Author | Lightnews

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1m

There's also some drama involved in "awaiting the chains" to determine a first down one way or another. This removes all of that drama. At least most of it. See how they created the video with a slight delay as if a camera were approaching? Like, "oooh, what's happening?" They could cut right to it.

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 3m

I haven't seen it yet - but if I had to predict, this will eventually be something that is sponsored. The NFL will get paid to roll this garbage out with some corporation blasted across the top of the bullshit, computer generated 'recreation'.

I'm not sure time had much to do with it.

2 1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 11m

That last bit was a joke on how technology never really works in these situations and it only ever creates the need for additional technology to monitor the previous technology to make sure the previous technology isn't incorrect even though itself has another technology on top doing the same for it

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 14m

Agree on the whole surface having to be covered. At least to, what, a quarter of an inch? But, a-ha! see, there's a gap. Which is why technology doesn't work.

As to when the down or out-of-bounds calls are made, those could be synched up and the data reviewed. Maybe add sensors to Ref's whistles!

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 17m

The fact that they've introduced a computer generated variation of this post-placement measurement that is likely *LESS* accurate than what they had before is the whole scandal. There is no theoretically logical nor technilogical reason why they needed to introduce this.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 21m

That was the whole premise of my original post/rant on this. The problem was never with the chain system - it was always, and may always be, with the physical placement of the ball, on the physical field, by the physical human referee. That's the root cause of inaccurate first down calls.

2 1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 24m

Right. But that's the whole problem right there. The chains were a perfectly legitimate, mathematically accurate (within parameters) method. They had the sideline markers, pinched the chain, brought it out along a perpendicular line, and transferred the measurment to the middle of the field.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 32m

Baseball is a much more fun game to watch when everyone's not just waiting for a home run.

I'm glad I cut my teeth on baseball in the 70s and 80s when the little things mattered. HRs are exciting but double plays are fun. Infield singles are fun. Singles up the middle to move a baserunner are fun.

3

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 37m

I read somewhere that 'Boudreau' is French for 'James', so...

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 38m

Well done.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 47m

Ha... I see what you're saying. Yeah, who knows!? I mean, who knows how legit any of this is anymore. Greed is a corrosive element.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 50m

Yeah, it's what they use for those cute little videos with the player and ball dots 'running' the play. I like those. But if the accuracy isn't there, it's useless for this particular issue - spotting first downs! Which is how we got here.

1 1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 52m

I'd be less concerned with this. It could be closed circuit within the stadium or something. I'm just spitballing here, I have no technical background but hopefully you know what I'm getting at. Not saying it's not possible but it would be low on the risk list for me.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 57m

Right. It's tricky for sure. A running back (or anyone running with the ball) usually holds it short-way perpendicular to the field - the fat middle of the ball facing the end zone. No one runs with the point of the ball facing north-south. So, the fat part could pass the marker but not the ends.

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 59m

Absolutely. In some way, I think going back to 100% human is the way to go. Well, maybe not with all this recent gambling nonsense. But, practically, yes - it's the way to go. Because unless they're willing to do absolutely everything possible with the technology, it's not much of an improvement.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

Me neither. I'm not attacking, I just don't know the tech-specs of how it works. Like, what if there's a player in the way?

Your point stands, however, that everything is fixed which makes it infinitely easier to even attempt to measure.

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

What if there's a player in the line of sight of the camera?

I understand what you're saying. I'm just saying that it's still janky. If it's accepted within the sport (tennis, soccer, etc.) then, fine. Everyone lives with it. But if you're talking about it on a technical level it has some flaws.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

Right. The whole surface of the ball would need to be covered.

This brings me to another abomination the NFL introduced - "Breaking the plane" bullshit. What are we, all Geometry fucking experts now? That's for another thread, though. Let's not go down that dark path.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

And those little videos just have the field graphic as a background. The play starts (roughly) at the 32 yard line, for example. Just underimpose the line of scrimmage from there and let the dots run. But that's not accurate enough for ball-spotting.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

Ahh, okay. I actually like watching those little videos of plays. So, kudos there. But, yeah, they should be tinkering with those to spot the ball. Knowing this now, my suspicion is there's no way to accurately compare the ball to the *field*. Ball and players are easy. Relation to the field is hard

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

Maybe. I don't claim to be an expert on wireless tech, what options are available, the impact they might have, etc. I'm sure something could be done but it would take time to implement. QBs would make a stink, though. Look how MLB pitchers reacted to the pitch clock. Just saying, it would take work.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

But what IS that 'technology'? What is spotting the ball going millimeters over the goal line? What is actually determining that?

It likely comes from composite camera angles which includes a margin of error (i.e. guesswork). Just because it's shown as a computer graphic doesn't mean it's accurate.

1 1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

For real? Where are they and what are they for? Is it for those little live-action play graphics that I see all the time where the players and ball are little dots moving around?

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

I don't watch tennis but I've seen it. I beg to differ. It's the same problem. Are there sensors on the entire surface of the ball? On every millimeter of every line on the court? I think tennis is accepted because it was the first. But I don't know the technology and don't trust it to be accurate.

1

Ed Sweeney (d.b.a. Knobby Burton) @knobbyburton.bsky.social · 1h

Not perfectly every time. I don't know the technology but this would have to be the bare minimum starting point to even attempt to implement something like this that was accurate to the actual ball.

You still have the problem of where the Ref places it after the play, though.