They would be covered by snow and completely useless 99% of the game.
Maybe, but with multiple cameras working together, we must have areas of the line that is not covered. Wide aperture cameras would do the trick. Or as some posters suggested, use Infra-red or Raman or some sort of sensor technology. Although the sensor technology may be more expensive than Hawkeye.
I'm not a huge soccer guy, but I thought during the last world cup they had put a chip in the ball and on the goal posts that would tell you if the ball had fully crossed the plane or not...Can they not bring this into the NHL?
The Following User Says Thank You to GeoRock For This Useful Post:
I'm not a huge soccer guy, but I thought during the last world cup they had put a chip in the ball and on the goal posts that would tell you if the ball had fully crossed the plane or not...Can they not bring this into the NHL?
A ball is a sphere, distance from center to any edge is equal.
A puck can be flat, on end, etc.
The Following User Says Thank You to DeluxeMoustache For This Useful Post:
After reading all the suggestions. There can only be one reason that we still have inconclusive goal calls - as many had concluded already, NHL is too cheap and just don't care enough about the integrity of the game. It is embarrassing.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Iggy3x For This Useful Post:
A ball is a sphere, distance from center to any edge is equal.
A puck can be flat, on end, etc.
Typically, a lot more in the goal area in hockey as well. Plus, if the sensors are in the posts and crossbar, they are always moving, unlike a soccer goalpost. If the sensor is in the ice, how does it differentiate pucks in versus over the net?
After reading all the suggestions. There can only be one reason that we still have inconclusive goal calls - as many had concluded already, NHL is too cheap and just don't care enough about the integrity of the game. It is embarrassing.
That's too true. In this day and age to not have conclusive evidence on each and every goal is simply amateur. Or maybe it's job security for the clowns in the 'war room'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache
A ball is a sphere, distance from center to any edge is equal.
A puck can be flat, on end, etc.
There are different technologies out there. When a tennis ball hits the court, it deforms into an oblong, and the Hawkeye accounts for this. The technology exists for hockey. Even super high speed cameras HD cameras instead of that bull#### webcam for above the net would be more conclusive.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CroFlames For This Useful Post:
I'm not a huge soccer guy, but I thought during the last world cup they had put a chip in the ball and on the goal posts that would tell you if the ball had fully crossed the plane or not...Can they not bring this into the NHL?
There are numerous issues. A puck isn't a sphere like a soccer ball, meaning you need to know the puck's relative position to the goal line in 3 dimensions to determine if the puck completely crossed a line.
A puck takes a lot more abuse than a soccer ball.
100 mph slap shots into plexiglass, crossbar, posts
sharp blades stepping on it
rubber needs to be frozen or it bounces.
Electronics don't typically survive well in these conditions.
These should be workable solutions, but until someone invests some money into developing a system designed that can meet the requirements of hockey, it appears that it will be a pipe dream.
A camera based system is not really tenable in hockey. With bodies and equipment everywhere, most of the time a puck is not visible to the cameras. It might have helped on Bennett's non-goal though as there were clear line of sights in that particular instance.
Last edited by sureLoss; 05-06-2015 at 01:21 PM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sureLoss For This Useful Post:
There are numerous issues. A puck isn't a sphere like a soccer ball, meaning you need to know the puck's relative position to the goal line in 3 dimensions to determine if the puck completely crossed a line.
A puck takes a lot more abuse than a soccer ball.
100 mph slap shots into plexiglass, crossbar, posts
sharp blades stepping on it
rubber needs to be frozen or it bounces.
Electronics don't typically survive well in these conditions.
These should be workable solutions, but until someone invests some money into developing a system designed that can meet the requirements of hockey, it appears that it will be a pipe dream.
A camera based system is not really tenable in hockey. With bodies and equipment everywhere, most of the time a puck is not visible to the cameras. It might have helped on Bennett's non-goal though as there were clear line of sights in that particular instance.
Sorry but those environmental requirements are comical compared to any aerospace or military application. The technology to survive is readily available.
Sorry but those environmental requirements are comical compared to any aerospace or military application. The technology to survive is readily available.
Yeah that is why I said there are workarounds.
But no one is putting them to use in sports and no one will until someone ponies up the money to develop a system.
But the environmental requirements are a reason why you can't take a system designed for soccer and just straight apply it to hockey without testing and development of a system that can handle it.
Further to my point above, this video demonstrates how accurate high speed cameras can be. If you had two at the 45 degree position, and the overhead camera and maximum frame rate, they would have caught the goal 100%.
My guess is the overhead and 45 degree angle cameras were 120 FPS, which is utterly subpar. Jeez, even 300 FPS would have been better.
This particular camera retails for about $5,000 USD. Maybe make the players play one extra exhibition game per year, and the struggling NHL could maybe afford to put them in all NHL rinks.
They should just insist the goaltenders start being more honest.
Stupid goalies. You're only in net because you were always the smallest kid, or couldn't skate. The least you could do is not lie when the puck was in. This is exactly the sort of insecurity that causes you to wear all that bloated equipment Gump Worsley didn't need. Know why??
His face was his mask.
Stupid lying goalies. There's yer problem.
__________________
"Isles give up 3 picks for 5.5 mil of cap space.
Oilers give up a pick and a player to take on 5.5 mil."
-Bax
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Flashpoint For This Useful Post:
I'm not a huge soccer guy, but I thought during the last world cup they had put a chip in the ball and on the goal posts that would tell you if the ball had fully crossed the plane or not...Can they not bring this into the NHL?
__________________
Watching the Oilers defend is like watching fire engines frantically rushing to the wrong fire
There are numerous issues. A puck isn't a sphere like a soccer ball, meaning you need to know the puck's relative position to the goal line in 3 dimensions to determine if the puck completely crossed a line.
A puck takes a lot more abuse than a soccer ball.
100 mph slap shots into plexiglass, crossbar, posts
sharp blades stepping on it
rubber needs to be frozen or it bounces.
Electronics don't typically survive well in these conditions.
These should be workable solutions, but until someone invests some money into developing a system designed that can meet the requirements of hockey, it appears that it will be a pipe dream.
A camera based system is not really tenable in hockey. With bodies and equipment everywhere, most of the time a puck is not visible to the cameras. It might have helped on Bennett's non-goal though as there were clear line of sights in that particular instance.
I bet the engineering department in any University could come up with a solution in 2 months.
I found the end of this video interesting. They basically show and state that the human eye, even under replay conditions with a camera can't accurately detect if the ball enters the net. That's with a soccer ball, a puck is much faster, and smaller. How the NHL has not invested in better technology is crazy. Needs to be done.
I wonder if Burke will engage the NHL on this issue and push for the technology now that he's a victim of a potential goal. He seems to have a lot of clout at the head office.
It would be interesting to see what kind conversations may take place in the near future regarding this issue.
