Goal line decisions.

[ditto]

Was wondering if it would be possible to use 'hot spot' technology to use as part of a review?

Admittedly my knowledge on the technology is virtually nil, however wouldn't it show if the ball hit the hand or brushed the post?

Would this work??

 

[AzzEffect]

I'm not sure about hot spot, maybe for hitting the post but my main concern is the quality of the footage used to review the decision. I also have the same problem with the run out appeals in cricket. They can show us smooth slow motion footage of players highfiving and celebrating for dramatic effect but the review footage skips to many frames to be of any use

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

Was wondering if it would be possible to use 'hot spot' technology to use as part of a review?

Admittedly my knowledge on the technology is virtually nil, however wouldn't it show if the ball hit the hand or brushed the post?

Would this work??

Like you, not sure how it works

But I would think boot to ball would create a hot spot (possibly ball hitting the ground also), so could be difficult to tell, on a spinning ball, if the hot spot seen was created by goal line touch of hand or post. Having a rolling ball near the line with a few players in the vicinity (some trying to toe poke it through, so trying to lay a finger on it) would be difficult to gauge when the touch came, what was the last impact, etc

Having said that, I don't know why a cricket ball hitting the pitch doesn't create a hot spot

At any rate, if the technology in general is going to be used, it needs to be better than it currently is

 

[ditto]

At any rate, if the technology in general is going to be used, it needs to be better than it currently is

Thoroughly agree.

I'd like to see the AFL & Cricket Australia invest a few of their many, many millions in a joint effort.

 

[Underarm]

Hot spot wouldn't work. At the cricket, the cameras are trained on one place the entire game, they can't be move/follow the play.

Also they are really expensive. Some cricket nations can't afford the cameras for some series. For the amount of use they would get, wouldn't be worth it.

Thirdly, I'm not sure they would do what people would like it to do. It wouldn't really be able to tell if it went over the line before or after being touched.

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

Thoroughly agree.

I'd like to see the AFL & Cricket Australia invest a few of their many, many millions in a joint effort.

Agree, but CA are somewhat restricted by ICC / ICB rules

The ICB (or whatever the Indian Cricket Board are called) doesn't even agree that the 3rd umpire should come into play

I see the difficulty in when it comes to goal line. How many cameras would you need to cover the entire post? Particularly if they are extra tall (eh Richo?)

It's different to one camera guy deciding to focus on Kosi poking out Riewoldt's eye in super slow mo after he's kicked a goal

But if the AFL want it, they can't rely on the broadcasters to supply the tech

Maybe something like hot spot, but not

A chip inside the ball, special paint on the posts ... we need some nano tech here!!

 

[Call Me Cake]

Hot spot wouldn't work. At the cricket, the cameras are trained on one place the entire game, they can't be move/follow the play.

Then fix a few cameras overlooking the goals then?

 

[Cousin of Daicos]

I'm not sure about hot spot, maybe for hitting the post but my main concern is the quality of the footage used to review the decision. I also have the same problem with the run out appeals in cricket. They can show us smooth slow motion footage of players highfiving and celebrating for dramatic effect but the review footage skips to many frames to be of any use

This is what I never understood.

They have ther super slow mo cameras that record at something like 120 frames per second to allow for that slow mo, yet don't use those cameras for the goal line decisions?

Is Channel 7 run by monkeys?

 

[Furn]

Hot spot wouldn't work. At the cricket, the cameras are trained on one place the entire game, they can't be move/follow the play.

Also they are really expensive. Some cricket nations can't afford the cameras for some series. For the amount of use they would get, wouldn't be worth it.

Thirdly, I'm not sure they would do what people would like it to do. It wouldn't really be able to tell if it went over the line before or after being touched.

Yep can only cover a small area, even in cricket if the batsman comes down the wicket he can be out of range.

 

[IllBeTheJudge]

This is what I never understood.

They have ther super slow mo cameras that record at something like 120 frames per second to allow for that slow mo, yet don't use those cameras for the goal line decisions?

Is Channel 7 run by monkeys?

Nah, that's just the commentary team

 

[Murph_S13]

Anderson and Vlad won't cough up the $s to pay for proper cameras and so we end up with a system that's a joke.

The biggest joke is that Anderson claimed last year that there were only 6 goal umpiring errors in more than 10,000 decisions over a whole season. His new system has shown that assessment to be self-serving optimism at best. Makes you wonder why we're having to endure this nonsense to correct such an apparently miniscule error rate.

 

[CAS79]

Hot spot wont work on the ball. The ball is constant motion and will be full of spots that will take to long to differentiate and a players hands are also likely to have touched other players etc.

It may work on the posts.

 

[Speck]

It's obvious more technology/cameras need to be used as almost every decision has been somewhat inconclusive.

For touched on the goal line decisions, a bunch of cameras inside the post is needed, sort of like a larger version of stump cam. You'd need a couple on each to get reasonable height though.

Touched off the boot unless we go super-slow motion is always going to be tough.

Whether its hit the post or not again super slow motion is the only way.

Don't think hotspot will work as the ball will have too many spots from it hitting the ground, players etc.

 

[The Speaker]

Yet another example of the AFL creating a problem where there never was one.