[2025 Six Nations] France vs Wales - 31/01/25

[Which Tyler]

This is the closest I can get youtube to show me the pass and the catch

Ball goes forwards over the lines of the pitch by approximately 3 metres.
Dupont's arms are fairly clearly moving backwards relative to his body (the angle from the corner of the deadball area shows the ball clearly passed with both hands, so right arm is 100% relevant).
Whilst the ball travels approximately 12m laterally, Dupont moves approximately 6m forwards, whilst decelerating.
When I draw lines on the screen at the point of the freeze-frame, Dupont's shoulders are approximately 60* angle to the try line.

If you believe that a forward pass is determined by movement relative to the pitch, then you will believe that this is a forward pass - and have to ignore at least 40 years worth of evidence - which means that nothing will ever convince you otherwise.
If you believe that a forward pass is determined by the relative velocities of the passer and the ball, then you will believe that this is a backwards pass - and agree with the people who make the laws, and the people who interpret the laws on the pitch.
If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do know how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

ETA: If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do accept how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

 

[BPM]

That really was a tedious watch. I know it was only the first game against a really poor side but I thought France looked mediocre. Ntamack's red card was utter stupidity. Yet again the French players look miles off the players that they are for their club sides - bar Dupont, obviously. There's absolutely no reason why England can't have a real go at them next week. France's attacking shape was shambolic for a lot of that game. As for Wales…. only two words - Wooden Spoon. I think Italy beat them next week and I don't think it's that close either.

In theory yes, but let's see how we go this afternoon first …

Compare that performance with some of the 'minnows' at the world cup, yes they're often outgunned and sometimes lose heavily, but often they look well coached to maximise their strengths and at least fire some shots and put some decent stuff together even if mistakes, or fitness issues scupper them. I can't say that for Wales, and we have better players available.

I've said the same about England in the past too TBH. Portugal and Uruguay are two good examples of sides that offered a level of skill and ambition that we (England and Wales in this case) apparently can't match despite being 'better' players. Blows my mind.

Who can pick better players?!?!?

Well maybe Watkin's injury does you a favour and gets Llewelyn the call-up he should have had in the first place.

 

[Leonormous Boozer]

This is the closest I can get youtube to show me the pass and the catch

Ball goes forwards over the lines of the pitch by approximately 3 metres.
Dupont's arms are fairly clearly moving backwards relative to his body (the angle from the corner of the deadball area shows the ball clearly passed with both hands, so right arm is 100% relevant).
Whilst the ball travels approximately 12m laterally, Dupont moves approximately 6m forwards, whilst decelerating.
When I draw lines on the screen at the point of the freeze-frame, Dupont's shoulders are approximately 60* angle to the try line.

If you believe that a forward pass is determined by movement relative to the pitch, then you will believe that this is a forward pass - and have to ignore at least 40 years worth of evidence - which means that nothing will ever convince you otherwise.
If you believe that a forward pass is determined by the relative velocities of the passer and the ball, then you will believe that this is a backwards pass - and agree with the people who make the laws, and the people who interpret the laws on the pitch.
If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do know how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

ETA: If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do accept how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

This ignores that he threw the ball up though. You can be in a sprint with a ball, throw it forward and up in front of you and catch it. Like for a chip kick or garryowen the relative velocities aren't in favour of the player, the ball just has to go up and down.

I'm dubious of the listed heights of both players, Dupont at 174 and Attisogbe at 181 both seem wrong and I'll include images of them compared to 178 listed Thomas Ramos. I think a 10+cm difference in height is more accurate.

Dupont throws the ball from his chest height, and Attisogbe catches the ball above his head after it's fallen about 2m from it's peak (image below). A human head is on average 20-25cm, so we'll say 22.5cm even though Dupont has a chonker of one. So the ball has risen ~2.325m and dropped maybe 1.9m and all of this travel adds time for Dupont to move further and is largely irrelevant to relative velocities. It's an 8-10m pass from left to right but the ball travels another ~50% of that distance up and down (and I'm no physicist but a believe a projectile is at it's slowest at it's peak compared to when rising to it or falling. I also realise the 50% figure is a bit of a guess with arc to consider, however it definitely isn't something to be dismissed).

All of this is to say, relative velocities can't be simplified down to where's the ball thrown and where did the passer end up in passes like this, it's different to a flat horitzontal pass.

I think that pass gets called forward more often than not if you don't have Dupont on your back.

 

[dullonien]

This is the closest I can get youtube to show me the pass and the catch

Ball goes forwards over the lines of the pitch by approximately 3 metres.
Dupont's arms are fairly clearly moving backwards relative to his body (the angle from the corner of the deadball area shows the ball clearly passed with both hands, so right arm is 100% relevant).
Whilst the ball travels approximately 12m laterally, Dupont moves approximately 6m forwards, whilst decelerating.
When I draw lines on the screen at the point of the freeze-frame, Dupont's shoulders are approximately 60* angle to the try line.

If you believe that a forward pass is determined by movement relative to the pitch, then you will believe that this is a forward pass - and have to ignore at least 40 years worth of evidence - which means that nothing will ever convince you otherwise.
If you believe that a forward pass is determined by the relative velocities of the passer and the ball, then you will believe that this is a backwards pass - and agree with the people who make the laws, and the people who interpret the laws on the pitch.
If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do know how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

ETA: If someone has already made their decision on whether they agree with the application of the law or not, then there's no discussion to be had - this is purely illustrative for those who do accept how the law is applied, and felt that it was forwards anyway.

I was happy with that live tbh. You only need basic kmowledge of maths/physics to understand that forward momemtum will be imparted to the ball by a player running forward.

Some won't agree though, nevee will. My dad will be adamant that's a forward pass despite being a clever guy.

 

[OldSchoolRugga]

Glad I missed this. Cricket scores in rugby are not good for the game.

 

[BPM]

There's like 4 teams that I think should be desperately courting Stuart Lancaster right now. Wales are one.

This is actually an excellent point. I doubt the Welsh would be able to disassociate Lancaster from the 30-3, but in terms of what they actually need from a coach he'd be a great shout.

 

[BPM]

Glad I missed this. Cricket scores in rugby are not good for the game.

That isn't a cricket score.

 

[dullonien]

That isn't a cricket score.

Realistically it would have been if France didn't empty their bench and coast the last 30+ minutes.

 

[Amiga500]

Glad I missed this. Cricket scores in rugby are not good for the game.

It wasn't really a cricket score - its more that you never really felt the French were having to move out of first gear to do what they did.

Maybe in the 2nd quarter of the match they nudge up into 2nd gear for a wee bit, then freewheeled the 2nd half.

 

[BrokenWing]

That isn't a cricket score.

43-0 a promising start for the openers.

 

[Vieux Talonneur]

This is actually an excellent point. I doubt the Welsh would be able to disassociate Lancaster from the 30-3, but in terms of what they actually need from a coach he'd be a great shout.

As part of the coaching set up, totally. But not as the head guy.

 

[TommiG88]

The one major weakness from France which I didn't think Wales made enough of, we contestable kicks. In the opening 20, wales were doing some good kicks, then it just was crap from then on.

I expect England will bomb them with contestable kicks