That's my point, last night they couldn't detect when it was kicked. With the chip they would have been able to get the exact camera view the moment the ball was played. Being able to see the line wasn't an issue, so if they had the exact point of contact they could have made a decision. TV seemed to be showing two frames, one with the ball clearly out and the other with it touching the line, but they had no way of knowing which one to use so had no option but to go with the on pitch decision.The chip isn't used to track ball position, it detects when the ball was kicked so they can sync the cameras more accurately.
The chip used in an American Football is only accurate to 6 inches.
Yes, the football has a chip in it. Plus other sports technology you may not know about
The chip is only accurate to six inches so ball measurement decisions are left up to the chain gang. There are a lot of other analytics coaches can get from the chipped ball and players who wear RFID tags.www.wvxu.org
ARS v WHU
- Thread starter george.g
- Start date
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
Not sure I follow. If you're trying to decide if the ball was out of play or not, only the position of the ball matters - not when it was played.
And if there was any image showing the ball clearly out of play then it was out of play. Whether it was touching the line at some other point, surely doesn't matter.
Agree, but point of contact is likely to be the point the ball starts moving back in field, so would get you a good reference point to check the ball when it was at its most out/tightest in
Bowen's body was blocking the ball from the camera on the goal line. They seemed to have two frames, one with the ball out of play and one with it in, but they couldn't decide which one to use as they couldn't see when Bowen played the ball. If they had the chip they would have known exactly when he touched the ball and therefore which video frame to use.
That's not right. A chip in the ball does not tell you where the ball is. It's used in semi-automated offside to determine when the ball is played with much better precision than a 50 fps camera (it runs at 500Hz, so ten times more precise).
If either of the frames shows the ball out of play the game stops, surely?
Very good point, my eyes must have been playing tricks on me then.
Peter Grove
RefChat Addict
But
But again, it doesn't matter if or when the player touched the ball. It only matters if the ball was in or out of play. Which is the same point that @Trip was making.
socal lurker
RefChat Addict
These events happen how often? The quest for perfection can get silly.
Three times this season already. Wonder how many times glt has been required
Agreed that the "quest for perfection" can get silly but this could be a low tech, easy win imo.
Problem is a simple camera solution wouldn't work, there was one on the goal line here and Bowen's body was in the way. It would need to be something with multiple cameras like GLT, and Hawk-Eye is said to cost around £250,000 per ground. That makes it around £1 million a decision over the course of a season, no idea if they could reduce this by using the existing cameras but I doubt it as they are pointed directly at the goal.
Granted that is small fry given the EPL's wealth, but I can't see it being high up priority lists. Plus where do you draw the line, do you also need cameras to check whether the ball went out for a throw-in prior to a goal?
Yeah I get that!
I absolutely see goal and side line decisions being made by tech in future
It actually doesn't track the ball. That's one of the bits that's not automated. They have to check that manually.