Snicko Tech for Goals

[Demonland 74,181]

 

[daisycutter 29,982]

with all the other surrounding noises, good luck with that one

bound to be contentious a controversial, but i think contrived conflict is the latest media trope and let's face it the media run the afl now

[Diamond_Jim 12,739]

another piece of untrialled technology... why o why don't they trial it at VFL level for a season

[Mickey 4,776]

Surely hot spot would be better. Not sure the speed of the ball or the material of the posts would create enough heat to be picked up though

[Diamond_Jim 12,739]

Here's a link to an article on the subject at AFL.com

https://www.afl.com.au/news/2019-03-19/did-that-goal-hit-the-post-umps-to-ask-snicko-in-2019

[david_neitz_is_my_dad 4,084]

As with past AFL ideas this will be scrapped within a week.

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 11,051]

I actually can't believe that it has taken soo long to get to this point (pardon the pun).

I would think that the ball brushing the post would setup a reasonable sound/vibration within the post, such that a microphone directly mounted to the post would have a reasonable chance of detecting the impact and screening it out from the surrounding crowd noise.

The key difference here between cricket and AFL is that in cricket, the technology was developed and gained audience acceptance via the TV broadcasters before it was accepted as an umpiring adjudication tool.  The AFL probably don't really want to go down that path, so it comes across as a little half baked to me to announce this tech before it's proven.  Prove it up in private and then just actually introduce it.

I'm glad they are investing something into it though as the present goal line tech is a bit embarrassing at times.  I still don't understand why with the near zero price of minature full HD cameras these days why there are not more cameras mounted at multiple heights/angles on each goal post that would garentee the required vision of the ball for every occasion.

[daisycutter 29,982]

1 minute ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

I actually can't believe that it has taken soo long to get to this point (pardon the pun).

I would think that the ball brushing the post would setup a reasonable sound/vibration within the post, such that a microphone directly mounted to the post would have a reasonable chance of detecting the impact and screening it out from the surrounding crowd noise.

The key difference here between cricket and AFL is that in cricket, the technology was developed and gained audience acceptance via the TV broadcasters before it was accepted as an umpiring adjudication tool.  The AFL probably don't really want to go down that path, so it comes across as a little half baked to me to announce this tech before it's proven.  Prove it up in private and then just actually introduce it.

I'm glad they are investing something into it though as the present goal line tech is a bit embarrassing at times.  I still don't understand why with the near zero price of minature full HD cameras these days why there are not more cameras mounted at multiple heights/angles on each goal post that would garentee the required vision of the ball for every occasion.

it's not just crowd noise, players close by will make noise and even hit/touch the goal posts........but we shall see.

i hope they have better slo-mo cameras to synchronise with the audio as in cricket. the current camera frames per second (and resolution) wouldn't seem to be adequate

[melborn4vr 14]

I would have thought that a goal umpire on each goalpost would help sort this out, as well as touching on the line. If the umpires don’t agree, then video technology could be added. New technology can often be confusing in its interpretation.

[Demon_spurs 1,943]

If I was a full back, I'd be bumping into the post just at the same time the ball passes, a bit like when the ball hits a batsmans pad instead of the bat. 

[Moonshadow 17,678]

More technology that will only make human judgements harder to understand

[Rodney (Balls) Grinter 11,051]

9 minutes ago, Demon_spurs said:

If I was a full back, I'd be bumping into the post just at the same time the ball passes, a bit like when the ball hits a batsmans pad instead of the bat. 

I recon bodies hitting the posts will produce a significantly different vibration signature compared to the ball hitting it, just like bat pad is able to be distinguished from the ball snicking the bat.

[Diamond_Jim 12,739]

8 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

I recon bodies hitting the posts will produce a significantly different vibration signature compared to the ball hitting it, just like bat pad is able to be distinguished from the ball snicking the bat.

aye,,, but will the Magpie supporters trust this new fangled technology...especially if it comes from the other side of the river (if you know what I mean)

?

[daisycutter 29,982]

13 minutes ago, Rodney (Balls) Grinter said:

I recon bodies hitting the posts will produce a significantly different vibration signature compared to the ball hitting it, just like bat pad is able to be distinguished from the ball snicking the bat.

i don't think that's true

a bat/pad noise (or bat/ground) can be the same as a bat/ball noise. they are generally separated by the synchronising of the video with snicko as it is rare that both occur at exactly the same sub second (i.e. video frame)

and of course cricket has hot spot to further clarify

Edited March 19, 2019 by daisycutter

[Deestroy All 14,266]

Like DC said, players wil oft be hitting or touching the posts at the same time. Stupid idea. Hot spot would be better. 

 

Or dip the footy in (Haymes) paint at every stoppage. 

[Dame Gaga 2,453]

Surely more cameras to provide more angles to view and better resolution (the vision is often blurry) would be better than snicko.

[george_on_the_outer 7,858]

11 hours ago, melborn4vr said:

I would have thought that a goal umpire on each goalpost would help sort this out, as well as touching on the line. If the umpires don’t agree, then video technology could be added. New technology can often be confusing in its interpretation.

The AFL couldn't possibly go for this simple solution. 

An extra 2 goal umpires with eyes that can see....goodness! Much better to spend thousands of $ on untried untested audio technology and then sit some clown up in a video box reviewing everything and still getting it wrong. 

[Straight Sets Simon 23,113]

12 hours ago, melborn4vr said:

I would have thought that a goal umpire on each goalpost would help sort this out, as well as touching on the line. If the umpires don’t agree, then video technology could be added. New technology can often be confusing in its interpretation.

This.

[layzie 34,493]

Like the idea but think some extensive testing is needed. Could be useful in conjunction with the video review down the track if proven somewhat reliable.

[La Dee-vina Comedia 17,119]

An alternative might be to change the rule so that a ball hitting the post becomes irrelevant. if it bounces back into play, it's play on. If it goes through on the goal side of the goal post it's a goal and on the behind side of either the goal or point post, it's a minor score. Yes, it would be a major break with tradition. But does that really matter? 

[Diamond_Jim 12,739]

Like the runner, the rule changes, the sign board and AFLX etc... when is the AFL going to learn to trial these concepts for a season or more at VFL , SANFL etc level and then bring them in when the public are on board.

Nothing against any one change but we seem to be having them now for changes sake without much forethought.

And why not try different things in different leagues.For example VFL could have the 6,6,6 while SANFL could trial reduced interchange etc.

Edited March 20, 2019 by Diamond_Jim

[daisycutter 29,982]

1 hour ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

An alternative might be to change the rule so that a ball hitting the post becomes irrelevant. if it bounces back into play, it's play on. If it goes through on the goal side of the goal post it's a goal and on the behind side of either the goal or point post, it's a minor score. Yes, it would be a major break with tradition. But does that really matter? 

lol - might cause some fanatics to want to revise some previous close grand finals and recalculate things like the coleman medal etc

has got merit intellectually, but can't see it happening

[daisycutter 29,982]

1 hour ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Like the runner, the rule changes, the sign board and AFLX etc... when is the AFL going to learn to trial these concepts for a season or more at VFL , SANFL etc level and then bring them in when the public are on board.

Nothing against any one change but we seem to be having them now for changes sake without much forethought.

And why not try different things in different leagues.For example VFL could have the 6,6,6 while SANFL could trial reduced interchange etc.

far too much common sense, dj