Doc Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 3 minutes ago, BUFFALOBART said: I watched this kick a number of times in slow motion on Game Day, just now. In my opinion, the kick was flat out, good. That's what I've been saying since they showed the replay on game day. I waited to see what the All-22 showed and... 1
Doc Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 Just now, BUFFALOBART said: Was the ref under the right goal post a replacement? No idea.
shoshin Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 30 minutes ago, Foxx said: immediately after the attempt, they had a shot from the ground looking up at the ball as it went through the uprights. when they showed that, i thought it was good. Ditto. I haven't seen that vid since but the one view when they came back from commercial showed it really clearly. Then they went back to.showing the behind Bass shot, which was less clear. 1
Rochesterfan Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 31 minutes ago, shoshin said: Ditto. I haven't seen that vid since but the one view when they came back from commercial showed it really clearly. Then they went back to.showing the behind Bass shot, which was less clear. I need to see this clear evidence. There are a ton of clips showing this kick and all of them show the same 2 angles from behind the kicker. I would assume since people use their camera to take vids off the tv and the game has not only been shown, but shown on replay - that if their was a clearer shot - someone would post it. I want to be convinced - I just have not seen anything with a shot that you can tell the moment it hits the end line where the ball is. 1
Doc Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 17 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said: I need to see this clear evidence. There are a ton of clips showing this kick and all of them show the same 2 angles from behind the kicker. I would assume since people use their camera to take vids off the tv and the game has not only been shown, but shown on replay - that if their was a clearer shot - someone would post it. I want to be convinced - I just have not seen anything with a shot that you can tell the moment it hits the end line where the ball is. You know what would’ve given us a clear shot...
cd1 Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 On 9/15/2020 at 6:57 PM, SlimShady'sSpaceForce said: Pic or it didn’t happen seriously. w/o a picture of it over and inside the GP there is no refutable evidence. the eh hem ref was under the GP was he directly under, off to the right or left we won’t know.
bobobonators Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 (edited) I dont get the argument: “its not a really an issue so why worry about it” its not an issue until it is; until a playoff game is lost. The entire point of utilizing technology to fix it is that the issue could potentially be eliminated altogether. More cameras are added. Does that offend people? Is it your money? I dont get the whole eh who cares argument. we can all agree it can potentially be an issue at some point. Seeing that why not be proactive and implement something to eliminate it. Edited September 18, 2020 by bobobonators 4
NewEra Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 40 minutes ago, bobobonators said: I dont get the argument: “its not a really an issue so why worry about it” its not an issue until it is; until a playoff game is lost. The entire point of utilizing technology to fix it is that the issue could potentially be eliminated altogether. More cameras are added. Does that offend people? Is it your money? I dont get the whole eh who cares argument. we can all agree it can potentially be an issue at some point. Seeing that why not be proactive and implement something to eliminate it. But people just have argue the fact because they like to argue. Why would you want to get the calls right just because you can? BECAUSE WE ******* CAN!!! Each team is worth billions of dollars. There are billions or dollar bet on games each week. SPEND SOME $ AND GET IT RIGHT IF YOU CAN. To debate this is just ridiculous
Don Otreply Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 (edited) Its yet another embarrassing blunder by the zebras, so the league disappeared it. That footage is the Property of the NFL, so they can do whatever the F they want to do with it. Luckily it did not change the outcome, time to move on, cannot say that I have heard of this problem before..., it’s gotta be a pretty rare occurrence. We fans have zero rights on this issue. Or in legal speak we have no standing. Go Bills!!! Edited September 18, 2020 by Don Otreply
Old Coot Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 Here's the Australian solution to the wide right problem: 6 points if bewteen the uprights; 1 point if "behind" (the wider uprights): video at 2:34 Also shows why you occasionally see Aussie placekickers or punters in the NFL. 1
Heavy Kevi Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 1 hour ago, NewEra said: But people just have argue the fact because they like to argue. Why would you want to get the calls right just because you can? BECAUSE WE ******* CAN!!! Each team is worth billions of dollars. There are billions or dollar bet on games each week. SPEND SOME $ AND GET IT RIGHT IF YOU CAN. To debate this is just ridiculous Got to agree with you there! Put a chip in the ball and a sensor can detect where it is. Same tech on the goalline to see if the ball crossed the plane. Then once that works, put it in hockey pucks too so we can know whether they enter the net when under a goaltender. ***** it seems like such an easy, accurate, irrefutable, and relatively inexpensive alternative to 50 year old guy's eyes 1 1
Rochesterfan Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 6 hours ago, BUFFALOBART said: The End Zone figuratively 'goes around the world'. Time to make the uprights extend 'to the moon', in the figurative sense. Just review the damn play, no matter how high the ball is kicked... So assume they allow this to be reviewed - was it good or because there has not been one conclusive picture at the exact moment do they go with the call on the field? The issue with it is because it is higher than the reference point and because there is not a straight angle camera shot right up the goal post - it will always be deemed inconclusive- unless it goes between the uprights low enough that you can see it. In this case as was stated on the broadcast there was nothing conclusive - so he would have lost a challenge. That is what they would have to fix. 7 hours ago, Doc said: You know what would’ve given us a clear shot... I think the All-22 would give us another angle, but that camera is not positioned above the goalpost - not sure it provides a much better view than the 2 shots we already have. We need a view of exactly what the Ref saw. The Ref was in the right spot - under and slightly behind the upright looking up - the only view point on the field that can tell the exact position as it crosses the end line.
Rochesterfan Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 7 hours ago, cd1 said: Nice pic - where is the ball relative to the end line and what angle are we at. This picture to me seems to be well before the ball got to the goalpost maybe 3-5 frames to early and we know the ball is drifting right. This does not show me a good field goal - I am sorry - just do not see it. 1
Rochesterfan Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, GoBills808 said: pretty clearly good imo Watch it at 11 seconds and go frame by frame. There is a shot with 3/4 of the ball inside the post, a shot with the ball directly over the post and a shot with 3/4 of the ball outside the post all within the 11 second mark. Which spot did the ball actually cross the end line or was it before or even after that - that is the question and that is why it is not reviewable. I am not sure what would help conclusively show this one way or another. A view up the post or from the top of the post would help. Not sure if a sensor in the ball helps as you are 35 feet above the end line - you would need a second sensor someplace to give any accuracy. I get why people feel the way they do. It seems like there is a good chance it may have been good, but there has been nothing definitive. Just like goal line review - sometimes the physical camera angles just do not allow the ability to identify a TD or down by contact because the shot just is not available. Edited September 18, 2020 by Rochesterfan
DCOrange Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 18 minutes ago, Rochesterfan said: Watch it at 11 seconds and go frame by frame. There is a shot with 3/4 of the ball inside the post, a shot with the ball directly over the post and a shot with 3/4 of the ball outside the post all within the 11 second mark. Which spot did the ball actually cross the end line or was it before or even after that - that is the question and that is why it is not reviewable. I am not sure what would help conclusively show this one way or another. A view up the post or from the top of the post would help. Not sure if a sensor in the ball helps as you are 35 feet above the end line - you would need a second sensor someplace to give any accuracy. I get why people feel the way they do. It seems like there is a good chance it may have been good, but there has been nothing definitive. Just like goal line review - sometimes the physical camera angles just do not allow the ability to identify a TD or down by contact because the shot just is not available. There won't be conclusive video evidence that the kick was good but it was. I guarantee if anyone cared enough, a physicist could tell you that based on the trajectory of the kick, the speed of the kick, and where it hit the net, it must have been inside the uprights when it crossed over the crossbar. It looks obvious to me but I'm no physicist so I can't give you the actual numbers behind it. It's kinda like one of those plays in basketball where a player swipes his hand left but the ball is deflected out of bounds to the right and the ref says it was off that player. The physics of the play tell you that it's impossible but you can't just tell the ref that what they just called is physically impossible lol. I say this from experience...one of my basketball coaches growing up was an actual physicist and he used to make this argument to refs all the time and he received a technical foul every time.
Rochesterfan Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 42 minutes ago, DCOrange said: There won't be conclusive video evidence that the kick was good but it was. I guarantee if anyone cared enough, a physicist could tell you that based on the trajectory of the kick, the speed of the kick, and where it hit the net, it must have been inside the uprights when it crossed over the crossbar. It looks obvious to me but I'm no physicist so I can't give you the actual numbers behind it. It's kinda like one of those plays in basketball where a player swipes his hand left but the ball is deflected out of bounds to the right and the ref says it was off that player. The physics of the play tell you that it's impossible but you can't just tell the ref that what they just called is physically impossible lol. I say this from experience...one of my basketball coaches growing up was an actual physicist and he used to make this argument to refs all the time and he received a technical foul every time. You might be right, but it would not be simple. You would need ball speed, wind speed and trajectory because the ball does not travel a straight path. It would be easy if this was a round baseball going directly from point a to point b. The difficulty will be do you have every measurement and the effect of the laces and the impact of the wind changing from behind the kicker to at the goal line the wind is blowing directly right. There are also many exact measurements they would need - the exact distance from the pole to the net, the exact distance up the net, exactly how far outside the post it landed into the net. You can do a quick and rough estimate like Shaw did and he determined it was no good, but the problem I have with Shaw’s math was we are assuming a straight path and the ball because of angular spinning velocity and the laces and shape of the ball was pulling to the right it was not a straight line at any point in the kick and you can’t treat it as such. That is why the video would have to be the proof, until they get some type camera/laser system that can determine it was good. The video is inconclusive and unless the physicists have enough data points on all of the variables they are making an educated guess. I would love to see the math though - higher level calculations dealing with multiple variables is fun.
Chaos Posted September 18, 2020 Posted September 18, 2020 11 hours ago, ColoradoBills said: For the kick to be good it would mean that it went Back and to the Left, Back and to the Left. I suspect a second kicker! Hauscha?
Recommended Posts