Forward pass problem solved

[RichieRich89]

More techmology could be the answer. You've got hotspot in cricket, electronic pads to pick up false starts in sprinting, sensors to detect who touches the wall first in swimming.

If they can come up with a system that can accurately measure whether or not a pass is forward relative to the passer how can that be a bad thing?

[Mahoney]

I agree, I think it's a brilliant solution.

I'd like to see a lot more automated refereeing in rugby, as the technology gets better. A rugby where the decisions are entirely consistent, and where you never get away with an infringement, would be a very different animal. So much of the infringing happens precisely because there's a relatively high chance of getting away with it.

[JM2K6]

Killer robot referees



"ROLL AWAY! YOU HAVE HALF A SECOND TO COMPLY"

[Mahoney]

Robust refereeing for a happier sport.

[Rhubarb & Custard]

Taser boots. Any player going offside gets zapped and can twitch on the floor for a few minutes

[Grandpa]

Killer robot referees



"ROLL AWAY! YOU HAVE HALF A SECOND TO COMPLY"

Yellow card leads to automatic fingernail removal. Red card, you lose a digit. Scott Barret would probably have stumps for hands now...

[PCPhil]

Or alternatively make all players wear black with little bit of silver on the jummy. Problem solved, all passes are flat.

[Blake]

Sensors were added to the ball in the South African Varsity Cup tournament in around 2019 (I think), but it was more for the fans than for the referees, at least initially.

It was pretty successful if I recall and also introduced some fun new metrics and stats during the game. One that was particularly fun was scrumhalf head-to-heads where they compared average pass speed and pass distance etc. Same with kicking...acceleration, distance, hangtime etc.

Not sure why it was dropped and not expanded upon.

[JM2K6]

Sensors were added to the ball in the South African Varsity Cup tournament in around 2019 (I think), but it was more for the fans than for the referees, at least initially.

It was pretty successful if I recall and also introduced some fun new metrics and stats during the game. One that was particularly fun was scrumhalf head-to-heads where they compared average pass speed and pass distance etc. Same with kicking...acceleration, distance, hangtime etc.

Not sure why it was dropped and not expanded upon.

They're doing the same thing in the Premiership at the moment, but it's just fluff and meaningless American-style context-less statistics. In isolation none of those stats mean anything! And the tech isn't good enough to determine forward passes at the moment.

[average joe]

Sensors were added to the ball in the South African Varsity Cup tournament in around 2019 (I think), but it was more for the fans than for the referees, at least initially.

It was pretty successful if I recall and also introduced some fun new metrics and stats during the game. One that was particularly fun was scrumhalf head-to-heads where they compared average pass speed and pass distance etc. Same with kicking...acceleration, distance, hangtime etc.

Not sure why it was dropped and not expanded upon.

They're doing the same thing in the Premiership at the moment, but it's just fluff and meaningless American-style context-less statistics. In isolation none of those stats mean anything! And the tech isn't good enough to determine forward passes at the moment.

Please explain what is meant by the bolded. Is it that the particular tech used is not good enough or is it that we don't have the tech good enough as yet.

[average joe]

Because if you're saying we don't have the tech to measure if a ball was thrown forward or not. I'll argue that you are very misinformed. We've had the technology for ages. Measuring movement, velocity, momentum, positioning, vector, temperature, location is very simple with the tech available. Writing the necessary algorithm to allow for all the variables is so simple a trainee developer can do it in his sleep.

[Kawazaki]

Because if you're saying we don't have the tech to measure if a ball was thrown forward or not. I'll argue that you are very misinformed. We've had the technology for ages. Measuring movement, velocity, momentum, positioning, vector, temperature, location is very simple with the tech available. Writing the necessary algorithm to allow for all the variables is so simple a trainee developer can do it in his sleep.

Great.

Who is going to pay for the technical infrastructure and extra staff required to install and use this technology?

[Guy Smiley]

Maybe you guys could go back and read the first post in the thread?

[Kiwias]

This video is good, but I'll cut to the chase with the time stamp.

The ball carrier chucked the ball back over his head. There is no way that can be a forward pass under any circumstances, can it?

The ball is caught by the receiving player roughly 3m in front of where it was released

It's worth rewinding and watching the whole thing, it clears up any misunderstanding of what a forward pass is

Your gif does not exactly depict what I have in mind. I can throw a ball high enough up into the air a meter or two in front of me and still run through under it.

I want the time back I wasted trying to envisage a scenario in a rugby match where this might happen.

[average joe]

I want the time back I wasted trying to envisage a scenario in a rugby match where this might happen.

Like I said I've seen Cooper doing it.

[Kiwias]

I want the time back I wasted trying to envisage a scenario in a rugby match where this might happen.

Like I said I've seen Cooper doing it.

I would love to see a link of Kwade doing that because I do not recall ever having seen it.

[average joe]

Because if you're saying we don't have the tech to measure if a ball was thrown forward or not. I'll argue that you are very misinformed. We've had the technology for ages. Measuring movement, velocity, momentum, positioning, vector, temperature, location is very simple with the tech available. Writing the necessary algorithm to allow for all the variables is so simple a trainee developer can do it in his sleep.

Great.

Who is going to pay for the technical infrastructure and extra staff required to install and use this technology?

Please, you have all this tech built into some of the cheapest smart phones. It's available, the tech is there.

[average joe]

I want the time back I wasted trying to envisage a scenario in a rugby match where this might happen.

Like I said I've seen Cooper doing it.

I would love to see a link of Kwade doing that because I do not recall ever having seen it.

He did it in a game against us in SA and actually got called on it. I'm not going to bother going trough every game he played against us to produce footage for you. So if you choose to believe it or not is up to you.

[JM2K6]

Sensors were added to the ball in the South African Varsity Cup tournament in around 2019 (I think), but it was more for the fans than for the referees, at least initially.

It was pretty successful if I recall and also introduced some fun new metrics and stats during the game. One that was particularly fun was scrumhalf head-to-heads where they compared average pass speed and pass distance etc. Same with kicking...acceleration, distance, hangtime etc.

Not sure why it was dropped and not expanded upon.

They're doing the same thing in the Premiership at the moment, but it's just fluff and meaningless American-style context-less statistics. In isolation none of those stats mean anything! And the tech isn't good enough to determine forward passes at the moment.

Please explain what is meant by the bolded. Is it that the particular tech used is not good enough or is it that we don't have the tech good enough as yet.

The specific tech being used in this trial by the premiership isn't good enough.

As for the tech in the opening post, I will remain open minded but I don't share your belief that basic mobile phones can measure what's required to the level of accuracy needed for rugby. Mobile accelerometers and gps are not really that good, mostly because they don't need to be - there's no use case for it.

[average joe]

They're doing the same thing in the Premiership at the moment, but it's just fluff and meaningless American-style context-less statistics. In isolation none of those stats mean anything! And the tech isn't good enough to determine forward passes at the moment.

Please explain what is meant by the bolded. Is it that the particular tech used is not good enough or is it that we don't have the tech good enough as yet.

The specific tech being used in this trial by the premiership isn't good enough.

As for the tech in the opening post, I will remain open minded but I don't share your belief that basic mobile phones can measure what's required to the level of accuracy needed for rugby. Mobile accelerometers and gps are not really that good, mostly because they don't need to be - there's no use case for it.

Point out where I mentioned using a mobile phone to measure anything related to rugby. The tech used in mobile phones can be used though. You are measuring whether an oval ball was thrown forward or not. You hardly need the accuracy they use in say avionics or automation. Perhaps you are over estimating the level of accuracy required for a simple game of rugby.

[JM2K6]

Please explain what is meant by the bolded. Is it that the particular tech used is not good enough or is it that we don't have the tech good enough as yet.

The specific tech being used in this trial by the premiership isn't good enough.

As for the tech in the opening post, I will remain open minded but I don't share your belief that basic mobile phones can measure what's required to the level of accuracy needed for rugby. Mobile accelerometers and gps are not really that good, mostly because they don't need to be - there's no use case for it.

Point out where I mentioned using a mobile phone to measure anything related to rugby. The tech used in mobile phones can be used though. You are measuring whether an oval ball was thrown forward or not. You hardly need the accuracy they use in say avionics or automation. Perhaps you are over estimating the level of accuracy required for a simple game of rugby.

Sorry, you confused me with:

Please, you have all this tech built into some of the cheapest smart phones. It's available, the tech is there.

which I assumed was related to this topic.

I'm not over estimating the level of accuracy. I have a decent idea of the level of accuracy required and specifically that of the technology in mobile phones which your post brought to mind. I'm aware it's trickier than it might appear (especially when compared with similar sports tech like hawkeye). I don't think it's technically impossible or anything, but I will wait for some actual evidence of it working correctly beyond a marketing blurb, and hopefully some third party independent reviews and analysis of the system.

[RichieRich89]

It would need to be pretty sensitive to be useful. I think a lot of GPS stuff is average speed measured over 10m. If you google Usain Bolt's top speed the answer that is thrown up is his fastest average speed for a 10m split. You have to do a lot more digging to find his highest instantaneous speed. Average speed over the last 10m wouldn't really be good enough to accurately tell you whether the ball was thrown forward relative to the player. You'd need something far closer to the player's instantaneous speed.

[average joe]

So pointing out that the tech required is so commonplace that nearly everyone out there are walking around with it in their pocket is the same as saying that the actual devices you carry in your pocket is sufficient to make the necessary measurements? I can see why you are confused.

[average joe]

It would need to be pretty sensitive to be useful. I think a lot of GPS stuff is average speed measured over 10m. If you google Usain Bolt's top speed the answer that is thrown up is his fastest average speed for a 10m split. You have to do a lot more digging to find his highest instantaneous speed. Average speed over the last 10m wouldn't really be good enough to accurately tell you whether the ball was thrown forward relative to the player. You'd need something far closer to the player's instantaneous speed.

We can measure a jet fuelled plane traveling at the speed of Mach 5. Surely you'll agree that we don't need that level of accuracy for a game of rugby. No one cares if a ball travelled forward a few macros but it will be useful to have an acceptable base level for the sake of consistency don't you think?

[JM2K6]

So pointing out that the tech required is so commonplace that nearly everyone out there are walking around with it in their pocket is the same as saying that the actual devices you carry in your pocket is sufficient to make the necessary measurements? I can see why you are confused.

But it's not the tech required. It's a shittier version of the tech required and lacking some fundamental aspects required to be useful for measuring forward passes. Toga's point was a fairly obvious one and you ignored what he was saying about cost and infrastructure.

Like go off about Mach 5 aeroplanes as much as you like, but a) they don't need to care too much about sudden changes in acceleration over very small distances and b) the cost of the stuff in aeroplanes is incredible.

I don't understand why you're posting so angrily on this thread. No-one has said anything offensive or particularly controversial. What gives?

[average joe]

So pointing out that the tech required is so commonplace that nearly everyone out there are walking around with it in their pocket is the same as saying that the actual devices you carry in your pocket is sufficient to make the necessary measurements? I can see why you are confused.

But it's not the tech required. It's a shittier version of the tech required and lacking some fundamental aspects required to be useful for measuring forward passes. Toga's point was a fairly obvious one and you ignored what he was saying about cost and infrastructure.

Like go off about Mach 5 aeroplanes as much as you like, but a) they don't need to care too much about sudden changes in acceleration over very small distances and b) the cost of the stuff in aeroplanes is incredible.

I don't understand why you're posting so angrily on this thread. No-one has said anything offensive or particularly controversial. What gives?

The cost would be minute compared to what is spent on broadcasting, players salaries, stadia, etc.

Humans are not capable of running or throwing a ball at the speed and pace planes or even cars are moving and yet we are able to accurately measure them but for some or other reason we cant measure the movement of humans and a ball? We don't need the level of technology used in avionics or automation because we don't need to measure on the same level of tolerances. We all complain about consistency in rugby. All that's required is to establish an acceptable base level and remove the human factor. Don't leave it up to the three blind mice that's not in the correct position or have the right angle to fairly judge. I would even go as far as to suggest we put a huge air siren on the roof that goes of every time an anomaly is detected.

How you came to a conclusion that there is any emotion involved in my postings is beyond me. I'm quite calm and just shooting the shit like the rest of you.

[Grandpa]

So pointing out that the tech required is so commonplace that nearly everyone out there are walking around with it in their pocket is the same as saying that the actual devices you carry in your pocket is sufficient to make the necessary measurements? I can see why you are confused.

But it's not the tech required. It's a shittier version of the tech required and lacking some fundamental aspects required to be useful for measuring forward passes. Toga's point was a fairly obvious one and you ignored what he was saying about cost and infrastructure.

Like go off about Mach 5 aeroplanes as much as you like, but a) they don't need to care too much about sudden changes in acceleration over very small distances and b) the cost of the stuff in aeroplanes is incredible.

I don't understand why you're posting so angrily on this thread. No-one has said anything offensive or particularly controversial. What gives?

The cost would be minute compared to what is spent on broadcasting, players salaries, stadia, etc.

Humans are not capable of running or throwing a ball at the speed and pace planes or even cars are moving and yet we are able to accurately measure them but for some or other reason we cant measure the movement of humans and a ball? We don't need the level of technology used in avionics or automation because we don't need to measure on the same level of tolerances. We all complain about consistency in rugby. All that's required is to establish an acceptable base level and remove the human factor. Don't leave it up to the three blind mice that's not in the correct position or have the right angle to fairly judge. I would even go as far as to suggest we put a huge air siren on the roof that goes of every time an anomaly is detected.

How you came to a conclusion that there is any emotion involved in my postings is beyond me. I'm quite calm and just shooting the shit like the rest of you.

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

[Blake]

Maybe you guys could go back and read the first post in the thread?

This; seems like the tech is ready and no reason not to use it in internationals and high level matches.

[average joe]

But it's not the tech required. It's a shittier version of the tech required and lacking some fundamental aspects required to be useful for measuring forward passes. Toga's point was a fairly obvious one and you ignored what he was saying about cost and infrastructure.

Like go off about Mach 5 aeroplanes as much as you like, but a) they don't need to care too much about sudden changes in acceleration over very small distances and b) the cost of the stuff in aeroplanes is incredible.

I don't understand why you're posting so angrily on this thread. No-one has said anything offensive or particularly controversial. What gives?

The cost would be minute compared to what is spent on broadcasting, players salaries, stadia, etc.

Humans are not capable of running or throwing a ball at the speed and pace planes or even cars are moving and yet we are able to accurately measure them but for some or other reason we cant measure the movement of humans and a ball? We don't need the level of technology used in avionics or automation because we don't need to measure on the same level of tolerances. We all complain about consistency in rugby. All that's required is to establish an acceptable base level and remove the human factor. Don't leave it up to the three blind mice that's not in the correct position or have the right angle to fairly judge. I would even go as far as to suggest we put a huge air siren on the roof that goes of every time an anomaly is detected.

How you came to a conclusion that there is any emotion involved in my postings is beyond me. I'm quite calm and just shooting the shit like the rest of you.

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

You Kiwis always have to have a loophole don't you?

[Grandpa]

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

You Kiwis always have to have a loophole don't you?

But then from the OP... it actually does analyse what the hands are doing...

“We look at the ball data just before the pass and just after the pass has been made, when the ball is flying through the air,” Husemeyer explained. “By comparing those two sets of data, you can then back-calculate the players’ hand angle. You can see if the hands were flat, aimed forwards or backwards. When the person makes the pass, within 300 milliseconds we’ll know if it’s a forward pass.”

That's quite impressive considering what the hands might actually be doing.... the art of deception etc... the disguising of throwing the ball forward... when actually throwing it backwards... Carlos Spencer would lose his magician status...

[Blake]

It would need to be pretty sensitive to be useful. I think a lot of GPS stuff is average speed measured over 10m. If you google Usain Bolt's top speed the answer that is thrown up is his fastest average speed for a 10m split. You have to do a lot more digging to find his highest instantaneous speed. Average speed over the last 10m wouldn't really be good enough to accurately tell you whether the ball was thrown forward relative to the player. You'd need something far closer to the player's instantaneous speed.

You wouldn't use GPS but the concept is similar...triangulation; but instead of satellites in space and a receiver in a phone, you put a signal generator in the ball and multiple sensors around the pitch. With a setup like this you can have a very high degree of accuracy.

The complexity will come in with ignoring false negatives such as when a ball is kicked (easy-ish) or when there has been a turnover and legitimate change is direction of the ball.

[Blake]

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

Looking at the hands is just an easy way for your brain not to get fooled by the forward momentum of the ball. It's just a handy shortcut for our monkey-brains.
The sensor inside the ball and the sensors stadium is able to measure that forward velocity of the ball at point of release precisely, so the direction f the hands are not relevant to the calculation.

[Grandpa]

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

Looking at the hands is just an easy way for your brain not to get fooled by the forward momentum of the ball. It's just a handy shortcut for our monkey-brains.
The sensor inside the ball and the sensors stadium is able to measure that forward velocity of the ball at point of release precisely, so the direction f the hands are not relevant to the calculation.

Surely it's the direction of movement of the ball which is irrelevant? It's the hands which are important?

If just sensing from the perspective of the ball... what is it sensing the movement of the ball in relation to? As surely it doesn't matter which direction the ball is going? It is all about the hands... so the ball can have forward velocity out of the hands... as long as the hands aimed to pass it backward?

If you are running fast it's pretty difficult to pass a ball backwards relative to the ground?

[Kawazaki]

You wouldn't use GPS but the concept is similar...triangulation; but instead of satellites in space and a receiver in a phone, you put a signal generator in the ball and multiple sensors around the pitch. With a setup like this you can have a very high degree of accuracy.

Which takes us back to this...

Great.

Who is going to pay for the technical infrastructure and extra staff required to install and use this technology?

[JM2K6]

So pointing out that the tech required is so commonplace that nearly everyone out there are walking around with it in their pocket is the same as saying that the actual devices you carry in your pocket is sufficient to make the necessary measurements? I can see why you are confused.

But it's not the tech required. It's a shittier version of the tech required and lacking some fundamental aspects required to be useful for measuring forward passes. Toga's point was a fairly obvious one and you ignored what he was saying about cost and infrastructure.

Like go off about Mach 5 aeroplanes as much as you like, but a) they don't need to care too much about sudden changes in acceleration over very small distances and b) the cost of the stuff in aeroplanes is incredible.

I don't understand why you're posting so angrily on this thread. No-one has said anything offensive or particularly controversial. What gives?

The cost would be minute compared to what is spent on broadcasting, players salaries, stadia, etc.

Humans are not capable of running or throwing a ball at the speed and pace planes or even cars are moving and yet we are able to accurately measure them but for some or other reason we cant measure the movement of humans and a ball? We don't need the level of technology used in avionics or automation because we don't need to measure on the same level of tolerances. We all complain about consistency in rugby. All that's required is to establish an acceptable base level and remove the human factor. Don't leave it up to the three blind mice that's not in the correct position or have the right angle to fairly judge. I would even go as far as to suggest we put a huge air siren on the roof that goes of every time an anomaly is detected.

How you came to a conclusion that there is any emotion involved in my postings is beyond me. I'm quite calm and just shooting the shit like the rest of you.

Honestly just getting a really hostile tone from your posts, that's all.

Yes, cars and planes can move really fast! But we don't need centimetre-level accuracy for them and we don't need millisecond response time either. We're talking largely about small variations in vectors over a short distance and a very small space of time, which also has to be calibrated to know exactly what "forward" even means in context. It's not as straightforward as it sounds - the level of accuracy required is actually fairly daunting. We're talking quite different margins of error.

[JM2K6]

But isn't it about subtle changes in direction of hands (not the ball) ? The ball is almost irrelevant in this conversation... so do we have the technology that can measure if the player's hands are moving backwards? That sounds highly complicated... with so many variables... what if one hand is moving backwards while the other is moving forward (to impart spin)?

Looking at the hands is just an easy way for your brain not to get fooled by the forward momentum of the ball. It's just a handy shortcut for our monkey-brains.
The sensor inside the ball and the sensors stadium is able to measure that forward velocity of the ball at point of release precisely, so the direction f the hands are not relevant to the calculation.

Surely it's the direction of movement of the ball which is irrelevant? It's the hands which are important?

If just sensing from the perspective of the ball... what is it sensing the movement of the ball in relation to? As surely it doesn't matter which direction the ball is going? It is all about the hands... so the ball can have forward velocity out of the hands... as long as the hands aimed to pass it backward?

If you are running fast it's pretty difficult to pass a ball backwards relative to the ground?

Yes. Essentially any system is going to have to know what "forward" means - i.e. the opposition tryline location - and be able to determine if the ball has accelerated towards the tryline as a result of a pass, i.e. it's suddenly moved closer to the tryline faster than the speed it was travelling at previously. It's not going to be a major difference, it'll have to be pretty finely tuned and accurate.

[Grandpa]

Looking at the hands is just an easy way for your brain not to get fooled by the forward momentum of the ball. It's just a handy shortcut for our monkey-brains.
The sensor inside the ball and the sensors stadium is able to measure that forward velocity of the ball at point of release precisely, so the direction f the hands are not relevant to the calculation.

Surely it's the direction of movement of the ball which is irrelevant? It's the hands which are important?

If just sensing from the perspective of the ball... what is it sensing the movement of the ball in relation to? As surely it doesn't matter which direction the ball is going? It is all about the hands... so the ball can have forward velocity out of the hands... as long as the hands aimed to pass it backward?

If you are running fast it's pretty difficult to pass a ball backwards relative to the ground?

Yes. Essentially any system is going to have to know what "forward" means - i.e. the opposition tryline location - and be able to determine if the ball has accelerated towards the tryline as a result of a pass, i.e. it's suddenly moved closer to the tryline faster than the speed it was travelling at previously. It's not going to be a major difference, it'll have to be pretty finely tuned and accurate.

And even if the ball decelerates it doesn't mean it went backwards... sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't... in fact if the ball is looked at in isolation, it could do exactly the same thing... but in one instance be forward.. and in another instance be backward... it all depends on context... and how would the sensors distinguish that if the ball is doing identical things? It's almost quantum mechanics in it's detail...

[Kawazaki]

In complicated matters such as deciding if a players hands are passing the ball backwards it is always useful to refer back to Jacobellis v. Ohio, 1964 whereby Judge Potter described his threshold test for whether something was porn... 'I know it when I see it'.

[Ymx]

The simplest test is just was it launched forward from the player (taking his speed in to account). Is it launched to go ahead of him or not?

If you were a line judge running at the same speed as the player, does it end up further ahead of you or not.

[Grandpa]

The simplest test is just was it launched forward from the player (taking his speed in to account). Is it launched to go ahead of him or not?

If you were a line judge running at the same speed as the player, does it end up further ahead of you or not.

Most can't keep up... I refer you to France in Cardiff in 2007....