Jesus offside goal vs West Ham - Explanation in the Mail

Discussion in 'Bluemoon forum' started by MCFC1993, 18 Aug 2019.

  1. MCFC1993

    MCFC1993

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2008
    Messages:
    16,961
    Location:
    Travelling the World


    An explanation in the Mail of how that decision come about and the huge problem with it, now they've had time to look into it.

    Basically the final point of contact from Silva to Sterling was lost. They had a frame when Silva was playing the ball with Sterling over 10cm's onside and they used the frame where the ball had already gone where he was 2.5cm offside. Losing the point where it was actually played.

    In the 0.02 seconds between frames Sterling had moved around 13cm's.

    So they're not even using sufficient enough equipment to make these calls.
     
    Last edited: 18 Aug 2019
  2. SebastianBlue

    SebastianBlue

    Joined:
    25 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    25,150
    Location:
    Still at Maine Road in my mind.
    It is a more formal explanation of exactly what many of us had been arguing in the VAR thread regarding the call: insufficient transparency, incompetent use, technology not up to required standard, acting without regard to margin of error for the system as a whole.
     
    Nooks and 1.618034 like this.
  3. Corky

    Corky

    Joined:
    9 Dec 2005
    Messages:
    14,973
    Said this at the time - it is impossible to get the instantaneous point.

    The laws have it down as the 'moment' which could be 0.2 seconds, and a player runs at 9 metres per second.
     
  4. Bluemoon dan

    Bluemoon dan

    Joined:
    15 Jul 2009
    Messages:
    2,391
    Location:
    Littleborough
    To be fair Andy Gray came up with the same conclusion a week ago on that Bein Sports programme him and Richard Keys do over in the Middle East somewhere (I cant remember exactly which Country it is broadcast from so please excuse the broad generalisation of a region). I'm sure it will be floating around on the internet somewhere but he showed exactly this point and compared to the Sterling goal that was given.
     
    BlueTG and Thaksinssoldier like this.
  5. yeseye

    yeseye

    Joined:
    14 Feb 2008
    Messages:
    11,012
    Location:
    EARLY CROSS, CHANCE AT THE FAR POST,HINCHCLIFFE
    Microchip in ball,
    Microchip in all players boots.
    Determine the exact position of Forward / Defender at the exact time the ball has been played.
    No need for these silly lines.
     
  6. dario2739

    dario2739

    Joined:
    6 Jan 2009
    Messages:
    2,825
    Andy Gray demonstrated perfectly how shit it is by taking the still back two frames, which makes Raheem onside... It's still open to human error... Just time delayed!
     
  7. west didsblue

    west didsblue

    Joined:
    2 Oct 2011
    Messages:
    14,254
    Like I said on the other thread, they should draw thick lines to allow for the margin of error and if the lines overlap at all the advantage should be given to the attacking side. The thickness of the lines could be related to the speed of the players if they have the tech to do it or just make them a standard thickness to cover most cases.
     
  8. Kokonut1307

    Kokonut1307

    Joined:
    21 May 2013
    Messages:
    450
    You would think they would use simple statistics and calculate a 95% confidence interval to cover the margin of error, but that requires work.
     
  9. bewildered

    bewildered

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2017
    Messages:
    140
    I design ‘chips’ for a living and it’s not that simple.

    The problem is that to accurately determine a 3D spatial position it can only be done optically as there isn’t a precise enough positioning technology available currently. GPS is not precise enough.

    It is possible that in the future other radio based triangulation systems could be developed but nothing exists currently that has the required precision.

    So optical is the only way at the moment which leads to the follow up problem that because time is a factor the measurement needed is actually 4D. Current broadcast video is 25 frames per second which means that there is uncertainty of 1/25 sec between frames. Clearly that time period is significant when people are using the system to accuracies of a few mm’s.

    The system is fundamentally flawed until replaced by high resolution video systems which operate at higher fps. 60 Frames per second is available and used in industrial optical inspection systems and could be deployed in VAR if high speed networks were available. It’s still not perfect but higher FPS translates to more accurate position resolution.

    VAR needs 60 FPS video connected to a facility within the ground via high speed direct fibre connections. This could easily be implemented using a facility similar to the post production trucks used by the TV broadcasters, these are the lorries that we see parked up outside the ground.

    The tech could be easily implemented but they have chosen the cheap option of using the standard TV feeds and a central facility.

    However, good a system is however, let’s be in no doubt that it would be used to fuck us over at every opportunity.
     
  10. peoffrey

    peoffrey

    Joined:
    15 Oct 2010
    Messages:
    13,945
    Location:
    RIP Billy Big Spuds
    Offside Jesus? He’ll be walking on water next.
     

Share This Page