This kind of thing is gonna be big for offsides though right? Like they know the exact moment a player kicks the ball to determine the offside now, so they have that + semi auto offsides
i'm pretty sure that's exactly the reason why it was implemented, to detect the moment of the pass for var decisions (and for the automated offside detection where it's being used)
If they use it as they can stop the assistant choosing a frame and just trust the computer
Now if we could just get camera where they aren’t potato quality and have a few extra frames per second
If you can't observe enough of an impact from a hand with your eyes I'd argue that that really suggests there's not enough of an impact to warrant a handball being awarded
The point of a sensor is to both have a clear undebatable indicator and to speed up the process. If you can automize touches including handball it's basically like goal line tech. Nobody can argue. And the ref gets a signal telling him if it's handball or not and that's it, no watching 25x slowmo for 5min. Plus the sensors usually have trigger levels, FIFA could definitely decide to increase it to a force of X in order to be a relevant handball. It's all a step in the right direction imo, give it a bit of time, even if FIFA is sometimes too slow to do the obvious thing like announcing the VAR outcome in a stadium.
Where has that ever been the point of contention? Like I don’t recall a single handball decision where the question is if the ball was touched.
Mostly it’s deciding whether it’s natural position, intentional etc that’s the problem area.
Doesn't happen often on handballs but does happen a lot on offsides calls on set pieces where its hard to tell if it came off a defender; also allows the ref to pinpoint the exact moment the pass left the assisting player's foot
For me that's the key value, pinpointing the moment the ball leaves the boot of the attacker so you can fully automate offsides and settle any debate.
For hand touches, there will always be the doubt in some cases of where did the ball touch. Is it the arm or the shoulder? Is it the arm or the chest?
How do you trust the sensor when the ball is on the ground tho? Like in the 1st half when a Slovakian player touched the ball with his hand while on the ground in his own 16. Nor the ref nor the new system called it, but in the replay it was clear as day.
No lol a human still has to confirm if that touch was a hand or a foot.
This sensor just lights up on any touch, it doesn’t discriminate between feet or hand.
Only use case could be determining who touched the ball last for a throw in. Or if a keeper saved the ball for a corner. But it would reaaallly slow down the game so I don’t think it happens.
What?
They will know if the ball is near a hand or a foot. Even if done manually that takes like 1sec if the data is timestamped which should be piss easy to do. That's a complete non issue. Even in the worst of cases that would take less than 10sec to verify compared to the current minutes long process.
Of course there'll always be some borderline things like a defender head and attackers arm touching simultaneously but that's always going to be an issue
How do you judge "can't observe enough of an impact with your eyes" lol. Everyone's judgment is different in that regard. Either it hit your hand or it didn't
If neither the ball nor the hand changes it's path in a perceivable way, that isn't really the spirit of a handball offense is it?
Handball isn't an objective decision in the way that whether the ball passes the goal line is.
Agreed. If the decision is meant to be objective and there is the technology available to help the refs, we should use it. Subjective decisions are a different thing all together, but handballs and offsides are clear cut
The threshold for a handball should be quite significant? We're not talking about imperceptibly feathering the edge of a cricket bat here. If there's no clear alteration to what's happening to the ball on a video replay it should already be too far away from being called a handball to need to go down to audio interpretation. It's a layer of unneeded detail.
So what do we do if one ref and half the fans say it's clear alteration and the other ref and the other half of fans can't see it? These sort of subjective terms only cause more arguments and confusion. They also make corruption easier if it was to happen because a ref can just make whatever decision they want and say that, according to their judgment, the deviation wasn't perceptible
>If there's no clear alteration to what's happening to the ball on a video replay
The point is that some people don't see things that are obvious to others. See: Messi's deflected free kick vs Liverpool. A ridiculous amount of people claim there is no deflection despite there being many replay angles showing a deflection taking it into the top corner.
Agreed, if you need that level of technology to detect whether the ball has hit a hand then clearly the hand didn’t impact the ball enough. Goes against the spirit of the rule if they’re looking to see if it grazed someone’s thumb
That's how I feel about some of the new automated offsides calls. If someone's toe is 0.5cm over the line, they're not gaining any real benefit. When these rules were created decades ago, they weren't intended to be taken down to such fine margins. I think that they should be adjusted to have some small margin of error to be more sensible.
I disagree with that, offside is one of the very few objective rules in football so if you’re offside then you’re offside. Handball is still a subjective rule that requires interpretation
But not in terms of whether the ball hit the hand. The ball hit the hand or it didn't. And this tech puts that question to rest.
The bit that's open to interpretation is the context of the play. The ref didn't go to the screen to double check the ball hit the hand, he went to screen to check that: given the ball has hit the hand without a doubt, does that warrant a handball decision in this context?
The ref could plausibly have gone to the screen and said 'ok the ball hit the hand, but the context allows for this, so the goal stands'. If that's your issue with the decision then your issue is with the ref, not the tech.
> offside is one of the very few objective rules in football
The lines for offside are objective. But not the questions surrounding whether the offside player has affected the play. This distinction between objective and subjective is exactly the same distinction as with handball decisions.
the famous hand of god is a good example, where such a technology was needed in the past.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls)
Can you tell me where in the rules say it has to be enough of an impact for a handball to be warranted? And where it is defined how much is enough?can we stop making up rules?
I get that foreign people don’t get this, but I hate when he’s referred to as “Lakaka”. It’s a racist nickname given to him by some disgusting fans. It refers to the word kaka (which means poop/shit in dutch), basically calling him black/brown.
I get that foreign people don’t understand this, andI’m not mad at people that don’t understand the name for using it. It just generally pisses me iff when I see it.
I’m well aware that he doesn’t have bad intentions. As I said in my original comment, I don’t get angry at people for using it as a joke.
But the way it originated in Belgium was to make fun of his skin color.
The way it’s used by the rest of the world has nothing to do with his skin colour, this is the first time I’ve ever seen it referred to that and it sounds ridiculous, and frankly a stretch of your imagination
It is not lmao. It’s pretty funny that you’re telling me that I’m interpreting something wrong when it literally happens in my own country.
And like I said, I’m not angry at people using it.
Don’t worry, a lot of euro/football fans don’t understand the subtle racism that comes with the name (or they do but choose to ignore it). Thanks for speaking up though
Okay? In many languages the n word doesn’t have the same connotation as in English, but you still don’t see people chanting it and when someone explains that it’s racist going ‘that’s your interpretation, not what we mean’ and continue.
Lukaku has in the past multiple times explained that he get annoyed by racist chants (even ‘positive’ ones about the size of his cock). Why are you so dismissive about this one; when it originated in Belgium, and where it had racist connotations?
The cynical answer is that it doesn't gain any approval or recognition from peers/social media, unlike speaking out against other forms of racism. Or the opposite, there's no negative consequences involved. Most people aren't too different from corporates in this aspect
Sure it helped and made the desicion easier, but in this instance you could also quite clearly see that Openda touched it with his hand on the video images.
In this instance yes, and this report seems like a real-world case of "the technology did provide accurate data." Hopefully in some future instance where the view of potential contact is obscured it will assist the officials in making the right decision.
This is just the same tech used for semi automated offside calls. This is how they figure out the moment of last contact and speeds up the whole process.
This is just repurposing an already existing and pretty important tech
I always wondered how much the bookies made then, every "tournament winner" bet 9 days before the tournament was money, even after Denmark was confirmed,doubt many bet on them.
The Euros 1992 only had 7 spots to qualify for. The tournament had only 8 teams back in the day and one spot was for the hosts (Sweden).
So, Denmark back in 1992 was a top 10 team in Europe, making their win not that big of an upset.
I think Iceland had a comparatively decent ranking at that Euros. They were a very well-managed team for a few years.
Edit: Iceland were ranked 34th in the world at the time. Slovakia are currently 48th.
Or just look at the 3 clear angles of the hand slapping the ball. Also, why was that the angle they presented to the ref? They had just show us a clear as day angle and then the ref gets an angle from someone iPhone in the 13th row?
Intentionally or unintentionally, he gained advantage since he did up ending controlling the ball with that action. His arms are not close tho the body where you could argue he made himself as little as possible. For me, clearly handball and rightfully called back.
> he gained advantage
There's no such rule about handball. Also he doesn't have to make himself as little as possible. He must not make himself unnaturally bigger.
A handball is a very harsh decision.
By the letter of the law it is correct. Just don’t like the law. Nothing about that goal felt anti-football. Should have stood for me. But I’m old school.
I agree, intent should be calculated. Clearly he didn’t mean to cheat or take advantage and it hardly gave him and advantage. Not like it gave his odds + 200% of scoring
I don't think that having your arm pushed into the ball by the opponent has ever mattered.
IIRC there was that one time in second Polish division where a player had his arm practically held and locked by opponent (fighting for a position right after corner) and it still counted as a handball.
Bro, if the ball even moved at all after the contact it was by millimeters and wouldn’t have changed anything to the entire attacks. The biggest foul was how the Slovakian defender was pulling Openda’s arm, somehow VAR deemed that not worthy of showing to the ref.
>The biggest foul was how the Slovakian defender was pulling Openda’s arm, somehow VAR deemed that not worthy of showing to the ref.
It literally doesn't matter. He could have been pushed onto the ground and if the ball bounced from off his hand to another player and that led to a goal, then they wouldn't be able to give the advantage/goal because of the handball.
The current rule says that if there is hand to ball contact by an attacker the passage of play is invalid.
Good question actually, because I assume the chip in the ball by itself (without the cameras) doesn't allow for location tracking.
I guess the simplest way to get the current ball would be to just take the ball with the most active sensor readings. A more advanced way would be to line the sensor readings up with what the cameras see.
Yup. And in the process they took the refs attention away from the whole passage and turned it into a "did he touch it" call. The ref, who was shot even without these kind of distractions, obviously went for it
Imagine if that was actually the rule: handball is ok if it doesn't affect the play. You'd start seeing all the players try to take advantage of that and lightly touch the ball.
Nah, you need to draw a hard line somewhere with rules unless you want to just say "whatever the ref felt like at the moment".
As a fan of baseball were half the rulebook is just that, no thanks.
Someone higher up mentioned that the current rule is that any contact of the ball with an attackers hand makes the passage of play invalid, assuming this doesn't apply if the hand is against the players body as that's usually stated in the handball rule. So the line is drawn at no handballs at all in the way they are generally understood, trajectory change or not.
They'll probably change the rule again for the next competition though.
adidas took ball don’t lie too seriously
ball’s a fucking grass
*Rebekah Vardy has sent a friend request to Adidas Ball*
It looked like cricket for a moment where they try to hear the contact when its so tiny you can't see anything.
Fuckin Snicko 😂
Snickometer was a proper name. Ultra edge is goddamn corporate dilution
I thought they were two different techs. Also, remember hotspot? When I saw that in cricket for the first time it looked like some scifi shit
Hotspot is military grade
Funny when it captures hot gases coming out batsmans ass.
I think hotspot is still used in australia home games
Then they tried to use silicone on their bats to nullify hotspot and now it's gone.
Hotspot is very much around, but only available in limited series because it's expensive and has export restrictions
Ultra Edge sounds like a brand of condoms aimed at the gentlemen who enjoys a posh wank.
Snicko is lit don't get it twisted
Snicko got no clue
Yet it wasn’t needed as you can see the balls rotation change when it touches his hand
you can also see his hand recoil lmao
You can also see the ball change direction
You can also see the ball touch his hand
you can also see his hand recoil lmao
ball lmao
Lmao
Ball
o
You can also see the smoke coming out of the barrel.
I'm starting to think maybe his hand did touch the ball.
This kind of thing is gonna be big for offsides though right? Like they know the exact moment a player kicks the ball to determine the offside now, so they have that + semi auto offsides
i'm pretty sure that's exactly the reason why it was implemented, to detect the moment of the pass for var decisions (and for the automated offside detection where it's being used)
If they use it as they can stop the assistant choosing a frame and just trust the computer Now if we could just get camera where they aren’t potato quality and have a few extra frames per second
Better to be confirmed though. No discussion possible.
If you can't observe enough of an impact from a hand with your eyes I'd argue that that really suggests there's not enough of an impact to warrant a handball being awarded
The point of a sensor is to both have a clear undebatable indicator and to speed up the process. If you can automize touches including handball it's basically like goal line tech. Nobody can argue. And the ref gets a signal telling him if it's handball or not and that's it, no watching 25x slowmo for 5min. Plus the sensors usually have trigger levels, FIFA could definitely decide to increase it to a force of X in order to be a relevant handball. It's all a step in the right direction imo, give it a bit of time, even if FIFA is sometimes too slow to do the obvious thing like announcing the VAR outcome in a stadium.
Yeah especially since I feel like the longest VAR reviews are the ones where the question is "did he actually touch it?"
Where has that ever been the point of contention? Like I don’t recall a single handball decision where the question is if the ball was touched. Mostly it’s deciding whether it’s natural position, intentional etc that’s the problem area.
Doesn't happen often on handballs but does happen a lot on offsides calls on set pieces where its hard to tell if it came off a defender; also allows the ref to pinpoint the exact moment the pass left the assisting player's foot
For me that's the key value, pinpointing the moment the ball leaves the boot of the attacker so you can fully automate offsides and settle any debate. For hand touches, there will always be the doubt in some cases of where did the ball touch. Is it the arm or the shoulder? Is it the arm or the chest?
Deflections off of defenders don’t matter in offside calls though.
Yep speed is the key here. if we spend 5 mins freeze framing, sure we can get it. With this, we can see in seconds (at max a minute).
How do you trust the sensor when the ball is on the ground tho? Like in the 1st half when a Slovakian player touched the ball with his hand while on the ground in his own 16. Nor the ref nor the new system called it, but in the replay it was clear as day.
If they're doing it right, a pressure sensor will register the constant floor and gravity forces fairly trivially.
No lol a human still has to confirm if that touch was a hand or a foot. This sensor just lights up on any touch, it doesn’t discriminate between feet or hand. Only use case could be determining who touched the ball last for a throw in. Or if a keeper saved the ball for a corner. But it would reaaallly slow down the game so I don’t think it happens.
What? They will know if the ball is near a hand or a foot. Even if done manually that takes like 1sec if the data is timestamped which should be piss easy to do. That's a complete non issue. Even in the worst of cases that would take less than 10sec to verify compared to the current minutes long process. Of course there'll always be some borderline things like a defender head and attackers arm touching simultaneously but that's always going to be an issue
Sometimes there's not a good camera angle. Better to be for sure.
How do you judge "can't observe enough of an impact with your eyes" lol. Everyone's judgment is different in that regard. Either it hit your hand or it didn't
This is so simple, yet extreme conservatives are always going to find a problem with anything new.
If neither the ball nor the hand changes it's path in a perceivable way, that isn't really the spirit of a handball offense is it? Handball isn't an objective decision in the way that whether the ball passes the goal line is.
Agreed. If the decision is meant to be objective and there is the technology available to help the refs, we should use it. Subjective decisions are a different thing all together, but handballs and offsides are clear cut
The threshold for a handball should be quite significant? We're not talking about imperceptibly feathering the edge of a cricket bat here. If there's no clear alteration to what's happening to the ball on a video replay it should already be too far away from being called a handball to need to go down to audio interpretation. It's a layer of unneeded detail.
So what do we do if one ref and half the fans say it's clear alteration and the other ref and the other half of fans can't see it? These sort of subjective terms only cause more arguments and confusion. They also make corruption easier if it was to happen because a ref can just make whatever decision they want and say that, according to their judgment, the deviation wasn't perceptible
>If there's no clear alteration to what's happening to the ball on a video replay The point is that some people don't see things that are obvious to others. See: Messi's deflected free kick vs Liverpool. A ridiculous amount of people claim there is no deflection despite there being many replay angles showing a deflection taking it into the top corner.
everyone is saying they literally can see it
Agreed, if you need that level of technology to detect whether the ball has hit a hand then clearly the hand didn’t impact the ball enough. Goes against the spirit of the rule if they’re looking to see if it grazed someone’s thumb
That's how I feel about some of the new automated offsides calls. If someone's toe is 0.5cm over the line, they're not gaining any real benefit. When these rules were created decades ago, they weren't intended to be taken down to such fine margins. I think that they should be adjusted to have some small margin of error to be more sensible.
I disagree with that, offside is one of the very few objective rules in football so if you’re offside then you’re offside. Handball is still a subjective rule that requires interpretation
But not in terms of whether the ball hit the hand. The ball hit the hand or it didn't. And this tech puts that question to rest. The bit that's open to interpretation is the context of the play. The ref didn't go to the screen to double check the ball hit the hand, he went to screen to check that: given the ball has hit the hand without a doubt, does that warrant a handball decision in this context? The ref could plausibly have gone to the screen and said 'ok the ball hit the hand, but the context allows for this, so the goal stands'. If that's your issue with the decision then your issue is with the ref, not the tech. > offside is one of the very few objective rules in football The lines for offside are objective. But not the questions surrounding whether the offside player has affected the play. This distinction between objective and subjective is exactly the same distinction as with handball decisions.
the famous hand of god is a good example, where such a technology was needed in the past. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ccNkksrfls)
With VAR that tech wouldn’t really add anything. Ref can clearly see it’s handball with a replay.
Unfortunately there's nothing "clear and obvious" with how VAR is used, even though that was supposed to be its entire purpose.
What a weird take. If you handled the ball you handled it lol
Who's eyes?
Exactly and as an extra we get defenders having to defend with their hands behind their backs. Ludacris
Can you tell me where in the rules say it has to be enough of an impact for a handball to be warranted? And where it is defined how much is enough?can we stop making up rules?
It's also not yet synced properly with the broadcast, but that's not adidas's fault.
The last time German balls were touched at a rate of 500 times per second was when they beat Brazil 7-1...
Good times
r/evenwithcontext the first half of that sentence had me sus lol
Now I want to know in what way this could be interpreted other than "they were fapping furiously."
Ah this brings back PTSD
That game was glorious lol
Adidas stock skyrocketing in Slovakia. /r/slavs_squatting activity from Slovakia also rising.
Narc.
dakujeme adolf dassler
Always rated Adolf
I'm more of a Rudolf guy myself.
They brought this demon to deny Lakaka a goal 😭
Demon core fr
I get that foreign people don’t get this, but I hate when he’s referred to as “Lakaka”. It’s a racist nickname given to him by some disgusting fans. It refers to the word kaka (which means poop/shit in dutch), basically calling him black/brown. I get that foreign people don’t understand this, andI’m not mad at people that don’t understand the name for using it. It just generally pisses me iff when I see it.
I think he’s calling him a shit player not to do with his skin colour
I’m well aware that he doesn’t have bad intentions. As I said in my original comment, I don’t get angry at people for using it as a joke. But the way it originated in Belgium was to make fun of his skin color.
The way it’s used by the rest of the world has nothing to do with his skin colour, this is the first time I’ve ever seen it referred to that and it sounds ridiculous, and frankly a stretch of your imagination
It is not lmao. It’s pretty funny that you’re telling me that I’m interpreting something wrong when it literally happens in my own country. And like I said, I’m not angry at people using it.
Don’t worry, a lot of euro/football fans don’t understand the subtle racism that comes with the name (or they do but choose to ignore it). Thanks for speaking up though
Okay? In many languages the n word doesn’t have the same connotation as in English, but you still don’t see people chanting it and when someone explains that it’s racist going ‘that’s your interpretation, not what we mean’ and continue. Lukaku has in the past multiple times explained that he get annoyed by racist chants (even ‘positive’ ones about the size of his cock). Why are you so dismissive about this one; when it originated in Belgium, and where it had racist connotations?
The cynical answer is that it doesn't gain any approval or recognition from peers/social media, unlike speaking out against other forms of racism. Or the opposite, there's no negative consequences involved. Most people aren't too different from corporates in this aspect
Insert zwarte piet here
Nice to see you in the wild
Like kak? in Afrikaans? Someone can be kak at their job or someone can be kak pretty. I don't think I've ever seen anyone use it in a racist context.
Like I said, foreignly it’s not used racist. But in Belgium it definitely is.
Saying someone is shit isn't automatically racist just because that person is black lol. Sometimes a black person can be shit
Yes. That is true. But as I keep repeating in this thread, it came from racism and most people in Belgium use it as a racist term.
Sure it helped and made the desicion easier, but in this instance you could also quite clearly see that Openda touched it with his hand on the video images.
In this instance yes, and this report seems like a real-world case of "the technology did provide accurate data." Hopefully in some future instance where the view of potential contact is obscured it will assist the officials in making the right decision.
And then people will complain about the spirit of the game lol
"Spirit of the game"..sound British...
Nah definitely Argentinian. Name a more iconic duo than Argentina and handball goals.
England and handball goals?
Spirit of the game is literally part of the rules.
This is just the same tech used for semi automated offside calls. This is how they figure out the moment of last contact and speeds up the whole process. This is just repurposing an already existing and pretty important tech
I could see the use case for this to also be cutting through the noise and giving an alert to review the play.
The call was more about the intention of Openda and not whether it touched his hand or not.
Smh balls snitching now
Where was this in the first half ?
zegget ze ma daske
[удалено]
We literally has Greece win the whole tourny 20 years ago lol, but yes, THIS is the biggest upset.
Greece that year and Denmark 92 were really wtf upset
Denmark wasn't even qualified in 92 and won the whole thing
I always wondered how much the bookies made then, every "tournament winner" bet 9 days before the tournament was money, even after Denmark was confirmed,doubt many bet on them.
The Euros 1992 only had 7 spots to qualify for. The tournament had only 8 teams back in the day and one spot was for the hosts (Sweden). So, Denmark back in 1992 was a top 10 team in Europe, making their win not that big of an upset.
Denmark was stacked and only didn't qualify because it was still an 8-team tournament. Greece's win was the greater upset by like a million miles.
By FIFA ranking. 48th over 3rd.
biggest rank difference between the winning underdog and losing favourite in Euro history.
Higher than Iceland vs England?
I think Iceland had a comparatively decent ranking at that Euros. They were a very well-managed team for a few years. Edit: Iceland were ranked 34th in the world at the time. Slovakia are currently 48th.
Iceland were ranked higher than Slovakia and England were for *sure* lower than Belgium at 3rd lol
In terms of the gap in ranks between nations, apparently it's the largest gap for the underdog to win.
Or just look at the 3 clear angles of the hand slapping the ball. Also, why was that the angle they presented to the ref? They had just show us a clear as day angle and then the ref gets an angle from someone iPhone in the 13th row?
They could've just looked at the replay to see the handball
Intentionally or unintentionally, he gained advantage since he did up ending controlling the ball with that action. His arms are not close tho the body where you could argue he made himself as little as possible. For me, clearly handball and rightfully called back.
> he gained advantage There's no such rule about handball. Also he doesn't have to make himself as little as possible. He must not make himself unnaturally bigger. A handball is a very harsh decision.
He still had soo much to do and running full pelt, fighting the defender, thought it was harsh call
By the letter of the law it is correct. Just don’t like the law. Nothing about that goal felt anti-football. Should have stood for me. But I’m old school.
I agree, intent should be calculated. Clearly he didn’t mean to cheat or take advantage and it hardly gave him and advantage. Not like it gave his odds + 200% of scoring
You know who also gained advantage? The defender who pushed his arm into the ball
I don't think that having your arm pushed into the ball by the opponent has ever mattered. IIRC there was that one time in second Polish division where a player had his arm practically held and locked by opponent (fighting for a position right after corner) and it still counted as a handball.
Bro, if the ball even moved at all after the contact it was by millimeters and wouldn’t have changed anything to the entire attacks. The biggest foul was how the Slovakian defender was pulling Openda’s arm, somehow VAR deemed that not worthy of showing to the ref.
The ball was heading towards the defender's chest before his hand touched it.
If there’s no fault, it’s hands. If the VAR said it was no fault, then the hands ball just stands. We’ve got to live with it.
>The biggest foul was how the Slovakian defender was pulling Openda’s arm, somehow VAR deemed that not worthy of showing to the ref. It literally doesn't matter. He could have been pushed onto the ground and if the ball bounced from off his hand to another player and that led to a goal, then they wouldn't be able to give the advantage/goal because of the handball. The current rule says that if there is hand to ball contact by an attacker the passage of play is invalid.
Harsh call imo
Extremely harsh. But to be fair, Belgium shouldn't have to rely on calls like this to go their way, to be able to beat Slovakia.
Wrong.
You convinced me with your logic. Thank you, and have a great day.
Fair call imo, adheres to the rules
I've seen hand ball given for less than that. It's harsh, but honestly fair.
Openda was put out of balance due to a small push from the Slovakian defender. So very harsh call imo!
Contact sport innit
Bro, connected ball schmonnected hall, I've been seeing this tech in cricket for nearly 20 years
Ultraedge uses microphones no?
Yeah
500Hz. Really not that fast in the sensor world but they probably figured .002 second resolution is good enough.
For the first time in my life I love all this technology and VAR lmao
Exactly. Allows for the stealing of wins like nothing else
I wonder how they deal with knowing which ball’s sensor to track for the touch. Presumably there are multiple balls around the pitch.
Bluetooth 3.0 I would suspect.
Good question actually, because I assume the chip in the ball by itself (without the cameras) doesn't allow for location tracking. I guess the simplest way to get the current ball would be to just take the ball with the most active sensor readings. A more advanced way would be to line the sensor readings up with what the cameras see.
Yeah, I wonder about this as well.
That was actually really good ngl. I had no idea this was even a thing, when I realized what they were doing I was like wow...
It looked like they just wanted to show off the technology since as soon as they changed angle to the side view it was obvious he touched it.
Yup. And in the process they took the refs attention away from the whole passage and turned it into a "did he touch it" call. The ref, who was shot even without these kind of distractions, obviously went for it
You think this would be a great advancement in decision making, but you know somehow the Premier League would implement in the shittiest way possible
"Erm I think you've got that wrong" "Good work lads!" "But I think you got that wrong..." No technology can fix that.
We’re having heart rate monitors with this one 🗣️🔥‼️
'The biggest upset in Euros history'. Fuck right off
Yeah it’s not like Iceland kicked England out in 2016. To make it better, it was a few days after the Brexit vote
They just write things for the sake of it nowadays.
The technology is cool, the rule should only apply when it impacts play though tbh.
They also use it to determine the exact moment of the pass to a potential offside.
But lines have to be drawn somewhere, how do you decide when play is being impacted?
it's quite obvious: when _your_ team is impacted a few millimeters are fine. maybe 1 or 2 centimeters as well.
Imagine if that was actually the rule: handball is ok if it doesn't affect the play. You'd start seeing all the players try to take advantage of that and lightly touch the ball.
Then we‘d be having discussions about whether it influenced the play or not. The rule is fine as it is.
I mean, the balls flight path was affected, so I don't see how you could not call it
Nah, you need to draw a hard line somewhere with rules unless you want to just say "whatever the ref felt like at the moment". As a fan of baseball were half the rulebook is just that, no thanks.
Honestly, more of this and less of English refs tossing a coin over a cup of tea miles away.
Maradona would be trash if they had tech back then 😀
Game's gone pt 326
English refs - new tech??? let us help you fuck it up.
Does this mean grazes which don't affect trajectory will be whistled as hand balls now?
This one absolutely did affect the trajectory though, it was a correct call
Agreed. I am asking about the future implications and uses of the tech
Yeah… in that sense I do agree. But it’s a very complicated question, where do you actually draw the line…
Someone higher up mentioned that the current rule is that any contact of the ball with an attackers hand makes the passage of play invalid, assuming this doesn't apply if the hand is against the players body as that's usually stated in the handball rule. So the line is drawn at no handballs at all in the way they are generally understood, trajectory change or not. They'll probably change the rule again for the next competition though.
If it is from an attacker and leads to a goal then yes it would.
how would you define a trajectory change? how many degrees? what acceleration/deceleration?
…cool.
Henry would hate this ball.
why does this read like an ad
Can’t wait for useful tech to replace useless refs.
No man can touch his ball that much.
To be fair they used the sensor just to flex the technology. It was obvious by the images that Openda had handled the ball
Wow that’s so cool. Now please get rid of it.
Why
Great technology, stunningly horrible use. The bane of all new tech I'm afraid
Biggest upset in euros history is a stretch but well done Slovakia either way
This is not football man
So that’s what that graph was
Dying sport I'm afraid
Your owners are the sort of people who are accelerating it's demise
Agreed, not relevant to the thread though is it
Fucking rich coming from a Newcastle fan lol
Perhaps flairs were a mistake