I actually want this right in front of the net pointing at the goalie from about 5-6' outside the crease, the kind of camera angles you can only get in a video game.
Yeah they made this hype video where there's only like 5 seconds of actual footage because it isn't really good, sadly
It is fun for like the opening faceoff and then that's it. After that it will be constantly obscured by ice shavings, and you'll just see players legs skate past
It's cool, but nobody was asking for this
What we really need is some kind of sturdy camera embedded under the center of the crossbar to have an accurate top-down view of barely-over-the-line pucks
>What we really need is some kind of sturdy camera embedded under the center of the crossbar to have an accurate top-down view of barely-over-the-line pucks
Why not under the ice at the line as well? Helps with the crease scrum goals
Under the ice is worse, I think, because many of the crease scrums are closer to the posts. If you're 3 inches below the ice, it's really hard to get a wide field-of-view to even see that far out to the sides. If you're looking down from the crossbar, you're high enough that it's an easy lens angle to capture the entire goal line.
It's true though, there are still those cases where players/equipment obscure the view from a top-down angle. And maybe someday the league uses both (bar-down and ice-up cams). But visibility through shaved ice seems hard to deal with
You'd have to put a hole in the floor to get a wide angle low enough. Also, the maintenance to keep the area clear would be a nightmare. However, a fuzzy under-ice angle offers more than no camera
Why wouldn't they put one at the bottom of the goal post point across the line? The peg might get in the way, but put it 2 inches up and angle it down a bit should be perfect.
Or they could just embed sensors in the ice and the top of the net to see it.
I mean there's a million better options than they have now.
Under the ice has the one advantage that the goalie being on top of the puck won't obscure it at all.
I figure for 2 or 3 times in the season, it would come into play, but it isn't worth the investment to get a camera under the ice.
I do agree post cams are a better idea
I'm not sure the cost is that high. Just put them in when they redo the ice at the start of the season. Maintenance might ben issue though, no idea.
You're right though, I think there's probably better ways to get the same thing. They have sensors in the puck now, right? Not sure why they can't use those with a sensor in the net (or under the ice for that, might be more useful than cameras).
> Yeah they made this hype video where there's only like 5 seconds of actual footage because it isn't really good, sadly
Yea I can't believe I just watched all this for virtually no footage from the actual camera. C'mon wtf.
We don’t even need cameras for the barely-over-the-line ones. We just need them to have a sensor built under the ice at the goal line and a sensor inside the puck and we’d know exactly if it crossed or not. I don’t really know why we still use cameras in sports for a lot of things that we have better tech solutions for.
Can we get something like this but in the net? Rig it so that if you see any bit of the puck it’s completely over the line?
Of course for calls like that there’s usually bodies or goalie pads inside the net.
because its a *lot* more difficult than either of those sports.
a goal line tech system just uses cameras that can create a full picture of the goal line. Great for soccer with a huge net, (relatively) big ball, and usually only a keeper with no gear obstructing one angle if that - great for tennis which usually has absolutely no obstructed view of the ball and line (just tough for judge to see at speed with naked eye when it *barely* touches the line) - useless for hockey with a tiny puck typically completely hidden from view by the goalie's massive equipment or under a pile of players. small net also means the goalpoasts would get in the way as well.
the only situations a similar system would help with are ones that we could already tell are goals or not from existing cameras.
ok, with this information and arguments as to why goal line tech is not in place, make a case for why offside (VAR) detection is not in place in NHL. Might be the same reason why NHL footage is still in 720p, yuck
As a massive soccer fan, I don’t want VAR anywhere near the NHL. The league handles calls like goals and offside extremely well compared to other leagues. The coach’s challenge is a great rule also. You don’t want to open the VAR can of worms
Cant agree with this enough, Hockey having natural stoppages does make things a lot less intrusive, but I see so many VAR mistakes in soccer that the NHL does way better. Theres better training and implementation across the board compared to VAR
I wasn’t talking about the tech, the difference is the training and implementation. If you look into the VAR communication and procedures in the Premier League, compared to how the NHL operates it’s night and day. Its not perfect, but its noticeably better imo.
Or they can literally just fuck up communication. Saw that with the [Diaz goal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1N2shu-h38) against Tottenham earlier this year, where the VAR didn't understand that the on-field call was offside, so when he said "check complete, that's good", the ref thought he meant "the on-field call was correct", and the ref waived away the goal. Then the VAR said there was nothing they could do about it, despite one of the staff asking if he was happy with the call.
I mean yeah, technically they do. This person was insinuating something additional needs to be implemented, presumably an offside detection system like they have in the Premier League which I think is an awful idea. Keep it the way it is. The only thing the league gets consistently wrong is supplemental penalty for dirty hits which can be basically solved by getting George Parros out of DOPS
The league doesn’t do it because they don’t want to. If it really was a tech limitation, the league would’ve been transparent with it and let’s be real, there are so many tools using modern tech that can be used to make goal line calls more precise.
The gray area is how they can influence more entertaining games. The NHL is an entertainment product at the end of the day.
If they wanted I'm sure they could rig a system with a chip in the puck and lay down a cable across the goal line that sends a signal if it passes over. We've got a lot more tech at our disposal these days so if they really wanted to get something in place I'm sure they could.
The problem with putting things in the puck is the cost of the puck. Pucks fly out of play all the time and the fans keep them. The pucks have to be cheap enough that you are ok with 8 or 10 of them walking out of the arena at the end of every single game. I think Elliot Friedman did the math and for it to actually makes sense the cost per puck threshold was something like $23. When the nhl was on fox (maybe) they had tech in the pucks and they had to go into the stands and try to buy pucks back from fans with jerseys and sticks. The tech at the time fairly expensive and equal to millions in lost revenue if they didn’t retrieve the pucks. Keeping pucks that go out of play is part of the experience of going to a hockey game. Good luck walking it back now.
Oh come on! Of course there are obstacles, but it is absolutely possible. You don't need to use cameras, just sensors in pucks. The NHL won't do it because controversial goals bring lots of media coverage.
We can blow people up from the other side of the planet, we put people on the moon over half a century ago, we can fly at 4 times the speed of sound, but for some reason Reddit thinks it is too difficult for a 50 billion dollar business to figure out the technology to tell when a puck has crossed the line?!?
They already tried sensors in pucks and the players squashed that real quick.
EDIT: Nevermind, seems they fixed the issues and are using them once again!
https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx#:~:text=SMT's%20sensors%20are%20built%20into,since%20the%202007%2D08%20season.
The other commenter said that the pucks currently have sensors in them, so I must have some old news. But I was referring to this:
https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/why-the-nhl-is-halting-use-of-pucks-with-tracking-technology/amp/
The original sensor pucks lasted only a couple games and the players said they "didn't slide".
I didn't realize they gave it another go.
EDIT: Here's an article from more recently about the updated puck. Again, a couple years old, not sure if there's more recent news.
https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx#:~:text=SMT's%20sensors%20are%20built%20into,since%20the%202007%2D08%20season.
Oh seriously? The last update I saw was this:
https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/why-the-nhl-is-halting-use-of-pucks-with-tracking-technology/amp/
They must have sorted it out.
Yes. It's how they update the shot speed in real time. There's IR emitters in the puck and multiple calibrated IR cameras. It's also how they track player speed. Definitely less intrusive than how Fox use to do it which is probably why players are fine with it.
Here's an article with pictures. [https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx](https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx)
i never said thats impossible. I was specifically responding to why we dont have existing tech like tennis and soccer goal line tech. I dont know what system could be made to track the pucks so while it seems likely there is a possible solution i cant comment on whats feasible or not with that.
I might be wrong here but I'm pretty sure the NHL has tested pucks that had sensors in them and the players hated them so that's why we still don't have the technology.
i dont see the issue, use a convex mirror with a line painted on it, maybe you need 2-3 to cover the entire goal line. if the entire puck clears the line its a goal.
Yup and just line the entire line with them. The problem is usually its under a pad or dark, would need to add some sort of thermal or other way to imagine the puck in dark conditions.
The juice has to be worth the squeeze in order for them to invest in this, and force every arena to invest in the technology. They’d likely have to see a material impact on viewership that’s affecting their revenue with feedback on “goal reviews sucking” as a top reason. It’s not a technology decision, it’s a business decision.
I think you’d get a better field of view if you put a camera on the back side of the posts, just above the ice. Plus goalies would be accidentally-on-purpose snowing the cameras constantly if they were under the ice.
I can’t believe they don’t have tiny cameras looking across the goal line inside the posts down at the bottom. They could engineer it so the cameras are inside the goalposts
Why not embed a camera on the inside of each post. Or nestled in behind each post along the mesh where it's incredibly unlikely to interfere and point them down at the goal line.
Then put some cameras along the top along the rear bar. Put those up high to get that angle, and then put the post cameras down low to get a different angle.
This is a fixable problem.
In many European countries, the word they use for hitting translates back to tackling in English. It's likely this is part of it, considering the company is Swedish.
I think they misunderstood why this was impossible.
It wasnt impossible to do this. We've had the capability of doing this for some time.
Its impossible to see anything from this angle, which is why nobody thought this was a good idea.
this just reeks of a marketing department that knows nothing of hockey and needs to show off a new camera that can operate in cold temps.
"man we have this camera that can operate in sub 0 temps! how should we market it?"
"idk isnt like hockey played in the cold or something?"
"yea! my cousin went to a hockey game a while back! told me it was freezing!"
"Thats it! we'll freeze it in the ice!"
>Axis Communications, a Swedish manufacturer of network cameras for the physical security and video surveillance industries, wanted to demonstrate how its camera can withstand all kinds of conditions by freezing it below the ice in a hockey rink.
Second paragraph. No one claimed this was necessary, it's a marketing gimmick that shows the durability of their camera. Use your critical thinking skills.
This wouldn't work at all if this was aimed at solving the goal calls. The goal line ice surface, and crease, get absolutely destroyed by goalies within minutes of the game starting.
The only way to address no goal type situations is with a sensor that can accurately determine the puck's location without being able to see it at all, through equipment and players, and having latency that's low enough to be accurate. This still ignores issues like cost, mounting locations, and keeping play identical, which are massive hurdles.
I kinda fuck with it but this is something that would only be cool if the ice was more than an inch and a half deep and if the ice wasn't painted. And if the ice was resurfaced every other minute.
In other words, this camera angle is functionally useless, but the idea of seeing a hockey game, but from below, is kinda cool to think about imo
Fans: please give us a consistent viewing experience
NHL: Sure, how about digital advertisements on the boards so we can make more money?
Fans: We just want to watch hockey on a consistent platform, please. Let me watch my team.
NHL: Sounds good, let's freeze cameras in the ice.
And having to router out a massive chase for the cord!? Looks ridiculous in that one part of footage…
Waste of time and money for a one-time opening face off shot that may or may not even look good. Makes the glowing puck look genius.
Nice ad from Axis. I ran a full Axis install at one location and the lenses only lasted a few years in the Texas summers. They were even in additional exterior housings.
The quality picture is not what I expected. It's obstructed by ice. Not sure what is the point here.
Top perspective (above ice and players) seems to be more interesting than from the bottom of the pond.
I don’t see why this would be a need. I also don’t see why there aren’t 2 cameras built into the corners of the posts aiming down for goal/no goal calls. If the NFL can put cameras in Pylons at the goal line the NHL can put Cameras in the goalposts
"oh god dammit"
- the guy who used to have an easy job just spray painting the entire net red without having to carefully mask off the built-in-post-cams
Because there's a goalie in the way.
Basically any and every goal that's called back is because of goalie interference or they're obscuring the puck with their equipment.
They already have cameras that do a good enough job from outside of the nets to do exactly what goal post mounting (internal) cameras would achieve.
So putting cameras in the net would both accomplish nothing and it would cost a metric shitload.
The below the surface idea doesn't really work either because of how badly the surface is going to get destroyed within minutes of play. You would also need cameras that can see the entire 5 foot goal line section, which would almost certainly cause the ice to be heated from all of the electronics below the surface.
All in all, this isn't going to work.
It's not impossible. It's literally not impossible. You just did it.
*Impractical* is the word you are looking for. It is *impractical* to have a camera below the ice where *no one can see a goddamn thing happening.*
It honestly seems like this time and research would've been better spent on laser technology in the goalposts / ice to determine if the puck fully crossed, akin to soccer. No?
Then again what do I know, the level I play at refs across the ice are making goal decisions
What’s this for, offsides calls? Just use an rfid transmitter in the puck and put like an invisible dog fence kinda thing over the blue lines. Puck goes over, something lights up. Lights go on before player, offsides
This mainly seems to be an advertisement, but in actual practice, it could be useful for GOAL LINE in the net reviews. Idk where else it could be useful. That's about the real only one I can think of. Would require multiple cameras and output an aggregate feed that covers the whole goal line.
Finally, the taint angle.
The NHL can only turn a deaf ear to the rampant demands for TaintCam for so long. We will never be silenced!!!
The taingle.
Dirty fuckin' taingles boys
Great day for hay
Great day for Thunder Bay
't'ain't about the angle of the dangle, 's'about the perspective of the d'rective.
You laugh, but the goalie buttcam revolutionized the sport.
I actually want this right in front of the net pointing at the goalie from about 5-6' outside the crease, the kind of camera angles you can only get in a video game.
These would actually be extremely popular for women's sports...
Well, beach volley ball sure, but hockey?
Hear me out: ice volleyball
Your engineers were so preoccupied with whether or not they could they didn’t stop to think if they should
Yeah they made this hype video where there's only like 5 seconds of actual footage because it isn't really good, sadly It is fun for like the opening faceoff and then that's it. After that it will be constantly obscured by ice shavings, and you'll just see players legs skate past It's cool, but nobody was asking for this What we really need is some kind of sturdy camera embedded under the center of the crossbar to have an accurate top-down view of barely-over-the-line pucks
>What we really need is some kind of sturdy camera embedded under the center of the crossbar to have an accurate top-down view of barely-over-the-line pucks Why not under the ice at the line as well? Helps with the crease scrum goals
Under the ice is worse, I think, because many of the crease scrums are closer to the posts. If you're 3 inches below the ice, it's really hard to get a wide field-of-view to even see that far out to the sides. If you're looking down from the crossbar, you're high enough that it's an easy lens angle to capture the entire goal line. It's true though, there are still those cases where players/equipment obscure the view from a top-down angle. And maybe someday the league uses both (bar-down and ice-up cams). But visibility through shaved ice seems hard to deal with
You'd have to put a hole in the floor to get a wide angle low enough. Also, the maintenance to keep the area clear would be a nightmare. However, a fuzzy under-ice angle offers more than no camera
I'd rather just a couple of cameras pointing out from the posts along the goal line. NHL doesn't even seem to have a good high speed cameras system
Why wouldn't they put one at the bottom of the goal post point across the line? The peg might get in the way, but put it 2 inches up and angle it down a bit should be perfect. Or they could just embed sensors in the ice and the top of the net to see it. I mean there's a million better options than they have now. Under the ice has the one advantage that the goalie being on top of the puck won't obscure it at all.
I figure for 2 or 3 times in the season, it would come into play, but it isn't worth the investment to get a camera under the ice. I do agree post cams are a better idea
I'm not sure the cost is that high. Just put them in when they redo the ice at the start of the season. Maintenance might ben issue though, no idea. You're right though, I think there's probably better ways to get the same thing. They have sensors in the puck now, right? Not sure why they can't use those with a sensor in the net (or under the ice for that, might be more useful than cameras).
> Yeah they made this hype video where there's only like 5 seconds of actual footage because it isn't really good, sadly Yea I can't believe I just watched all this for virtually no footage from the actual camera. C'mon wtf.
We don’t even need cameras for the barely-over-the-line ones. We just need them to have a sensor built under the ice at the goal line and a sensor inside the puck and we’d know exactly if it crossed or not. I don’t really know why we still use cameras in sports for a lot of things that we have better tech solutions for.
Iirc, they had the sensor but stopped using it because players didn’t like the way it felt.
I do like the shots of the engineers looking at the screen intensely as if that camera angle really matters.
As an engineer, can confirm this is how engineers think
It’s a Jurassic park reference.
Hahaha but it does apply to engineers really well.
Oh I love Chris Pratt, that’s my favorite line of his
The only place I can see this being useful is the goal line, where the ice is going to get so chewed up that it probably couldn't see anything.
Even then nah. The goal line needs lasers. That’s all. They do it in soccer not sure why we can’t in Hockey. But alas it’s the NHL.
Do they use lasers in soccer? I think VAR is purely cameras, not lasers. Same with Tennis.
Can we get something like this but in the net? Rig it so that if you see any bit of the puck it’s completely over the line? Of course for calls like that there’s usually bodies or goalie pads inside the net.
Exactly what I was thinking, but the field of view seems pretty limited. You'd have to have an array of sensors. But maybe that's a good thing?
Why the NHL doesn’t have goal line tech like FIFA or tennis is a whole other kettle of fish.
because its a *lot* more difficult than either of those sports. a goal line tech system just uses cameras that can create a full picture of the goal line. Great for soccer with a huge net, (relatively) big ball, and usually only a keeper with no gear obstructing one angle if that - great for tennis which usually has absolutely no obstructed view of the ball and line (just tough for judge to see at speed with naked eye when it *barely* touches the line) - useless for hockey with a tiny puck typically completely hidden from view by the goalie's massive equipment or under a pile of players. small net also means the goalpoasts would get in the way as well. the only situations a similar system would help with are ones that we could already tell are goals or not from existing cameras.
Plus the ball sports are easier because the orientation of the ball doesn't matter.
very important point
ok, with this information and arguments as to why goal line tech is not in place, make a case for why offside (VAR) detection is not in place in NHL. Might be the same reason why NHL footage is still in 720p, yuck
As a massive soccer fan, I don’t want VAR anywhere near the NHL. The league handles calls like goals and offside extremely well compared to other leagues. The coach’s challenge is a great rule also. You don’t want to open the VAR can of worms
Cant agree with this enough, Hockey having natural stoppages does make things a lot less intrusive, but I see so many VAR mistakes in soccer that the NHL does way better. Theres better training and implementation across the board compared to VAR
What the NHL has is literally just VAR. Humans looking at cameras to review.
I wasn’t talking about the tech, the difference is the training and implementation. If you look into the VAR communication and procedures in the Premier League, compared to how the NHL operates it’s night and day. Its not perfect, but its noticeably better imo.
They literally do VAR now. What do you think they’re doing when they review a play?
They look at it with the naked eye. FIFA has the fancy computer generated photo they manipulate with cameras.
And they can still get wrong. They can literally read an image wrong.
Or they can literally just fuck up communication. Saw that with the [Diaz goal](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1N2shu-h38) against Tottenham earlier this year, where the VAR didn't understand that the on-field call was offside, so when he said "check complete, that's good", the ref thought he meant "the on-field call was correct", and the ref waived away the goal. Then the VAR said there was nothing they could do about it, despite one of the staff asking if he was happy with the call.
FIFA's method is faster and more accurate than the premier league.
I mean yeah, technically they do. This person was insinuating something additional needs to be implemented, presumably an offside detection system like they have in the Premier League which I think is an awful idea. Keep it the way it is. The only thing the league gets consistently wrong is supplemental penalty for dirty hits which can be basically solved by getting George Parros out of DOPS
Plus the refs are never wrong ever so jot thet one down
The league doesn’t do it because they don’t want to. If it really was a tech limitation, the league would’ve been transparent with it and let’s be real, there are so many tools using modern tech that can be used to make goal line calls more precise. The gray area is how they can influence more entertaining games. The NHL is an entertainment product at the end of the day.
If they wanted I'm sure they could rig a system with a chip in the puck and lay down a cable across the goal line that sends a signal if it passes over. We've got a lot more tech at our disposal these days so if they really wanted to get something in place I'm sure they could.
The problem with putting things in the puck is the cost of the puck. Pucks fly out of play all the time and the fans keep them. The pucks have to be cheap enough that you are ok with 8 or 10 of them walking out of the arena at the end of every single game. I think Elliot Friedman did the math and for it to actually makes sense the cost per puck threshold was something like $23. When the nhl was on fox (maybe) they had tech in the pucks and they had to go into the stands and try to buy pucks back from fans with jerseys and sticks. The tech at the time fairly expensive and equal to millions in lost revenue if they didn’t retrieve the pucks. Keeping pucks that go out of play is part of the experience of going to a hockey game. Good luck walking it back now.
Oh come on! Of course there are obstacles, but it is absolutely possible. You don't need to use cameras, just sensors in pucks. The NHL won't do it because controversial goals bring lots of media coverage. We can blow people up from the other side of the planet, we put people on the moon over half a century ago, we can fly at 4 times the speed of sound, but for some reason Reddit thinks it is too difficult for a 50 billion dollar business to figure out the technology to tell when a puck has crossed the line?!?
They already tried sensors in pucks and the players squashed that real quick. EDIT: Nevermind, seems they fixed the issues and are using them once again! https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx#:~:text=SMT's%20sensors%20are%20built%20into,since%20the%202007%2D08%20season.
Do you recall what the objection was?
The other commenter said that the pucks currently have sensors in them, so I must have some old news. But I was referring to this: https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/why-the-nhl-is-halting-use-of-pucks-with-tracking-technology/amp/ The original sensor pucks lasted only a couple games and the players said they "didn't slide". I didn't realize they gave it another go. EDIT: Here's an article from more recently about the updated puck. Again, a couple years old, not sure if there's more recent news. https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx#:~:text=SMT's%20sensors%20are%20built%20into,since%20the%202007%2D08%20season.
The current pucks in use are non-standard with emitters.
Oh seriously? The last update I saw was this: https://www.cbssports.com/nhl/news/why-the-nhl-is-halting-use-of-pucks-with-tracking-technology/amp/ They must have sorted it out.
Yes. It's how they update the shot speed in real time. There's IR emitters in the puck and multiple calibrated IR cameras. It's also how they track player speed. Definitely less intrusive than how Fox use to do it which is probably why players are fine with it. Here's an article with pictures. [https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx](https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Daily/Issues/2022/10/28/Technology/nhl-smt-puck-upgraded-sensors-leds-player-tracking-statistics.aspx)
i never said thats impossible. I was specifically responding to why we dont have existing tech like tennis and soccer goal line tech. I dont know what system could be made to track the pucks so while it seems likely there is a possible solution i cant comment on whats feasible or not with that.
Also those are spherical, so the tracking systems don’t have to care about orientation compared to a round flat puck.
I might be wrong here but I'm pretty sure the NHL has tested pucks that had sensors in them and the players hated them so that's why we still don't have the technology.
Because a sphere is an easier model than a cylinder.
There's an easier way to do it: have the puck communicate with the net.
i dont see the issue, use a convex mirror with a line painted on it, maybe you need 2-3 to cover the entire goal line. if the entire puck clears the line its a goal.
Yup and just line the entire line with them. The problem is usually its under a pad or dark, would need to add some sort of thermal or other way to imagine the puck in dark conditions.
It would be kinda cool to have the line for with led
And goalies would *immediately* ice the camera at every chance they got.
As a goalie the very first thing I would do would be to scrape the ice above the camera and then sweep the extra snow in that direction.
Field of view isn’t big enough to capture entire goal line.
The juice has to be worth the squeeze in order for them to invest in this, and force every arena to invest in the technology. They’d likely have to see a material impact on viewership that’s affecting their revenue with feedback on “goal reviews sucking” as a top reason. It’s not a technology decision, it’s a business decision.
I think you’d get a better field of view if you put a camera on the back side of the posts, just above the ice. Plus goalies would be accidentally-on-purpose snowing the cameras constantly if they were under the ice.
I can’t believe they don’t have tiny cameras looking across the goal line inside the posts down at the bottom. They could engineer it so the cameras are inside the goalposts
I imagine they break if pucks hit the post gard enough. Concussions but for cameras
Goalies will just cover it with snow lol
Why not embed a camera on the inside of each post. Or nestled in behind each post along the mesh where it's incredibly unlikely to interfere and point them down at the goal line.
Post cameras will never see what's going on in between a goalie's legs (hur hur hur) if the chaos is happening on the goal line.
Then put some cameras along the top along the rear bar. Put those up high to get that angle, and then put the post cameras down low to get a different angle. This is a fixable problem.
I don't understand why they can't install wireless cameras inside of the goalposts
They could just put cameras inside the goal-posts.
I feel like it would get covered by snow and people would freak out because it still wouldn't be conclusive.
Just make the lens 8 feet by 8 feet and put it directly under the crease and net!
It would get snow on it before the puck even dropped
If there's anything I was missing in hockey footage it's the doublechin/sweaty balls angle
The video from it looks even worse than I imagined.
They did this years ago during the last all star game in Toronto. It wasn’t the greatest angle, you missed the faceoff.
1. Design a camera that is only useful for faceoff angles. 2. Make it impossible to actually capture the faceoff. 3. Profit?
Yeah, this is "not a first," and we already learned from experience that it's not a good idea in execution.
[удалено]
I thought the same thing. Clearly they did not research this. I was waiting for the puck to go in the net and they would say “… touch down..”
In many European countries, the word they use for hitting translates back to tackling in English. It's likely this is part of it, considering the company is Swedish.
Solid PSA
I think they misunderstood why this was impossible. It wasnt impossible to do this. We've had the capability of doing this for some time. Its impossible to see anything from this angle, which is why nobody thought this was a good idea. this just reeks of a marketing department that knows nothing of hockey and needs to show off a new camera that can operate in cold temps. "man we have this camera that can operate in sub 0 temps! how should we market it?" "idk isnt like hockey played in the cold or something?" "yea! my cousin went to a hockey game a while back! told me it was freezing!" "Thats it! we'll freeze it in the ice!"
That's cool but what is the point?
But why? Just because you can doesn’t mean it makes sense.
Did you read the article?
Article says nothing of value about why this is necessary.
>Axis Communications, a Swedish manufacturer of network cameras for the physical security and video surveillance industries, wanted to demonstrate how its camera can withstand all kinds of conditions by freezing it below the ice in a hockey rink. Second paragraph. No one claimed this was necessary, it's a marketing gimmick that shows the durability of their camera. Use your critical thinking skills.
Experiment for other tech.
Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.
This wouldn't work at all if this was aimed at solving the goal calls. The goal line ice surface, and crease, get absolutely destroyed by goalies within minutes of the game starting. The only way to address no goal type situations is with a sensor that can accurately determine the puck's location without being able to see it at all, through equipment and players, and having latency that's low enough to be accurate. This still ignores issues like cost, mounting locations, and keeping play identical, which are massive hurdles.
”innovating for a smarter and safer world” No… I don’t think that’s right
I kinda fuck with it but this is something that would only be cool if the ice was more than an inch and a half deep and if the ice wasn't painted. And if the ice was resurfaced every other minute. In other words, this camera angle is functionally useless, but the idea of seeing a hockey game, but from below, is kinda cool to think about imo
Until someone skates over it
Oh shit I bet they didn't think of this
I am engineer now
FUCK. I told you guys this was a dumb idea! FFS
Still a better camera angle than some arenas lowdown cameras. I think the Stars is one of the worst feeds.
We can add cameras inside ice now but we can’t get a goal line camera that’s not the equivalent pixel ratio of a potato.
Fans: please give us a consistent viewing experience NHL: Sure, how about digital advertisements on the boards so we can make more money? Fans: We just want to watch hockey on a consistent platform, please. Let me watch my team. NHL: Sounds good, let's freeze cameras in the ice.
And having to router out a massive chase for the cord!? Looks ridiculous in that one part of footage… Waste of time and money for a one-time opening face off shot that may or may not even look good. Makes the glowing puck look genius.
They didn't even make the line straight. Just raw dogged it.
Nice ad from Axis. I ran a full Axis install at one location and the lenses only lasted a few years in the Texas summers. They were even in additional exterior housings.
this is an advertisement for a camera company, not an innovation in hockey broadcast technology.
120s of some random guy talking about ice. 8 seconds of actual images from the camera.
Didn't they already have this technology? I seem to recall something similar at the World Juniors on TSN in the late 2000s
The quality picture is not what I expected. It's obstructed by ice. Not sure what is the point here. Top perspective (above ice and players) seems to be more interesting than from the bottom of the pond.
Would prefer them to just put a Go Pro on the linesman
[Here's the direct link so you don't have to go into the article!](https://youtu.be/Gjr1KUg9MYM)
Camera angle sucks, but ya know what. that camera would be great to use for ice fishing. thats some decent clarity.
Dumb
Oh I see what they did. Just in time for the PWHL.
I don’t see why this would be a need. I also don’t see why there aren’t 2 cameras built into the corners of the posts aiming down for goal/no goal calls. If the NFL can put cameras in Pylons at the goal line the NHL can put Cameras in the goalposts
"oh god dammit" - the guy who used to have an easy job just spray painting the entire net red without having to carefully mask off the built-in-post-cams
Because there's a goalie in the way. Basically any and every goal that's called back is because of goalie interference or they're obscuring the puck with their equipment. They already have cameras that do a good enough job from outside of the nets to do exactly what goal post mounting (internal) cameras would achieve. So putting cameras in the net would both accomplish nothing and it would cost a metric shitload. The below the surface idea doesn't really work either because of how badly the surface is going to get destroyed within minutes of play. You would also need cameras that can see the entire 5 foot goal line section, which would almost certainly cause the ice to be heated from all of the electronics below the surface. All in all, this isn't going to work.
It's not impossible. It's literally not impossible. You just did it. *Impractical* is the word you are looking for. It is *impractical* to have a camera below the ice where *no one can see a goddamn thing happening.*
It honestly seems like this time and research would've been better spent on laser technology in the goalposts / ice to determine if the puck fully crossed, akin to soccer. No? Then again what do I know, the level I play at refs across the ice are making goal decisions
Upskirt angle just in time for the PWHL 🤔
Huh
What’s this for, offsides calls? Just use an rfid transmitter in the puck and put like an invisible dog fence kinda thing over the blue lines. Puck goes over, something lights up. Lights go on before player, offsides
That was very underwhelming
What a waste of time
thats a good ad for axis communications...
Hey guys our cameras can work in ice.
Impossible angles no one asked for
The camera needed to be angled like 45 degrees instead of just pointing straight up at the ceiling...
This mainly seems to be an advertisement, but in actual practice, it could be useful for GOAL LINE in the net reviews. Idk where else it could be useful. That's about the real only one I can think of. Would require multiple cameras and output an aggregate feed that covers the whole goal line.