RWC 2011 The 3rd/4th place: Wales vs. Australia

[dullonien]

Congrats Austrailia, you deserved to win that game and the 3rd spot. I was a little disapointed with the Welsh performance, but at the end of the day it was Austrailia's defense that won them that game, it was awesome for 82mins. They basically did what Wales have been doing all tourny, getting off the line quickly and taking Wales' big runners out on or behind the gain-line. They nullified Roberts, North, Shane and Davies. Pocock was awesome once again, he really is impossible to shift from the ball on occasion, and he just slowed down 80% of Welsh ball, allowing time for his defense to get organised.

As for Wales. I was a bit surprised by our poor scrummaging, but that probably goes to show that we need to develop a propper back-up tighthead instead of shifting James or Jenkins there. This will require playing Craig Mitchell at every opportunity imo. Warburton was missed, but praise has got to be given to Gethin Jenkins and Ryan Jones who got stuck in at the break-down to turn a few balls over. Ryan Jones was probably our best player today, really stepped-up imo. I thought Bevington had a huge impact when he came on, he's extremely mobile and constantly offers himself as a running option, he appeared quiete a few times in the run-up to our try at the death. Powell also made a big impact with his offloading out of the tackle allowing us to continue the move without giving Pocock a chance to slow the ball down at the ruck.

In the backs, whilst I thought Phillips was ok, the increase in the speed of delivery was noticable when Lloyd Williams came on, and I feel overall that Williams suite the way we're trying to play better. Hook was terrible again, very dissapointed. It's crazy how much we've missed Priestland in the last two games. As I said before, Aus did a job on Roberts in this game, and he failed to make the impact he has done all WC, Jon Davies was also a little quiet. I thought Halfpenny was our best back once again.

Gotta say that we were lucky to get our first try, because that offload from Hook was forward. Great finishing skills by Shane to finish it off though. I don't think O'Connor's offload a few mins later was forward either, just drifted forward with momentum which doesn't count!

Once again, congrats Austrailia fans. I'm not too upset, because I don't think this game means too much, but certainly would have been nice to finish on a high after such a good tournament. Will be nice to have a chance of payback in just a month or two, where we'll hopefully have Warburton, Adam Jones and Priestland back. Pitty that Cooper won't be there, looked like a nasty injury that I wouldn't wish on anyone. Beale will do well to be fit aswell.

 

[bmh16]

Wales were poor today, so many errors, Australia definitely deserved to win. Our best play was 80+ minutes when we scored the try which says it all. Our first try was never a try and was laughable how it was given. Hopeful of revenge in the game in December. I don't think Wales can get much worse than the performance today. Only one way up from here! And Warburton, and both A. Jones's should be back to start.

Ryan Jones was magnificent though.

 

[DuncTheDoodle]

The pass was forwards, but was rightly not given. The laws (Or at least the IRB, if anyone saw the video on Total Rugby the other week) dictate that if the players hands send the ball in a backwards motion, then it is deemed backwards. It doesn't matter where the ball ends up. Meaning that the only correct response to that try is "SHANE!!".

 

[TRF_Olyy]

I don't think Wales can get much worse than the performance today.

Bit of an over reaction

 

[SelimNiai]

The better side won that game. We were too predictable, kept on banging up through the forwards. That said, the Aussies knew how to nullify the crash ball so we never really had any 1st phase go-forward and spent a lot of it retreating. Our first try was a bit of opportunism, the last one was what we should have done the previous 80+ minutes.

Also, James Hook, suddenly looking a poor player. Can't kick for posts, poor tactical kicking, slow in getting passes away meaning the defence are in Roberts' face before he gets the ball. With a full strength side atm he doesn't figure in my plans. Stephen Jones or Preistland at 10, Roberts, Davies and even Scott Williams are ahead in the Centre and Halfpenny and Byrne at 15. Would drop Hook from Decembers game vs Aus, tell him to really knuckle down in France to improve his form.

 

[Sam Owen]

That pass to Shane was about four metres forward...

Oh ok, I didnt really watch the game I only saw that part where I thought Shane Williams scored. I dont really care too much for 3rd and 4th but Shanes try (or no try) looked good and I'd most probably watch the highlights of that game because of that play.

 

[ranger]

The distance a pass travels forward has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass or not (confusing but thems the rules..)

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

Yes but it was a forward pass, and the fact that it was a metre forward should've alerted the refs to it.

The fact that it wasn't called was nothing to do with the rules, it was to do with the fact that neither the referee nor the assistant noticed the forward pass.

 

[ACT1NUP]

The distance a pass travels forward has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass or not (confusing but thems the rules..)

That sounds a bit messed and amazingly confusing. Pass travels foward, but it has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass, despite it travelling forward and being a forward pass. I guess it's probably more if the ref/touchies don't see it, it never happened

 

[ranger]

That sounds a bit messed and amazingly confusing. Pass travels foward, but it has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass, despite it travelling forward and being a forward pass. I guess it's probably more if the ref/touchies don't see it, it never happened

A forward pass is when a player throws the ball forward. Whether it travels forward is irrelevent..

 

[ACT1NUP]

So if a player passes it either backward/lineball and it travels forward due the momentum of the player running it isn't a forward pass? is there any other way a pass 'travels' forward. On a side note no wonder we have **** referees in rugby, it's the **** rules we have, waaaaaay too many areas open to interpretation.

 

[ranger]

So if a player passes it either backward/lineball and it travels forward due the momentum of the player running it isn't a forward pass? is there any other way a pass 'travels' forward. On a side note no wonder we have **** referees in rugby, it's the **** rules we have, waaaaaay too many areas open to interpretation.

Exactly.

As a flanker i really like that laws are up for interpretation to some extent, but some really need to be rewritten to be less ambigious, the throw forward law could be better worded

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

It's possible, if you simply throw the ball forwards, it's quite easy to do.

 

[Sam Owen]

The distance a pass travels forward has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass or not (confusing but thems the rules..)

Yes but it was a forward pass, and the fact that it was a metre forward should've alerted the refs to it.

The fact that it wasn't called was nothing to do with the rules, it was to do with the fact that neither the referee nor the assistant noticed the forward pass.

That sounds a bit messed and amazingly confusing. Pass travels foward, but it has no bearing on whether it was a forward pass, despite it travelling forward and being a forward pass. I guess it's probably more if the ref/touchies don't see it, it never happened

A forward pass is when a player throws the ball forward. Whether it travels forward is irrelevent..

Its called relative velocity. Here, this is a video I saw on the TV the other day....

 

[ACT1NUP]

I see, good clip, never really thought about forward passes in depth. btw coulda told us that the first pass shown was the infamous french forward pass of the dreaded '07 QF. Shuddered when I saw that I did.

 

[TRF Mr Fish]

I don't know if the IRB quite knows how relative velocity works.

That player does not throw the ball behind his head, he throws it forward and then runs under, covering more ground than the ball does - that it clearly a forward pass. If the IRB says otherwise then they are idiots. The player never propelled the ball backwards.

Likewise, the same goes for the first pass. The player passes it forward then runs past the ball, because he's travelling faster - he still propels it forward. The IRB needs to change its definition, because its explanation does not stand up.

 

[Username]

Actually, I'm not sure you have any understanding of relative velocity. It's meaningless to say that the ball moves forward without giving a frame of reference. In those passes the ball moves forward relative to the ground, backwards relative to the moving players and eastward relative to the Sun. In this case, the frame of reference of the moving players is used, so the ball does indeed move backwards (relative to the players). That's exactly what relative velocity is. The IRB aren't idiots.

Or to use the maths,

Vball rel player​ = Vball​ - Vplayer ​
and since as you said the player is moving faster than the ball
Vplayer​ > Vball ​
Therefore
Vball rel player​ < 0 (i.e. the ball travels backwards)

 

[ranger]

I don't know if the IRB quite knows how relative velocity works.

That player does not throw the ball behind his head, he throws it forward and then runs under, covering more ground than the ball does - that it clearly a forward pass. If the IRB says otherwise then they are idiots. The player never propelled the ball backwards.

Likewise, the same goes for the first pass. The player passes it forward then runs past the ball, because he's travelling faster - he still propels it forward. The IRB needs to change its definition, because its explanation does not stand up.

? no..

 

[nickdnz]

I don't know if the IRB quite knows how relative velocity works.

That player does not throw the ball behind his head, he throws it forward and then runs under, covering more ground than the ball does - that it clearly a forward pass. If the IRB says otherwise then they are idiots. The player never propelled the ball backwards.

Likewise, the same goes for the first pass. The player passes it forward then runs past the ball, because he's travelling faster - he still propels it forward. The IRB needs to change its definition, because its explanation does not stand up.

I think you're a little confused with how relative velocity works to be honest.

The easiest way to think about it, is chucking a tennis ball to someone in the back seat of the car. If you chuck a tennis ball to a passenger in the back seat while moving forward at 50mph hour, while the ball moves backwards in relation to you (as the video shows with the monentum of the passers run), it's still going to travel further than the point of release.

If you watch (and I agree that the video doesn't demonstrate the over the head pass very well), it's still moving backwards in relation to the player, but it's traveling further because of the momentum.

 

[Seaton]

Remember the old mantra of "The ball travels faster than the man"?

I'd be interested to know what the average velocity of passes are in pro rugby, I would say that the vast majority of passes travel at a greater velocity to 180 degrees of the player than what the player is moving at.

I get the point the video is making, but disagree with their implied absolutes that the ball will always travel forward relative to the pitch, even if passed backwards, and that a pass thrown forward when the passer is at full tilt is never going to be caught.