land ran a “NRL has gotta do something about forward passes” story. Journalists and footy pundits were incensed. A recent run of tries scored from “blatant” forward passes got all those experts incensed and keyboards tapping. What a load of old bollocks.
Most of the complaints centred on the fact that “the bunker” does not have the authority to intervene in forward pass rulings. It’s a matter of fact that the central referee and his two assistants will, occasionally, not be in the best position to see a forward pass, so, the occasional iffy one will go unpunished. If the bunker sees what it believes is an obvious forward pass, (and an obvious error on the part of the on-field officials), the bunker ref should be allowed to intervene before a potentially game changing try is scored say the pundits. Oh please!
“It’s massively subjective”
This debate has come up many times in the past and NRL officialdom’s response has always been a resounding “no bloody way”. They have argued that, while a bunker ref can effectively rule on all kinds of indiscretions and violations using their multiple cameras, multiple angles and slow-motion replays, the bunker ref has “Buckley’s chance” of making a call on forward passes with any degree of accuracy. Way back in 2013 Graham Annesley summed up the argument when he said, “It’s massively subjective in a two-dimensional picture that distorts if the camera is not directly in line with it. Also, the rule itself is all about how the ball leaves the passer’s hand rather than the path that it travels across the ground, so a ball can be forward but thrown correctly and float forward and still be a legal pass.”
Annesley was right then… and he’s still right now. No improvements in technology have emerged that would enable a bunker referee to intervene with any degree of certainty that a pass actually travelled forward out of the hands. And it’s just not good enough to say that the bunker should be able to intervene if the forward pass is absolutely blatant. What a ridiculous criteria for intervention that would be. Who draws the line over the degree of blatancy. Imagine the referee’s boss advising his bunker team that “if you are 75% certain that the pass was blatantly forward then, by all means, overrule the on-field ref”. Imagine the argument between coaches, players, pundits, fans, commentators, and officials over what degree of certainty of constituted blatant. Every bunker ref would be given carte blanche to make their own subjective calls on what was blatant and what wasn’t. It would be ridiculous.
The thing is, there will always be tries scored from passes that might not be 100% kosher. Fans of the team that gets ripped off will always scream about how ridiculous and unfair it is and call for rules to be changed. Then a week later, they will be the ones receiving the benefit from a dodgy call and then it will be their opponent’s fans who will be complaining. Really? Who gives a rat’s arse. Surely we can live with the occasional refereeing error on the field. The world is not going to end because a forward pass was missed. In fact, for me, the world is a better place when forward passes are missed.
Best tries are from forward passes
Why? Because some of the best tries come from forward passes. I love ‘em. Bring ‘em on. I’d be happy for more forward passes to not be called.
Which brings us to the obvious solution to the whole debate. There wouldn’t be a problem if we just made forward passes legal! The current law has the referees trying to judge how the ball comes out of the passer”s hands. Oh yeah. That’s easy to do on a footy field with blokes running everywhere at a million miles per hour.
“Slow down for a minute there, Harry. I just wanna see what your hands are doing,” says Ashley.
What an incredibly stupid rule!
When I mentioned the “make forward passes legal” solution to the incomparable Andrew Moore of the ABC (get better soon mate – you’re the best – we need you) he scoffed. Aww thanks, Andrew.
“But that would change the nature of the game fundamentally,” he argued. “We don’t want to completely alter the nature of the game.”
Incredibly stupid rule!
I, respectfully, disagree with this most respected of NRL pundits. It would certainly change the game somewhat… it would open up significant new possibilities and opportunities… but the game itself would remain “fundamentally” the same. Some would claim that legal forward passes would turn the game into American football. That’s not true at all. In American Football a pass receiver can break downfield as soon as the ball is snapped by the centre. A wide receiver may be thirty or forty meters in front of the line of scrimmage by the time the Quarterback gets around to passing the ball. Now that’s a forward pass! That would never happen in a game of rugby league. Could never happen. Why? Because in rugby league, the pass receiver is expected to stay on-side until the passer has passed the ball… much the same as a player must stay on-side when a teammate kicks the ball. If the pass receiver is on-side when the ball is passed, why should we be worried if they end up catching the ball slightly in front of the passer. In reality this would make for much more exciting play.
If a player who catches a pass is in front of the passer before the ball is passed then the ref makes an off-side call and awards a penalty. Simple. The game would not be that different. Neither would it be difficult to officiate. But it would be better. More fun. Much more fun.
The ref still needs to keep an eye on when the ball leaves the passers hands, but their key role is in making a call on whether the receiver is in front of the passing player or not. Sure. This would take some skill. But not half as much skill as it takes trying to decide, with any degree of certainty, how the ball leaves the passers hands.
People are change averse
Even better… if the referee is unsighted and does make a cock-up of the call, with the legal forward pass rule, it would be easy and reasonable for the bunker referee to intervene.
If the bunker is looking for an off-side player (the pass receiver) rather than trying to determine if the pass was forward out of the passer’s hands, then that is a very easy thing for a video ref to make a call on. Bloody easy. They do it all the time now with kicks. Even better, again… if the video ref is not confident about making an off-side call then technology could do it for them. VAR is used in soccer all the time to determiner whether an attacking player is in front of the last defending player at the time a pass is made. Video has no problem with judging whether a player or ball crosses an imaginary line on the field.
In truth, the reason why this solution will not be considered… will be laughed at… is because people are change averse. The old argument that it will fundamentally change the way the game is played will be believed. It’s not true… but that is the way people will think. If the legal forward pass rule were adopted the play would be sped up. More tries would be scored. Better tries would be scored. Life would be tougher for defenders…but I, personally, don’t care about that. I’d love it.
Gimme forward passes. Lots of forward passes! Oh. And by the way. The no forward pass rule would be perfect for rugby union too.
Leave a Reply