Video replay - an easy fix

Submitted by tsbilly on

Video review is much too dificult as it currently exists. I offer an easy fix.

Give each camera a time stamp while the video replay booth has the ability to look at multiple cameras feeds, with each feed time synched.

The ability to watch one view of the play (for instance: a sideline view that can see a knee hit the ground) while at the exact same time a camera 45 degrees away gets another angle (for example, seeing a ball knocked loose but not a knee)

This should be doable with current technology. The refs could, with current abilities, rock the play back and forth, while looking at both angles.

How is this not a thing? All modern sports should have this easily available for video review. Two angles, in view by the ref, at the exact same time.

 

This cannot be that difficult to do.

tsbilly

December 5th, 2016 at 2:22 AM ^

Apologies for replying to my own thread, but MGoTechs, this should be possible, right?

(I have zero experience in this area, but it seems like it can't be that difficult to accomlish)

bacon

December 5th, 2016 at 6:10 AM ^

Even so, the ability to coordinate that fake landing in the 60s should mean we can timestamp the videos in today. I'd be surprised if this wasn't already done in the booth and we just don't see it on the tv.

bluebyyou

December 5th, 2016 at 7:38 AM ^

Time stamping video is easy and has been available for quite some time.  There are apps that allow you to time stamp phone video by using GPS.  As long as the cameras are synched to the same time source, everything works.

In addition to time stamping, they should also put devices in footballs that allow for exact positioning of the football, i.e., did forward progress go far enough to be a first down and to coordinate ball position with an official's blowing of a whistle.

mgobleu

December 5th, 2016 at 9:25 AM ^

They've got you so snowed. Of course the moon landing was real. We've landed on the moon hundreds of times, but what you don't know is that that big sumbitch is hollow and that's where the Zionists hide and control all of the earth's governments.

Two Hearted Ale

December 5th, 2016 at 7:35 AM ^

Centralized replay by officials who specialize in it makes sense for a lot of reasons. The screens could be much bigger, the environment would be a quiet room instead of a loud stadium, the officials making the replay call have no interest other than getting the call right.

The last reason annoys me the most about the current system. We are asking referees to overturn calls guys on their crew or even they make. I have no doubt they want to get it right but the inherent conflict of interest looks bad. These guys share a dressing room o there is at least a little social pressure not to show up a fellow official.

Inertia Policeman

December 5th, 2016 at 8:19 AM ^

On top of centralized replay, I think it would be awesome if the replay officials were not told what the call on the field was, therefore removing any remaining potential bias to uphold the call another official made.

I actually think rather than needing "indisputable" evidence to overturn a call, it should be 51% certainty. Why do we go with what 1 official saw in real time on the field as our default, when we can have a crew of officials who can look from a variety of angles in real time and slow motion? One of these scenarios seems more likely than the other to produce the most correct call consistently . . .

Two Hearted Ale

December 5th, 2016 at 1:35 PM ^

They may have an agenda but it's not to make the crew look good. They also have no incentive to tell the fans what they want to hear.

You hit on another point though. The fact that individual conferences select and assign officials isn't a good look. At minimum the process should be more transparent (release official grades, place higher scoring refs in high profile games, etc.), better yet officials should be managed by a third party.

San Diego Mick

December 5th, 2016 at 3:55 AM ^

fuck Delaney, too many stupid rules anymore and referees are crappier than ever.

One of the most egregious things done by officials is the spotting of the ball, I lose my mind during games at the ineptness with which this task is performed, unbelievable how bad they are at it.

Might sound like a small matter for many folks but we all know better than that.

ATC

December 5th, 2016 at 5:44 AM ^

Technology and methods exist to substantially enhance accuracy of highly disputed calls. As a result, the real question is: how much funding is the Big Ten willing to spend to reduce error? To the greatest extent, Delaney gets his paycheck on creating a healthy balance sheet for the Conference. The second question is: what tree needs to be barked up for change? ......answer: University Presidents.

bacon

December 5th, 2016 at 6:21 AM ^

I can't understand why we don't have better sensors for when the ball crosses the goal line. We should be able to know even if the ball is not visible. Clothing stores figured this out years ago with those stupid magnetic tags and sensors that alarm when they're not removed. Couldn't we just buy some door sensors from a store going out of business, put one of those tags inside the gameball, and hook the alarm up to the PA system in the stadium? Then when you cross the goalline you'd get that stupid beep and everyone would know. Of course if anyone accidentally left one of those magnetic tags on their jersey, the whole system would be foiled.

mgobleu

December 5th, 2016 at 9:31 AM ^

Easy. Copper thread woven into the fabric of the players' uniforms which is activated when they hold the ball. When the knee touches, the ball sensor relays to the booth it's spacial location relative to the embedded electronic grid installed in the field, all of which systems are governed by wireless triggers in the referees' whistles.

bluebrow

December 5th, 2016 at 7:19 AM ^

is some of that CSI glass table see everything magic computer crap.  Let's stop asking the officials to review and hire CSI for a Saturday.  They seem to solve crimes faster than official reviews anyway

maizenbluenc

December 5th, 2016 at 7:48 AM ^

1) The networks have all these cameras whizzing around on cables giving us worthless panning action views, why don't  they park one right over the line to gain?

2) Why don't we have a transparent ref process where refs recuse themselves for games with their favorite or state school so people can see there is a reasonable expectation for fairness?

1VaBlue1

December 5th, 2016 at 8:03 AM ^

Video timestamping is done by every TV camera in the business.  The production truck has it all...  I know the B1G replay is a bunch of Tivo boxes (3, I think) hooked to the TV feed.  So the replay officials are dependant on the TV feed giving them a decent replay in the time they need it.

There was talk over the summer about how the B1G was setting up a central replay office to help improve replay review for both quality and time.  I thought it was to be active for this season, but I don't think it's actually in place, yet.  Too bad, the OSU game could have used it...  A central facility should get the raw, timestamped, all-camera feed from each game.  (Timestamps would be synced to a network switch, so all cameras show the exact time.)  The B1G has plenty of money to get this in place, and needs to do so soon.

BlueFront89

December 5th, 2016 at 8:27 AM ^

Delany - "I would like to point out that the the tape has not been faked or altered in any way. In fact they have time coding, which is very hard to fake."  Harbaugh - Would you please explain "time coding"?  Delany - "Well, uh, just because I don't know what it is doesn't mean I'm lying."

NJMichigan

December 5th, 2016 at 8:31 AM ^

What frustrates me is how much technology we have and how little football uses it to enhance the quality of calls. First off, the replay cameras often become VERY fuzzy when slowed down further, and why can there never be a perfect angle? The camera is never alligned correctly with a) the goal line, b) the sideline or c) the first down line. I would like to see cameras put into the first down markers so that you can look right down the first down line (OSU) and also for the pylon cameras to be used more often when looking to see if the ball broke the goal line. And, they have the camera that is connected to wires that gets a view from above, so why not use a camera like that and place it directly over the first down/goal line?

2Blue4You

December 5th, 2016 at 8:47 AM ^

Somewhat related: did anyone watch the Journey on BTN with Butt and Elfewein and when they were covering the game there was a shot down the line of scrimmage from Michigan's sideline for "the spot" play. It cut away after the snap and showed the same crappy angle the Buckeyes have been parading around from well behind the play? I wonder where the rest of that clip is, or I suppose the cameraman may have stopped recording and packed up to miss traffic.




Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Red is Blue

December 5th, 2016 at 8:52 AM ^

Use some type of system to keep track of the exact position of the camera at a given time including how level it is. I'll bet with that info you could triangulate position.

Doesn't really matter if the refs are going to allow one team's wrs to be tackled with no flags.

While we're fixing things. Use the 4 power 5 conference championship games as the first round of playoffs.

Step 1) If a conference has two division winners that are both in the top 8, they play as normal. (So this year PSU/Wisky and CU/Washington would have played).
Step 2) If a conference has only one division winner in the top 8 and another non-division winner in the top eight, the division winner not in the top 8 gets bumped for the highest rated conference team in the top 8 (so if Wisky wasn't in the top 8 this year, PSU would play OSU).
Step 3) The highest rated remaining division winner will be the only top 8 team in their conference, they would play the lowest ranked team at the site of the highest ranked teams conference game. If a non power 5 team is the highest ranked team yet to be paired, they "host" a game at a conference site that wouldnt otherwise have a game. Like if WMU were #3 and nobody from the ACC was in the top 8, WMU becomes the ACC home team. Repeat this step if there is still a unpaired top 8 division winner.
Step 4) The highest rated remaining non division winner will play the lowest ranked remaining team.

So this year, we would have had PSU/Wisky, CU/Washington then Michigan bumps Florida and plays Alabama at the SEC site and OSU bumps VT and plays Clemson at the ACC site.

goblueram

December 5th, 2016 at 9:13 AM ^

This is definitely an easy fix.  Look at hockey - the replays all have the game clock stamped on to determine if the puck goes in right before the horn.  

Bocheezu

December 5th, 2016 at 10:55 AM ^

I think they use the Hawk-Eye system that tennis uses.  There was a no-goal in Liverpool/Bournemouth that was a no goal by like less than an inch.  Even the ref just kind of shrugged his shoulders and knew there was no way he would have been able to make that call himself.  

There's gotta be a way to implement that into football.  It would be tricky (since the line to gain is always moving), but it can be done.

http://www.newstalk.com/WATCH:-Goalline-technology-helped-Bournemouth-b…

wolfman81

December 5th, 2016 at 12:18 PM ^

Case in point:  The media "truck" that the game director uses to decide what shots to show.

You can do it with software like this (http://www.dtsvideo.com/studiocode).  I'm sure that there are literally dozens of software solutions to get it done.  (I have used studiocode before, so that's why I latched onto that one...)  NVivo (http://www.qsrinternational.com/) may be able to do it too.