I think it will simply be a matter of the techie watching a screen and the data will be almost immediate in live time .. he will simply call forward into the ref's ear piece ..
NRL to trial two new technologies to help detect forward passes
- Thread starter EaglesDontTweet
- Start date
-
We had an issue with background services between march 10th and 15th or there about. This meant the payment services were not linking to automatic upgrades. If you paid for premium membership and are still seeing ads please let me know and the email you used against PayPal and I cam manually verify and upgrade your account.
-
We have been getting regular requests for users who have been locked out of their accounts because they have changed email adresses over the lifetime of their accounts. Please make sure the email address under your account is your current and correct email address in order to avoid this in the future. You can set your email address at https://silvertails.net/account/account-details
I think it will simply be a matter of the techie watching a screen and the data will be almost immediate in live time .. he will simply call forward into the ref's ear piece ..
Well that Woodsie - sounds as good as it get's mate.....
My only concern initially was the accuracy of the GPS ... but then I was informed it isn't GPS from a satellite but locations taken off points around the ground and accurate to a very high degree ... the mathematic logarithms would be easy enough for a Physicist to program ... I think it has a very high likelihood of being successful ..
It's the best option so far by a way mate - I especially like the play is not stopped 2 minutes for every decision.
Seems pretty simple to me, if they can accurately track the linear speed of the ball towards the tryline. If it's travelling at a certain speed prior to release then increases that speed upon release then it's forward. Only problem will be the optics, many people will be up in arms when they see how far forward a "backwards" pass can actually travel.
Also @maxta ... it is not as simple as just seeing if the ball travels forward ... for example .. if a player is running at 30kph in a direct line to the try line and passes .. the ball's inertia will continue to take it in a forward motion at 30kph, with the only forces acting to slow it down being wind resistance and gravity ... if however, the ball continues forward at say 15kph, then that would mean that some other force was applied to the ball, in this case it would be the force of passing backwards ....
Other matters to contend with apart from just the speed of the passer is his direction, for example running at 30kph on a diagonal track will mean your actual forward sppeed is much less ... etc etc ...
Other matters to contend with apart from just the speed of the passer is his direction, for example running at 30kph on a diagonal track will mean your actual forward sppeed is much less ... etc etc ...
I think the article said half a second for the data ... if they accept the technology as infallible then that is all the time it should take
The Who
Journey Man
During play, or just when a try is scored?
I like the concept in principle but I fear there will be anomalies if used on every play, For example, an opposition player gets a light touch on the passed ball and propels it forward. The tech guy yells at the ref who stops play needlessly and wrongly awards possession to the other side. Does the tech guy then inform the ref that it is he who has gone off prematurely and it was play-on after all?
The more technical assistance you give to an off-field official the more chance of stoppages. It is already out of hand.
I take your point ... Murphy is always around somewhere ... but I think the technology will only need a very short distance of ball travel to calculate ... and would also register any change of momentum or direction by a hand deflecting it from it's initial course ... the speed at which the computers can track and calculate is astonishing ....
Just to upset you mate ... if the accuracy gets down to cm's .. which I think it may ... what if ever time there is a contest high ball catch and we watch endless replays of did he touch it or did he not ... did it go forward, or did it not .... maybe the ball tracker will be used and it might be a lot quicker
It's easily testable, set up a ball launcher on a dolly where forward speed and angle of release is known. With a few months of testing they would be able to hone it to an incredible degree of accuracy.
I thought they all got refunds from that scam?
pjayz
הנשרים ישרור בעוד שנתיים מיום הנשרים
The ref wears a collar and it zaps them whenever a pass is thrown forward. Jake might throw a few on purpose...
The first television image of the earth from outer space was courtesy of the Tiros 1 satellite waaaaaay back in.... 1960!
An electrical failure rendered the satellite 'defunct' after 3 months (approx) but the satellite is still orbiting earth today!
#bringtiros1home
The Who
Journey Man
I had no idea you were so tech savvy.
I fear that in this never ending quest to make the perfect sport future generations will simply play video games; no need to train, to sweat and it would eliminate HIA's.
meh, I tried to do a rollerball 1975 reference (the movie) but all the pics were too large.
So insert your own joke -----> here!
Cliffymagic
Bencher
Expect a hundred forward passes from dummy half to be picked up in the first week. Or will they only use it for tries?
If this technology can determine if a ball is travelling forward can it call a knock on vs knock back as well? For a time there everything not obviously projected backwards seemed to be deemed a knock on, but it appears to have eased back a bit this year (in the games I've watched).
To save technology I would be happy with a rule where a ball dropped behind is not a knock on if it doesn't cross past the player who has dropped it towards the opposition try line. I just don't see a benefit gained in projecting a ball towards you when you're facing your end. And supporters let out a frustrated groan when refs call it, like yeah, but really?
To save technology I would be happy with a rule where a ball dropped behind is not a knock on if it doesn't cross past the player who has dropped it towards the opposition try line. I just don't see a benefit gained in projecting a ball towards you when you're facing your end. And supporters let out a frustrated groan when refs call it, like yeah, but really?
| Team | P | W | L | PD | Pts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
10 | 9 | 1 | 124 | 20 |
|
9 | 7 | 2 | 72 | 16 |
|
9 | 7 | 2 | 49 | 16 |
|
11 | 7 | 4 | 59 | 14 |
|
9 | 6 | 3 | 57 | 14 |
|
10 | 6 | 4 | -10 | 14 |
|
11 | 6 | 5 | 107 | 12 |
|
11 | 6 | 5 | -9 | 12 |
|
10 | 5 | 5 | -56 | 12 |
|
11 | 5 | 5 | 30 | 11 |
|
10 | 4 | 6 | 15 | 10 |
|
11 | 5 | 6 | -12 | 10 |
|
9 | 3 | 6 | -71 | 8 |
|
10 | 3 | 6 | -9 | 7 |
|
9 | 2 | 7 | -69 | 6 |
|
10 | 2 | 8 | -91 | 6 |
|
10 | 1 | 9 | -186 | 4 |
