The resultant force (with the speed of the player running, the angle he is running, the angle the ball is released and the speed at it is thrown) results from all the velocities and angles and these will help us determine whether the "Laws of Physics" confirms the pass to be forward or not.
To know if the ball rightfully travelled forward due to Laws of Physics the angle of it being released from the hand is necessary to determine this.
Example: If you want to get across a fast flowing river about 10m wide in a dinghy and you want to get to exactly the same point opposite to where you are, you have to move at an angle backwards against the flow of the river. Otherwise if you go straight you’ll end up way past your desired point.
Therefore, say the player with the ball is running at 5m/s and he throws a pass straight across to a player at 10m/s who is 10m away from him. In one second the ball will travel 5m forward and is caught by the support player. Is this acceptable?
But say he initially passes the ball at 30 Degrees backwards. The result of this is the ball will end up being caught 10m perpendicular from whence the ball left the passers hand. In other words, it would be like a flat pass.
If he passes at less than 30 degrees backwards, the ball will travel increasingly forward to where the ball initially left the hands of the passer. At 20 Degrees backwards, the ball travels 1.38m forward and at 15 degrees backwards, the ball travels 2.41m forward until at a 0 degrees it becomes 5m forward.
Thus, I have stated the angle of the ball leaving the passer’s hands is important along with the velocity of the player and the released ball. You can’t try to enforce Law of Physics when the math is absent. And even in stating all the above, the variables I used are just some of them. A physics master will look at the shape of the ball, how it is thrown, wind conditions, etc…
So if you want to still apply “Laws of Physics” the basic accepted simple Math above can be used but then again it will require more variables and becomes more complicated.
Bunker will not waste time on trying to get all the algorithms for a system to determine all these and no way can a ref calculate this in real time so just drop this “Laws of Physics” argument. If the ref sees it as forward pass than it looks to have travelled forward from passer so let it be.
Velocity equals distance (the distance the ball floats forward) divided by time. If a rainbow pass and a straight pass both travel 5m in 1 sec then the rainbow pass has significantly more speed because it travelled a lot further than 5m on it's arc shaped path, however velocity is the same. I never used speed in my examples I used velocity, I used the speed reading and math to determine velocity on an angled run, because we know the players speed from the tracker they wear. I don't know why you're talking about resultant force. The only way to determine the ball's angle is to compare the velocities of the player and the ball, which tells you if the pass is legal or not, so no need to go one step further for the angle, you already have the result. Ball's velocity greater than player then angle>90 degrees (forward) ball's velocity less than player angle<90 degrees (legal). If the ball comes out with less forward momentum than the player it's legit, it's that simple...
John, to determine how the ball behaves you need to know the angles and the velocities. Btw, a ball floating (rainbow pass) 5m in 1 second vs a ball shooting straight 5m in 1 second have the same speed but not the same velocity. The resultant force is never calculated using speed so your example is incorrect.
So if you want to know if the pass is forward or not you have to determine the velocity and at which angles it goes out to know whether scientifically it is a legit pass or otherwise. I say scientifically because people like saying "Laws of Physics" cannot be ignored here but Laws of Physics are proven mathematically and unless that can be proven, a referee judging by how it looks is good enough for me. Even Einstein needed to prove it by writing equations yet we expect the referee to calculate it while on the field.
It was a forward pass to Smith.
You track the ball's velocity by the distance it floats forward (relative to the field markings) from throwers hand to catchers hand, and the time it takes, that's what I meant by "hang time", the video replay has a built in clock. Say it floats forward 5 metres in 1 second then the ball's velocity is 5 metres per second, if the players velocity was greater than that when he passed the ball then the ball has gone backwards relative to the player i.e. legit pass (left the hands backwards). The only angle you need is the players running angle if he is running straight, parallel to the sideline then speed = velocity, if for example he is running at a 45 degree angle at 7 metres per second then velocity = 4.95 m/s, the tracker they already wear can determine this. Forget the "out of the hands backwards" stuff that's something commentators say because they don't understand the science of the rule, it's not 100% accurate, it's only a guideline if the players are running dead straight.
So by that "logic"...
If Bromwich is being tackled at the time or is still, then the pass can be 0 meters forward.
If he's running obliquely at an average forward speed of 2 meters per second, he can throw it 1 meter forward.
If he consults a physicist beforehand, maybe we can solve the Kennedy assassination
GPS trackers. Field grid computer overlays. Hang time. Inertia. Love it. Way to screw up a good flowing sport by analysing the bejeezus out of it.
Solution: If it looks forward, it is forward. There. Even a League crowd can understand that. Hope you can too. :laughing:
You need the angles to determine the resultant force otherwise what variable do you use to determine the ball actually went forward or backwards from the hands first? In you example, you don’t know if the ball initially left the hands of the passer backwards or forwards or in a straight line.
Also, you need the velocity of the ball leaving the hand as well to know whether it travels the distance to the catcher quicker or slower. This helps determine the resultant force/distance in one second.
I find it funny the old "it came out of the back of the hand" or "the hands were going backwards" comments. You can easily pass the ball forwards while the hands go backwards, it just about when you let go of it. Plus if you do let go of a pass and it is line ball then floats forward, not matter what you "believe" when it comes to physics, it should be called forward.
"the ball maintains the same trajectory (path) from Bromwich’s hands to Smith" there you go we do agree - it went forward from the hand, as I've said from the very first reply when I dismissed the natural velocity for the ball to be caught forward of where it was passed. It was just a forward pass.
We have the technology and apparently it's already in the works. All players are fitted with GPS trackers these days. All you need is the passers forward velocity when passing and the ball's hang time, from this we can determine how far the ball can travel forward relative to the field markings before it is deemed forward. Computer grid on the field from the bunker. e.g Bromwich is travelling at 8 metres per second when he passes the ball, the ball is in the air for exactly one second, it travels 6 metres forward before caught, it's a legal pass by 2 metres, we have a decision. Not that complex distance between A and B and angle not needed. No report necessary sorted in no time, game continues with the correct decision.
AgeeNat, the ball never went backwards at any stage it was a straight pass directly forward.
I know what others were saying in regard to when the ball leaves the players hands but at no stage did the ball go behind his shoulder and float forward.
It's good arguing about "Laws of Physics" but it can only be proven if we have numbers. It is always a problem determining a forward pass like that even more so for a referee trying to run along with play live on the field.
The problem with this sort of rulings is that the distance between player A and B can be a problem. If Smith was a further 10m away when the ball was passed, the ball would have traveled a few more meters forward. What then does the referee call it? If he refers it to the bunker, the forward pass won't be checked so who is to blame here now? We don't know the velocity of the ball, the initial angle of the ball when thrown, the actual distance the ball traveled, the trajectory it was on, the speed the player was running, etc... Unless we know these variables we won't be a 100% sure on this types of passes. But then in saying this, how do we expect the on-field referee to rule on this then? He just has to rule on how it looks, just like how some of us react to a pass and immediately suspect it as it is because that is exactly how the ref sees it as. If the pass was called forward I wouldn't mind the call. We only argue the "angles, the line, the backwards from the hand" thing only from the replays but how on earth do you expect the ref to know all these at a live glance? The live glance is the ball has traveled forward and caught in front, he rules, that's it. You need accuracy, then measure all of the variables and write a report on it.
Surely you're not suggesting, quote: "the ball started in one direction then changed mid flight" because that's impossible, the ball maintains the same trajectory (path) from Bromwich's hands to Smith. It's quite plausible to throw a ball back while running at speed and the ball travels forward, it's called inertia, the ball wants to maintain the forward velocity it had while being carried by the player, that's why planes drop bombs well before the target, when the bomb lands they are roughly directly over it although friction plays a small role. You can't learn physics from a dictionary. Just ask fellow Roar Rookie Fraser.
Surprised no one is talking about the weather, particularly the strong wind on the first half (Pong line drop went 30m at one point). Given it was a lob, the wind would have played a massive part in the movement.
Back out of the hands for mine, forward once caught.
Still should have passed to JAC! Bloody took Smith out!
You're on a device john, try a little googling of your own. However, I'm guessing reading isn't your strong point as I never said he passes the ball back. Mine was in relation to your statement on velocity.
Tell me MENSA, how does inertia pertain to the ball starting in one direction but then changing mid flight? Google may be your friend as well if you could read past Wiki for your only source of knowledge.
Nice googling. Inertia is what makes the ball go forward "relative to the field markings" after being "released backwards" from a player running forward. If Kenny released the ball backwards like you said, and the pass was thrown with the players in line, like you said twice, then how can it be forward?
Agreed - definitely not a forward pass. You can tell from the front-on angle that Bromwich throws it out of his hands backwards. He moves his hips in and twists his body towards back as he releases the ball. Also, the referee was in an incredibly good position to judge it.
Oh right, I just didn’t watch at the 8sec mark! smh.
Like I said, only at the point of release was Smith anywhere near in line with him yet Smith STILL has to reach a long way forward to catch it. No, I’m not confusing velocity for inertia as I was referring to the pace Kenny was going for the ball to float forward after being released backwards.
Inertia relates to something staying on the same trajectory unless otherwise altered by an external force. Does not apply here at all.
Great post thanks for the laugh, die hard League fan though with slight knowledge of physics/relativity/ballistics who is tired of seeing good passes called forward. Cheers
theHunter
Roar Rookie
The resultant force (with the speed of the player running, the angle he is running, the angle the ball is released and the speed at it is thrown) results from all the velocities and angles and these will help us determine whether the "Laws of Physics" confirms the pass to be forward or not. To know if the ball rightfully travelled forward due to Laws of Physics the angle of it being released from the hand is necessary to determine this. Example: If you want to get across a fast flowing river about 10m wide in a dinghy and you want to get to exactly the same point opposite to where you are, you have to move at an angle backwards against the flow of the river. Otherwise if you go straight you’ll end up way past your desired point. Therefore, say the player with the ball is running at 5m/s and he throws a pass straight across to a player at 10m/s who is 10m away from him. In one second the ball will travel 5m forward and is caught by the support player. Is this acceptable? But say he initially passes the ball at 30 Degrees backwards. The result of this is the ball will end up being caught 10m perpendicular from whence the ball left the passers hand. In other words, it would be like a flat pass. If he passes at less than 30 degrees backwards, the ball will travel increasingly forward to where the ball initially left the hands of the passer. At 20 Degrees backwards, the ball travels 1.38m forward and at 15 degrees backwards, the ball travels 2.41m forward until at a 0 degrees it becomes 5m forward. Thus, I have stated the angle of the ball leaving the passer’s hands is important along with the velocity of the player and the released ball. You can’t try to enforce Law of Physics when the math is absent. And even in stating all the above, the variables I used are just some of them. A physics master will look at the shape of the ball, how it is thrown, wind conditions, etc… So if you want to still apply “Laws of Physics” the basic accepted simple Math above can be used but then again it will require more variables and becomes more complicated. Bunker will not waste time on trying to get all the algorithms for a system to determine all these and no way can a ref calculate this in real time so just drop this “Laws of Physics” argument. If the ref sees it as forward pass than it looks to have travelled forward from passer so let it be.
john
Guest
Velocity equals distance (the distance the ball floats forward) divided by time. If a rainbow pass and a straight pass both travel 5m in 1 sec then the rainbow pass has significantly more speed because it travelled a lot further than 5m on it's arc shaped path, however velocity is the same. I never used speed in my examples I used velocity, I used the speed reading and math to determine velocity on an angled run, because we know the players speed from the tracker they wear. I don't know why you're talking about resultant force. The only way to determine the ball's angle is to compare the velocities of the player and the ball, which tells you if the pass is legal or not, so no need to go one step further for the angle, you already have the result. Ball's velocity greater than player then angle>90 degrees (forward) ball's velocity less than player angle<90 degrees (legal). If the ball comes out with less forward momentum than the player it's legit, it's that simple...
theHunter
Roar Rookie
John, to determine how the ball behaves you need to know the angles and the velocities. Btw, a ball floating (rainbow pass) 5m in 1 second vs a ball shooting straight 5m in 1 second have the same speed but not the same velocity. The resultant force is never calculated using speed so your example is incorrect. So if you want to know if the pass is forward or not you have to determine the velocity and at which angles it goes out to know whether scientifically it is a legit pass or otherwise. I say scientifically because people like saying "Laws of Physics" cannot be ignored here but Laws of Physics are proven mathematically and unless that can be proven, a referee judging by how it looks is good enough for me. Even Einstein needed to prove it by writing equations yet we expect the referee to calculate it while on the field. It was a forward pass to Smith.
john
Guest
You track the ball's velocity by the distance it floats forward (relative to the field markings) from throwers hand to catchers hand, and the time it takes, that's what I meant by "hang time", the video replay has a built in clock. Say it floats forward 5 metres in 1 second then the ball's velocity is 5 metres per second, if the players velocity was greater than that when he passed the ball then the ball has gone backwards relative to the player i.e. legit pass (left the hands backwards). The only angle you need is the players running angle if he is running straight, parallel to the sideline then speed = velocity, if for example he is running at a 45 degree angle at 7 metres per second then velocity = 4.95 m/s, the tracker they already wear can determine this. Forget the "out of the hands backwards" stuff that's something commentators say because they don't understand the science of the rule, it's not 100% accurate, it's only a guideline if the players are running dead straight.
Womblat
Guest
So by that "logic"... If Bromwich is being tackled at the time or is still, then the pass can be 0 meters forward. If he's running obliquely at an average forward speed of 2 meters per second, he can throw it 1 meter forward. If he consults a physicist beforehand, maybe we can solve the Kennedy assassination GPS trackers. Field grid computer overlays. Hang time. Inertia. Love it. Way to screw up a good flowing sport by analysing the bejeezus out of it. Solution: If it looks forward, it is forward. There. Even a League crowd can understand that. Hope you can too. :laughing:
theHunter
Roar Rookie
You need the angles to determine the resultant force otherwise what variable do you use to determine the ball actually went forward or backwards from the hands first? In you example, you don’t know if the ball initially left the hands of the passer backwards or forwards or in a straight line. Also, you need the velocity of the ball leaving the hand as well to know whether it travels the distance to the catcher quicker or slower. This helps determine the resultant force/distance in one second.
Rellum
Roar Guru
I find it funny the old "it came out of the back of the hand" or "the hands were going backwards" comments. You can easily pass the ball forwards while the hands go backwards, it just about when you let go of it. Plus if you do let go of a pass and it is line ball then floats forward, not matter what you "believe" when it comes to physics, it should be called forward.
Nat
Roar Rookie
"the ball maintains the same trajectory (path) from Bromwich’s hands to Smith" there you go we do agree - it went forward from the hand, as I've said from the very first reply when I dismissed the natural velocity for the ball to be caught forward of where it was passed. It was just a forward pass.
zonecadet
Roar Rookie
I'm with you mate, it has hit plague proportions, especially those last passes to wingers. I'm a Storm supporter but I saw as forward.
john
Guest
We have the technology and apparently it's already in the works. All players are fitted with GPS trackers these days. All you need is the passers forward velocity when passing and the ball's hang time, from this we can determine how far the ball can travel forward relative to the field markings before it is deemed forward. Computer grid on the field from the bunker. e.g Bromwich is travelling at 8 metres per second when he passes the ball, the ball is in the air for exactly one second, it travels 6 metres forward before caught, it's a legal pass by 2 metres, we have a decision. Not that complex distance between A and B and angle not needed. No report necessary sorted in no time, game continues with the correct decision.
Noosa Duck
Roar Rookie
AgeeNat, the ball never went backwards at any stage it was a straight pass directly forward. I know what others were saying in regard to when the ball leaves the players hands but at no stage did the ball go behind his shoulder and float forward.
theHunter
Roar Rookie
It's good arguing about "Laws of Physics" but it can only be proven if we have numbers. It is always a problem determining a forward pass like that even more so for a referee trying to run along with play live on the field. The problem with this sort of rulings is that the distance between player A and B can be a problem. If Smith was a further 10m away when the ball was passed, the ball would have traveled a few more meters forward. What then does the referee call it? If he refers it to the bunker, the forward pass won't be checked so who is to blame here now? We don't know the velocity of the ball, the initial angle of the ball when thrown, the actual distance the ball traveled, the trajectory it was on, the speed the player was running, etc... Unless we know these variables we won't be a 100% sure on this types of passes. But then in saying this, how do we expect the on-field referee to rule on this then? He just has to rule on how it looks, just like how some of us react to a pass and immediately suspect it as it is because that is exactly how the ref sees it as. If the pass was called forward I wouldn't mind the call. We only argue the "angles, the line, the backwards from the hand" thing only from the replays but how on earth do you expect the ref to know all these at a live glance? The live glance is the ball has traveled forward and caught in front, he rules, that's it. You need accuracy, then measure all of the variables and write a report on it.
john
Guest
Surely you're not suggesting, quote: "the ball started in one direction then changed mid flight" because that's impossible, the ball maintains the same trajectory (path) from Bromwich's hands to Smith. It's quite plausible to throw a ball back while running at speed and the ball travels forward, it's called inertia, the ball wants to maintain the forward velocity it had while being carried by the player, that's why planes drop bombs well before the target, when the bomb lands they are roughly directly over it although friction plays a small role. You can't learn physics from a dictionary. Just ask fellow Roar Rookie Fraser.
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Surprised no one is talking about the weather, particularly the strong wind on the first half (Pong line drop went 30m at one point). Given it was a lob, the wind would have played a massive part in the movement. Back out of the hands for mine, forward once caught. Still should have passed to JAC! Bloody took Smith out!
Nat
Roar Rookie
You're on a device john, try a little googling of your own. However, I'm guessing reading isn't your strong point as I never said he passes the ball back. Mine was in relation to your statement on velocity. Tell me MENSA, how does inertia pertain to the ball starting in one direction but then changing mid flight? Google may be your friend as well if you could read past Wiki for your only source of knowledge.
john
Guest
Nice googling. Inertia is what makes the ball go forward "relative to the field markings" after being "released backwards" from a player running forward. If Kenny released the ball backwards like you said, and the pass was thrown with the players in line, like you said twice, then how can it be forward?
Fraser
Roar Rookie
Agreed - definitely not a forward pass. You can tell from the front-on angle that Bromwich throws it out of his hands backwards. He moves his hips in and twists his body towards back as he releases the ball. Also, the referee was in an incredibly good position to judge it.
Nat
Roar Rookie
I'm assuming you are the diehard league fan with only slight knowledge of "physics/relativity/ballistics" based on your misuse of the terms below.
Nat
Roar Rookie
Oh right, I just didn’t watch at the 8sec mark! smh. Like I said, only at the point of release was Smith anywhere near in line with him yet Smith STILL has to reach a long way forward to catch it. No, I’m not confusing velocity for inertia as I was referring to the pace Kenny was going for the ball to float forward after being released backwards. Inertia relates to something staying on the same trajectory unless otherwise altered by an external force. Does not apply here at all.
john
Guest
Great post thanks for the laugh, die hard League fan though with slight knowledge of physics/relativity/ballistics who is tired of seeing good passes called forward. Cheers