Non Lions Discussion 2024

Remove this Banner Ad

martinson said:
That's really strange.

The teams that win the most games usually have the highest percentage because they win enough close ones against good opposition and belt inferior teams.

Clearly for whatever reason that's out the window this year.
Click to expand...
I think it underlines how it's never been more important to win the close ones. Collingwood started the trend in 2022, Port and Carlton jumped on last year and this year Essendon have joined them. It's a skill, it's been deciding games for 24 months and now it's having a decided impact on the ladder.

Have this in your kit bag, or fail.

Imagine if some NFL clubs didn't know how to take a knee in the last 2 minutes of a game. This is exactly what I'm talking about.
 
Nunez said:
Seems to me making it 15 steps instead of 15 metres simplifies it for everyone. Impossible for umpires to accurately judge 15m constantly given everyone has different stride lengths etc. Set up to fail.
Click to expand...
Getting these microchips put in the balls next year will help measure how far the ball has travelled between bounces. This information should be fed to the umpires and acted upon in real time. I have no doubt if this is done there will be truckloads of free kicks paid and may result in the lengthening of this 15m distance. Which I believe would be a mistake. Bouncing is a skill and defenders should be rewarded for a good against-the-odds chase.
 
Dalions said:
Do we seriously expect an umpire to count everyone’s steps?
Personally I think it’s much easier to judge 15m.
And with some of the 10 and 12m marks that are paid a lot more people should be pinged for running too far,
It appears to be something that they have relaxed over the years.
Only to pull it out in a big game when it advantages a Big VIC Club
Click to expand...
The same chips could measure the distance the ball travels before a mark is taken. We need this ASAP... The game is way too hard to umpire as it is right now.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Johnny Bananas said:
Correct, which is why I think eliminating the need to make contentious judgement calls is the way forward, as it minimises mistakes. We obviously can't get rid of umpire judgement in its entirety, but we could have controls for the most obvious issues. This is why I'm in favour of eliminating prior opportunity before calling holding the ball (as is Pav), because it's frequently a point of disagreement, and impossible for any human being to always get it right.

Of course we can't eliminate every rule that requires a judgement call, but there are other options to address them. Technology exists and we should use it, as long as we learn from the experiences other sports have had with it.

In soccer, VAR has caused more controversy than it's solved, because it's just shifted a judgement call from one human being to another. However, what's less problematic is goal mouth technology, which beeps the referee's watch when the chip inside the ball is detected to have crossed the goal line.

I wonder if the GPS tracker each player is fitted with can be used in real time to determine if a player has run too long with the ball through a similar instant notification to the umpires.


I think you've identified the right problem but the wrong solution. Yes, umpires can't accurately judge 15m, but neither can they judge the number of steps in real time. This is where technology should be used to automatically assess it. If the GPS tracking data can't be used in real time accurately as I suggested above, then cameras with AI can surely do a better job of assessing either distance of the number of strides.
Click to expand...
Check this out. The future is here.

www.afl.com.au

Ball-tracking technology to be trialled in the VFL

After AFL players tested the 'Smart Ball' in pre-season training, the technology will be tested in the VFL this Friday
www.afl.com.au www.afl.com.au
 
Grasshopper17 said:
The same chips could measure the distance the ball travels before a mark is taken. We need this ASAP... The game is way too hard to umpire as it is right now.
Click to expand...
The technology must be there because I heard recently that VAR in the EPL will not be adjudicating off sides next season and essentially the lines people will in some way have lessened responsibilities because the technology is so good that off side decisions will be made in real time without it turning into a draft persons exercise in measuring lines to determine if the attacker was offside.

I think the same should happen with where player landmark the ball and why umps regularly don’t set the mark at the exact spot because they’re regularly guessing.
 
Sheesh

North Melbourne signed Shaun Higgins and Jarrad Waite as free agents in 2014. Since then the club has added 95 players (*still on list).

2014
Pick 16 Sam Durdin (22 games)
Pick 25 Dan Nielson (7)
Pick 36 Ed Vickers-Willis (21)
Rookie Braydon Preuss (8)
Rookie Will Fordham (0)

2015
Trade Jed Anderson (89)
Pick 21 Ben McKay (71)
Pick 31 Ryan Clarke (40)
Pick 33 Mitchell Hibberd (4)
Pick 43 Corey Wagner (8)
Pick 60 Declan Mountford (12)
Rookie Farren Ray (4)

2016
Trade Paul Ahern (24)
Trade Nathan Hrovat (39)
Trade Marley Williams (60)
Pick 12 Jy Simpkin (140)*
Pick 34 Declan Watson (0)
Pick 36 Josh Williams (2)
Pick 73 Nick Larkey (101)*
Rookie Cameron Zurhaar (105)*
Rookie Oscar Junker (0)
Rookie Matthew Taylor (0)

2017
Free agent Alex Morgan (2)
Pick 4 Luke Davies-Uniacke (92)*
Pick 23 Will Walker (6)
Pick 62 Kyron Hayden (17)
Pick 72 Tristan Xerri (40)*
Pick 77 Billy Hartung (13)
Rookie Tom Murphy (9)
Rookie Gordon Narrier (0)
Rookie Tom Jeffries (Category 😎 (0)

2018
Trade Jared Polec (42)
Trade Jasper Pittard (33)
Trade Dom Tyson (6)
Trade Aaron Hall (58)
Pick 8 Tarryn Thomas (69)
Pick 46 Curtis Taylor (68)*
Pick 49 Bailey Scott (F/S) (85)**
Pick 69 Joel Crocker (F/S) (0)
Rookie Tom McKenzie (0)
Rookie Tom Wilkinson (0)
Rookie Red Og Murphy (Category 😎 (0)
Rookie Tom Campbell (12)

2019
Mid-season Lachlan Hosie (5)
Free agent Josh Walker (54)
Trade Aiden Bonar (28)
Pick 31 Charlie Comben (13)*
Pick 34 Jack Mahony (44)
Pick 35 Flynn Perez (24)
Rookie Matthew McGuinness (Category 😎 (0)

2020
Free agent Aidan Corr (48)*
Trade Lachie Young (39)
Trade Jaidyn Stephenson (61)*
Trade Atu Bosenavulagi (17)
Pick 3 Will Phillips (34)*
Pick 13 Tom Powell (52)*
Pick 36 Charlie Lazarro (35)
Pick 42 Phoenix Spicer (12)
Pick 56 Eddie Ford (28)*
Rookie Patrick Walker (0)
Rookie Connor Menadue (7)

2021
Mid-season Jacob Edwards (0)
Mid-season Charlie Ham (0)
Delisted free agent Hugh Greenwood (37)*
Trade Callum Coleman-Jones (22) *
Pick 1 Jason Horne-Francis (17)
Pick 22 Josh Goater (12) *
Pick 35 Paul Curtis (43)*
Pick 38 Miller Bergman (13)*
Pick 59 Jackson Archer (8)*
Rookie Tom Lynch (0)

2022
Mid-season Kallan Dawson (9)*
Trade Griffin Logue (15)*
Trade Darcy Tucker (25)*
Pick 3 Harry Sheezel (30)*
Pick 4 George Wardlaw (14)*
Pick 26 Brayden George (0)*
Pick 56 Cooper Harvey (F/S) (3)*
Rookie Blake Drury (7)*
Rookie Hamish Free (0)*
Rookie Daniel Howe (11)
Rookie Liam Shiels (18)*

2023
Mid-season Robert Hansen Jr (2)*
Delisted free agent Toby Pink (0)*
Trade Dylan Stephens (7)*
Trade Zac Fisher (7)*
Trade Bigoa Nyuon (3)*
Pick 2 Colby McKercher (7)*
Pick 4 Zane Duursma (7)*
Pick 20 Taylor Goad (0)*
Pick 22 Wil Dawson (0)*
Pick 23 Riley Hardeman (1)*
Rookie Finnbar Maley (0)*
Rookie Tyler Sellers (2)*

🔵⚪ How on earth did this happen? In a special report, we reveal the decisions, disappointments and disasters that led North Melbourne into an endless dark tunnel - starting with the brutal way club icon Brent Harvey was axed ⚪🔵

MORE HERE: bit.ly/4aYA2oX
Click to expand...
 
McIvor said:
The technology must be there because I heard recently that VAR in the EPL will not be adjudicating off sides next season and essentially the lines people will in some way have lessened responsibilities because the technology is so good that off side decisions will be made in real time without it turning into a draft persons exercise in measuring lines to determine if the attacker was offside.

I think the same should happen with where player landmark the ball and why umps regularly don’t set the mark at the exact spot because they’re regularly guessing.
Click to expand...
The footage of the automated offside system in the World Cup was exactly this, it was a game changer. Immediate feedback, correct feedback, with an easily understandable graphic to show why it was considered offside. There was a separate discussion kicked off about the actual wording of the offside law, but zero problems with the enforcement.
 
Grasshopper17 said:
No change to my seeds this week.

#1 - Sydney 159% (#1 in attack, #5 in defence - up 1)
#2 - Melbourne 143% (#10 in attack - down 1, #1 in defence)
#3 - GWS 124% (#5 in attack - down 2, #11 in defence - down 2)
#4 - Geelong 122% (#6 in attack, #6 in defence - up 1)

We have slipped to #7 (down 2). #9 in attack (up 4), #4 in defence (down 2) @ 113%. My model has us beating Richmond (#17 overall, #15 in attack, #17 in defence, 67%) by 40 points this Saturday.

Making up the top 4 in attack is the Dogs (#6 overall, #2 in attack, #14 in defence - up 1, 116%), Port Adelaide (#9 overall, #3 in attack, #15 in defence, 112%) and Carlton (#10 overall - down 2, #4 in attack, #16 in defence - up 1, 110%).

And making up the top 4 in defence is Fremantle (#12 overall, #17 in attack, #2 in defence, 94%) and St Kilda (#14 overall, #18 in attack, #3 in defence, 89%).
Click to expand...
Geelong :thumbsdownemoji:

#1 - Sydney 167% (#1 in attack, #2 in defence - up 3)
#2 - GWS (up 1) 130% (#4 in attack - up 1, #6 in defence - up 5). Probably made to look better by the Bulldogs' inaccuracy. Also made to look better by strong performances from Gold Coast, West Coast and us
#3 - Melbourne (down 1) 123% (#12 in attack - down 2, #1 in defence)
#4 - Collingwood (new) 120% (#6 in attack, #9 in defence)

Geelong slip all the way back to #9 (down 5) on the back of their pantsing by Gold Coast. 108%, #5 in attack (up 1), but #14 in defence (down 8).

We are back up to #6 (up 1). 113%, #11 in attack (down 2), #4 in defence. Our strong performance against Richmond is downgraded by Richmond's own struggles, and any % boost we might have otherwise got is offset by poor showings from Carlton, Melbourne and GWS. My model has us beating Hawthorn (#16 overall, #17 in attack, #10 in defence, 84%) by 21 points on Sunday.

Also in the top 4 in attack is Carlton (#10 overall, #2 in attack - up 2, #15 in defence - up 1, 108%) and the Dogs (#5 overall - up 1, #3 in attack - down 1, #12 in defence - up 2, 118%). Port slip to #7 (down 4) in attack (#14 overall - down 5, #16 in defence - down 1, 98%).

On the defensive side, Fremantle are #3 (down 1, #11 overall - up 1, #15 in attack - up 2, 103%). St Kilda slip to #7 in defence (down 4, #15 overall - down 1, #18 in attack, 85%).
 
Grasshopper17 said:
Getting these microchips put in the balls next year will help measure how far the ball has travelled between bounces. This information should be fed to the umpires and acted upon in real time. I have no doubt if this is done there will be truckloads of free kicks paid and may result in the lengthening of this 15m distance. Which I believe would be a mistake. Bouncing is a skill and defenders should be rewarded for a good against-the-odds chase.
Click to expand...
Grasshopper17 said:
The same chips could measure the distance the ball travels before a mark is taken. We need this ASAP... The game is way too hard to umpire as it is right now.
Click to expand...
I just don't see how that would be helpful in the overall umpiring decisions for short kicks and bouncing the ball.

Not going 15 meters for a mark can be a problem but fans get that wrong too depending on where they are viewing the kick from in the stands or the TV angle if viewing at home.
In a close to direct line to your position in the stand it could look like 9 meters but in fact is 15-20 meters.

The time lapse between the tec nurds and the umpire could be too long in general play in my opinion.
It maybe automatic via a computer but they would have to restrict what is being sent via audio to umpires ears.
Then that's just more noise in their ears while they are trying to umpire the game as they see it.

I have no issue with using the technology for all the goal line decisions as points scored is what all games are decided on.
You can include the ball being touched off another player in the goal scoring but not in general play.
This most likely will reduce time on goal decisions and is a good outcome
I will have more of a think about how it may be used in general play that won't hold up the game but at present i can't think of anything.

By using the technology for general play umpire decisions, i would be concerned on where it will end? and how much time will it take up during the course of the game.
......................................

Regarding the offside being a gamechanger for the World cup and EPL mentioned by dlanod and Mcivor.
I can see how it was a game changer as being pulled up for being offside especially when a goal is scored is better than the media talking about if for a week or a year or 4.
Soccer being an extremely low scoring game they need to get these decisions correct.
Obviously offside happens at other times during the game.
I assume it is also very handy in regard to actual scoring as in did the ball go over the line.
I don't follow soccer so how long is the game held up for "with an easily understandable graphic to show why it was considered offside". Was this done for every offside call? picked up by technology.
 
Section 5 said:
I just don't see how that would be helpful in the overall umpiring decisions for short kicks and bouncing the ball.

Not going 15 meters for a mark can be a problem but fans get that wrong too depending on where they are viewing the kick from in the stands or the TV angle if viewing at home.
In a close to direct line to your position in the stand it could look like 9 meters but in fact is 15-20 meters.

The time lapse between the tec nurds and the umpire could be too long in general play in my opinion.
It maybe automatic via a computer but they would have to restrict what is being sent via audio to umpires ears.
Then that's just more noise in their ears while they are trying to umpire the game as they see it.

I have no issue with using the technology for all the goal line decisions as points scored is what all games are decided on.
You can include the ball being touched off another player in the goal scoring but not in general play.
This most likely will reduce time on goal decisions and is a good outcome
I will have more of a think about how it may be used in general play that won't hold up the game but at present i can't think of anything.

By using the technology for general play umpire decisions, i would be concerned on where it will end? and how much time will it take up during the course of the game.
......................................

Regarding the offside being a gamechanger for the World cup and EPL mentioned by dlanod and Mcivor.
I can see how it was a game changer as being pulled up for being offside especially when a goal is scored is better than the media talking about if for a week or a year or 4.
Soccer being an extremely low scoring game they need to get these decisions correct.
Obviously offside happens at other times during the game.
I assume it is also very handy in regard to actual scoring as in did the ball go over the line.
I don't follow soccer so how long is the game held up for "with an easily understandable graphic to show why it was considered offside". Was this done for every offside call? picked up by technology.
Click to expand...
The ball over the goal line is ridiculously quick and accurate to the point it blows my mind how quick it actually is. How or why it isn’t implemented for our game is dumbfounding particularly given what a circus the whole score review system is and even then it’s not definitive unlike the EPL technology. I don’t understand the AFLs reluctance to use technology on many levels for different scenarios.
 
McIvor said:
The ball over the goal line is ridiculously quick and accurate to the point it blows my mind how quick it actually is. How or why it isn’t implemented for our game is dumbfounding particularly given what a circus the whole score review system is and even then it’s not definitive unlike the EPL technology. I don’t understand the AFLs reluctance to use technology on many levels for different scenarios.
Click to expand...
I can imagine over the goal line decisions in soccer is quick.
You only have a small distance to cover and no multiple goal posts or multiple players in the way to block the signal.
With shots on goal, you regularly have a number of players on the goal line plus the goal umpire in AFL compared to mostly just the goalkeeper in soccer that could block the signal.

The AFL aren't reluctant to use it they just need more trialing and then a decision in what they will actually use it for.
The AFL may be using a different technology than the video i found on soccer below and i imagine it would be on a smaller scale. It would have to be going on what soccer is using.
As i previously said it is only goal scoring i would use it for at present but still not sure how they will determine that.
It could easily be used for hitting the post.

Just looking at this Soccer video on goal line technology i can see why the AFL has taken it's time.
I don't know how many balls they use in soccer during a game (see 2 min 50 seconds of the video regarding just 1 ball), but in AFL we have two bucket loads of balls.
After watching this video (it's old being 2017) i just have more doubt. Maybe there is a newer one i can't find.

From what i can gather on the Soccer video and article below.
Goal line scoring requires 7 cameras at each end for scoring so 14 in total. A reasonable large computer setup.
A minimum of three cameras must have an unobstructed view of the ball to create a 3d image to make a goal decision.

VAR decisions (see article) on an offside ruling require an additional 10 cameras to cover all 22 players. AFL have 36 players so more cameras needed and that is for what i assume is for one rule. AFL also has a big difference in surface to cover so i would guess that increases the number of cameras needed in general play if they go down that path.

www.espn.com.au

The Premier League's getting semi-automated VAR offside -- what's so good about it?

Are the days of waiting an interminable amount of time for an offside decision over? Semi-automated VAR offside is about to arrive in the Premier League.
www.espn.com.au www.espn.com.au


 
Section 5 said:
I don't know how many balls they use in soccer during a game (see 2 min 50 seconds of the video regarding just 1 ball), but in AFL we have two bucket loads of balls.
Click to expand...
There's usually four down each sideline, and one behind each goal keeper plus one in play so I guess that's at least 11 for soccer. AFL wouldn't be too much more.
 
Section 5 said:
I can imagine over the goal line decisions in soccer is quick.
You only have a small distance to cover and no multiple goal posts or multiple players in the way to block the signal.
With shots on goal, you regularly have a number of players on the goal line plus the goal umpire in AFL compared to mostly just the goalkeeper in soccer that could block the signal.

The AFL aren't reluctant to use it they just need more trialing and then a decision in what they will actually use it for.
The AFL may be using a different technology than the video i found on soccer below and i imagine it would be on a smaller scale. It would have to be going on what soccer is using.
As i previously said it is only goal scoring i would use it for at present but still not sure how they will determine that.
It could easily be used for hitting the post.

Just looking at this Soccer video on goal line technology i can see why the AFL has taken it's time.
I don't know how many balls they use in soccer during a game (see 2 min 50 seconds of the video regarding just 1 ball), but in AFL we have two bucket loads of balls.
After watching this video (it's old being 2017) i just have more doubt. Maybe there is a newer one i can't find.

From what i can gather on the Soccer video and article below.
Goal line scoring requires 7 cameras at each end for scoring so 14 in total. A reasonable large computer setup.
A minimum of three cameras must have an unobstructed view of the ball to create a 3d image to make a goal decision.

VAR decisions (see article) on an offside ruling require an additional 10 cameras to cover all 22 players. AFL have 36 players so more cameras needed and that is for what i assume is for one rule. AFL also has a big difference in surface to cover so i would guess that increases the number of cameras needed in general play if they go down that path.

www.espn.com.au

The Premier League's getting semi-automated VAR offside -- what's so good about it?

Are the days of waiting an interminable amount of time for an offside decision over? Semi-automated VAR offside is about to arrive in the Premier League.
www.espn.com.au www.espn.com.au


Click to expand...

Yes but see this is the thing. Offside measurements in soccer not only require knowledge of where the ball is, they also require knowledge of where the players are, and more importantly, specific parts of their bodies (ie feet, knees, shoulders etc).

For footy, and these 15m measurements, we only require knowledge of where the ball is. And this data will be captured by the ball itself. No cameras required. Thus, the decision making process will be exceptionally quick, even quicker than in soccer. It could easily be introduced to rule on players running more than 15m, and adjudicated on in almost real time, similar to offside decisions in soccer.

I'll acknowledge I can see the potential for an issue in real-time adjudicating of a 15m kick in paying a mark or otherwise. The game can change dramatically in an instant depending on whether the umpire pays the mark or calls play on. There would almost need to be an immediate audible signal that a kick has not gone far enough, similar to the 6-again buzzer in NRL, only in real time.

One day we'll be using a network of drones hovering well above the playing surface to shine a light circle of 15m radius around the point of the kick, in real time, to achieve this. But that is a conversation for another decade or two 🙃
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I do wonder if the AFL would be willing to fund the technology. At the moment we still use an old Nokia N97 strapped to the point post for the goal review system.
 
Grasshopper17 said:
Yes but see this is the thing. Offside measurements in soccer not only require knowledge of where the ball is, they also require knowledge of where the players are, and more importantly, specific parts of their bodies (ie feet, knees, shoulders etc).

For footy, and these 15m measurements, we only require knowledge of where the ball is. And this data will be captured by the ball itself. No cameras required. Thus, the decision making process will be exceptionally quick, even quicker than in soccer. It could easily be introduced to rule on players running more than 15m, and adjudicated on in almost real time, similar to offside decisions in soccer.

I'll acknowledge I can see the potential for an issue in real-time adjudicating of a 15m kick in paying a mark or otherwise. The game can change dramatically in an instant depending on whether the umpire pays the mark or calls play on. There would almost need to be an immediate audible signal that a kick has not gone far enough, similar to the 6-again buzzer in NRL, only in real time.

One day we'll be using a network of drones hovering well above the playing surface to shine a light circle of 15m radius around the point of the kick, in real time, to achieve this. But that is a conversation for another decade or two 🙃
Click to expand...
For bouncing the ball.
The 15 meters rule includes changing direction and even going backwards and the umpire has to allow for this.
Will the chip be able to calculate that. Maybe it can maybe not.
 
Section 5 said:
For bouncing the ball.
The 15 meters rule includes changing direction and even going backwards and the umpire has to allow for this.
Will the chip be able to calculate that. Maybe it can maybe not.
Click to expand...
Apparently it can!

They are even planning on using similar technology in the NRL to rule on forward passes. By the way, to the non-rugby-league fan this is far more complicated than it sounds... A forward pass in rugby league is not simply one that travels towards the opposition's dead ball line... It is one that travels towards the opposition's dead ball line and does so faster than the guy passing it when he passed it.

It's the apple core out the window principle.. Even if you throw it out the car window behind you, because your car is travelling at speed the apple core is still going to fly forward as it travels towards the ground, only slower than the car is moving.

So that pass is legal in rugby league. This technology, apparently, can figure out what is a forward pass (to the letter of the law) and what is a legal pass. And if it can do that, it can certainly rule on the distance travelled by an AFL player carrying the ball, whether it is horizontal or vertical, or everything in between.

Bring it on.
 
Sherrinator said:
Dalions said:
Do we seriously expect an umpire to count everyone’s steps?
Personally I think it’s much easier to judge 15m.
And with some of the 10 and 12m marks that are paid a lot more people should be pinged for running too far,
It appears to be something that they have relaxed over the years.
Only to pull it out in a big game when it advantages a Big VIC Club
Click to expand...
Make it 20m run without bounce and 20 kick and get the curators to cut 10x10 squares.
Click to expand...

First of all, just, no. Bouncing is one of the many skills which make our game unique, and we should be embracing the bounce, not giving players excuses for not bouncing it. And let's be honest, so many players these days, suck at bouncing the ball.

Secondly, you can make the cut squares any size you like... When you're out on the field it all just looks like grass - exactly the same. Yes, we can see the squares from on TV or up high in the stands, but at ground level, every patch looks exactly the same as the next patch. It would be no help to the umpires at all.
 
Section 5 said:
I can imagine over the goal line decisions in soccer is quick.
You only have a small distance to cover and no multiple goal posts or multiple players in the way to block the signal.
With shots on goal, you regularly have a number of players on the goal line plus the goal umpire in AFL compared to mostly just the goalkeeper in soccer that could block the signal.

The AFL aren't reluctant to use it they just need more trialing and then a decision in what they will actually use it for.
The AFL may be using a different technology than the video i found on soccer below and i imagine it would be on a smaller scale. It would have to be going on what soccer is using.
As i previously said it is only goal scoring i would use it for at present but still not sure how they will determine that.
It could easily be used for hitting the post.

Just looking at this Soccer video on goal line technology i can see why the AFL has taken it's time.
I don't know how many balls they use in soccer during a game (see 2 min 50 seconds of the video regarding just 1 ball), but in AFL we have two bucket loads of balls.
After watching this video (it's old being 2017) i just have more doubt. Maybe there is a newer one i can't find.

From what i can gather on the Soccer video and article below.
Goal line scoring requires 7 cameras at each end for scoring so 14 in total. A reasonable large computer setup.
A minimum of three cameras must have an unobstructed view of the ball to create a 3d image to make a goal decision.

VAR decisions (see article) on an offside ruling require an additional 10 cameras to cover all 22 players. AFL have 36 players so more cameras needed and that is for what i assume is for one rule. AFL also has a big difference in surface to cover so i would guess that increases the number of cameras needed in general play if they go down that path.

www.espn.com.au

The Premier League's getting semi-automated VAR offside -- what's so good about it?

Are the days of waiting an interminable amount of time for an offside decision over? Semi-automated VAR offside is about to arrive in the Premier League.
www.espn.com.au www.espn.com.au


Click to expand...

You’ve said in your second paragraph that soccer technology doesn’t have multiple players in the way to block a signal. That’s fundamentally not right. Have you seen a goal line scramble where you have multiple players all over one another and a goal keeper whose body is completely smothering the ball to the point you can’t see it yet the technology knows exactly where it is in relation to the line? The same can easily be done with our goals and point.
 
A good discussion on technology that we don't really know what it's end purpose will be for AFL footy.

The AFL article stated they are using it at various clubs and a full trial at the VFL/VFLW double header at RESA park earlier this year.

After rewatching the AFL video, they are adapting the "Rugby Union System to a Whole New Sport" so anything used by soccer is not really relevant at this stage.
The Rugby system looks like it can do a lot of different things so they should be able to adapt stuff to our game.
A few links below that states what it can do in Rugby.

1716344371077.png
ministryofsport.com

Major League Rugby teams up with Gilbert and Sportable to introduce Smart Ball technology - Ministry of Sport

North America’s Major League Rugby (MLR) has forged a partnership with UK-based sports equipment manufacturer Gilbert and sports technology and data science firm Sportable.
ministryofsport.com ministryofsport.com

www.world.rugby

Rugby’s smart ball set to support match officiating at the World Rugby U20 Championship | World Rugby

World Rugby is collaborating with Sportable and Gilbert to undertake the world’s first trial of smart ball technology in a live match officiating capacity at the World Rugby U20 Championship in South Africa in June.
www.world.rugby www.world.rugby

 
Ay, who are we going for tonight? Normally I've simply been going for the lower ranked team, but now I'm like, with Sydney clearing out at the top, I'm happy for them to have top spot, win every game (except against us of course 😁), but knock everyone else off and help us into top 4 or even top 2 if we extract the digit far enough.

So, go Swannies 🤷
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Non Lions Discussion 2024

Similar threads

B
Women's Footy Non Lions AFLW discussion 2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
127
Views
5K
The Flying Belgian
The Flying Belgian
McIvor
Unofficial Preview Lions 2024 B&F Discussion
3 4 5 6 7
Replies
156
Views
6K
McIvor
McIvor
vic_LION
Toast All Australian Lions 2024
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
147
Views
5K
McIvor
McIvor
ZoBlitz
  • Poll
Women's Footy Preliminary Final, 2024 - Brisbane Lions vs. Adelaide
6 7 8 9 10
Replies
241
Views
5K
Perrip
P
MSB ROYS
Women's Footy Lions AFLW 2024 (Season 9) Discussion
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
197
Views
17K
Grasshopper17
G
ZoBlitz
  • Poll
Women's Footy Round 6, 2024 - Carlton vs. Brisbane Lions
2 3
Replies
52
Views
1K
Tom14
Tom14
ZoBlitz
  • Poll
Women's Footy Grand Final, 2024 - North Melbourne vs. Brisbane Lions
7 8 9 10 11
Replies
262
Views
5K
dlanod
dlanod

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top