pwny Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 17 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: It's all based on the yard markers. They place a clip on the chain right at the back end of the 5 yard marker closest to the original line of scrimmage. When they go out for a measurement, that clip is placed down again at the back end of the 5 yard marker, and both guys on the end pull from that, with the guy at the original line of scrimmage going first. So let's say you return a kick to the 27 yard line, 1st and 10 from there. They'd place a clip on the chain where it meets the very beginning of the 30 yard line, and it remains there until a new set of downs is gained. If they need to measure, that gets put at the 30, the first guy pulls his marker back to the 27, and then the actual measurement moment happens with the second guy pulling his marker to the 37. It's still not perfect, obviously. The clip may well be off by a small margin. But it isn't just one guy kind of eyeballing it when he gets to the middle of the field with his pole. So if the ball is advanced to somewhere between the 37 and 38 and the chains reset, where is the quality control present that makes sure the difference between the first marker and the clip is accurate based on where the ball was? How is the guy on the sideline in charge of setting the clip able to properly judge the difference between the ball being at 1 foot, 1 foot 3 inches, .85 foot, etc. from the 37? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 People had a problem with this? why? There was no incompetence or error or anything wrong with this... People just like to complain. This is known, though, I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 4 hours ago, iPwn said: So if the ball is advanced to somewhere between the 37 and 38 and the chains reset, where is the quality control present that makes sure the difference between the first marker and the clip is accurate based on where the ball was? How is the guy on the sideline in charge of setting the clip able to properly judge the difference between the ball being at 1 foot, 1 foot 3 inches, .85 foot, etc. from the 37? Most of the quality control occurs between the down judge and a few members of the chain gang. The down judge is always stationed at the line of scrimmage on the same side of the field as the first down markers, so he ensures they're accurately positioned once the ball is placed. The guy holding the box that shows what down it is is technically the one responsible for denoting where the ball is, though on a first down it's between him, the guy who holds the first post that denotes the initial line of scrimmage, and the down judge. The down judge aligns the heel of his foot with the line of scrimmage, and they place both the box and the initial line of scrimmage pole at that point. So initial placement after a first down really has far more to do with the down judge. They just reference that. The clip has nothing to do with whether it's 1 foot or 3 inches or whatever from the 37. The down judge, box man, and the first guy with the post handle that. Then the guy with the post at the yard to gain gets set. Then they set the clip once the full chain is in place. The clip just makes sure they don't get mis-set if they have to move for any reason after being set. Like your initial comment about going out for a measurement. Chain gang has 7 people, for reference. 4 on the main side of the field, one at each post, one holding the box denoting down and the current line of scrimmage, and one handling the clip and helping to ensure everyone is properly placed. 3 on the opposite side of the field assisting with issues of location of the line of scrimmage and down and distance on plays that go to that side of the field or assisting the line judge. They also serve as a backup to the main crew and sometimes alternate with them. I'm not going to argue that it's laser accurate. But it isn't just some random person guessing where to put the chains and calling it good. There's less human error in the alignment of the posts and chains and clip than there is in the actual ref's spot of the ball, by far. There's enough people involved and the people involved have generally been doing this for ages as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen Cygni Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 On 12/18/2017 at 12:11 AM, Darth Pees said: So bizarre that this is the best unit of measurement they could come up with. Agree, but I mean, the NFL still uses human eye judgement for ball placement, and two poles and a chain held by geriatrics to determine a game often won by literal inches, so I'm not sure why we have higher standards for their methods in the first place. Meanwhile, hockey figured out a way to track their puck electronically over 20 years. But, I guess I have to understand the NFL's slow growth in that department, being that they are only worth 2.3 billion dollars as an organization. /s Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cakeshoppe Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Honestly I kind of like it. It's a game wherer you throw a leather ball around on a grass field. They start it all off by flipping a big coin. I'm ok with something weird happening where you have to pull out a piece of paper to measure something sometimes. I think certain 'precision' parts of the game are silly when it comes down to the fact that you are trying to measure millimeters against a 4 inch line painted on grass with a fuzzy edge, and the ball is placed by eyeball by someone who saw it land there in the blink of an eye from 20 yards away. And again, it's just a quirk of the game that I enjoy. When you played with all the other kids at the park, end zones were marked by an invisible line between trees or two kids' sweatshirts i get that this is professional and there's a lot more on the line and we want things to be repeatable, but when it comes down to it, it's a game. Sometimes weird things happen. Wouldn't bother me if this happened and it went against my team. Lastly, if the refs want to rig a game they'll just spot the ball further back. Trying to rig a game by folding a pice of paper a certain way is ludicrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 42 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: Agree, but I mean, the NFL still uses human eye judgement for ball placement, and two poles and a chain held by geriatrics to determine a game often won by literal inches, so I'm not sure why we have higher standards for their methods in the first place. Meanwhile, hockey figured out a way to track their puck electronically over 20 years. But, I guess I have to understand the NFL's slow growth in that department, being that they are only worth 2.3 billion dollars as an organization. /s Do you have a source on this? I'll admit I'm not a hockey fan so I'm not particularly knowledgeable in the sport, but a few google searches don't bring up anything except some articles from 2015 saying the NHL was considering using trackers in pucks and uniforms, but it hasn't actually happened yet. There were a couple of old attempts about 20 years ago, but all of them were rejected for a negative impact on the game or viewing experience. So I'd be interested to see what you're referring to here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen Cygni Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 22 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: Do you have a source on this? I'll admit I'm not a hockey fan so I'm not particularly knowledgeable in the sport, but a few google searches don't bring up anything except some articles from 2015 saying the NHL was considering using trackers in pucks and uniforms, but it hasn't actually happened yet. There were a couple of old attempts about 20 years ago, but all of them were rejected for a negative impact on the game or viewing experience. So I'd be interested to see what you're referring to here. FoxTrax. It was an infrared tracking system embedded inside the puck in 1996. The past public response to this type of technology is irrelevant b/c the purpose here is for advancement in tracking the measurement/placement of the football, not displaying it's movement for TV viewership. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jakuvious Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, Carmen Cygni said: FoxTrax. It was an infrared tracking system embedded inside the puck in 1996. The past public response to this type of technology is irrelevant here b/c the purpose here id for advancement in tracking the football for measurement, not displaying it's movement for TV viewership. Okay. A few notes on that then. It's a little misleading to say they "figured it out" 20 years ago, when they promptly abandoned what they had figured out. Additionally, all that that did was aid in the process of cameras and viewers tracking where the puck is. That's it. Figuring out where the ball is isn't an issue that the NFL is having. The issue that prompted this thread comes down to figuring out the exact location of a specific part of the ball (whichever part was furthest forward) at a specific moment in time (when the whistle is blown, when the knee/body part is down, or when the ball is as far forward as it gets) in reference to another location (the line to gain.) That would require a substantially more complicated and completely different kind of technology than what FoxTrax was. People drastically oversimplify the type of tech solution the NFL would need to automate ball placement and measurement. It's not just where the ball is, it's also when it's there, and a host of other things going on around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 On 12/18/2017 at 11:02 AM, iPwn said: The biggest fraud in sports is how we pretend the chains are in any way an accurate representation of a first down gained. Two guys trot out with sticks attached by chains. The first guy puts the stick where he thinks the set of downs started, and the second guy pulls it to see if the ball is 10 yards from where the first guy guessed. There’s no way possible that the first guy could possibly get the exact mark that the ball started on. Particularly for something as close as what happened here, there is absolutely no way the measurement was accurate. But that's not really accurate. First off, they put a clip at the exact position the nearest solid 5 yard marker is at on the sideline, then measure from there. They also miraculously spot every first down gaining play on the nearest yard marker. Watch for it Sunday. Absolutely every change of possession (kick or punt return) will literally be lined up on a hash mark. It happens after the offense gets a new set of downs too. The only deviation is when the play before it had to be measured for a first. two weeks ago, I sat and watched the Bears punt returner fair catch a punt at the nine, with a holding penalty thrown in for half the distance. They then proceeded to mark the ball at the 5. It's infuriating to watch, especially as a math teacher, but it does allow those old guys to move more quickly in signalling first downs if they set up first downs exactly on hash marks, because even the blindest of them, can tell whether the ball crosses the hash ten yards further upfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 3 minutes ago, INbengalfan said: They also miraculously spot every first down gaining play on the nearest yard marker. Then wouldn’t the yard to gain always be at the yard marker? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 2 minutes ago, iPwn said: Then wouldn’t the yard to gain always be at the yard marker? Yes. And by doing this, they don't have to measure nearly as much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carmen Cygni Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 21 minutes ago, Jakuvious said: Okay. A few notes on that then. It's a little misleading to say they "figured it out" 20 years ago, when they promptly abandoned what they had figured out. Additionally, all that that did was aid in the process of cameras and viewers tracking where the puck is. That's it. Figuring out where the ball is isn't an issue that the NFL is having. The issue that prompted this thread comes down to figuring out the exact location of a specific part of the ball (whichever part was furthest forward) at a specific moment in time (when the whistle is blown, when the knee/body part is down, or when the ball is as far forward as it gets) in reference to another location (the line to gain.) That would require a substantially more complicated and completely different kind of technology than what FoxTrax was. People drastically oversimplify the type of tech solution the NFL would need to automate ball placement and measurement. It's not just where the ball is, it's also when it's there, and a host of other things going on around it. Not really. Of course there would need to be drastic development and improvement from the NHL's original design, but lets not act like it cant be done and with better accuracy than the guessing game that's going on now. And after all, that 20 damned years ago. A tracking alert could easily be programmed to signal at the whistle thus marking the exact ball placement at the appropriate time and have the ability to do so within pile ups, etc. There are quite a few advancements in technology that the NFL is conveniently ignoring a the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lancerman Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 On 12/18/2017 at 5:59 AM, HorizontoZenith said: People gotta stop saying the NFL is rigging games. They're not. If they were rigging games, they would have upheld the call on the field where the Panthers player didn't have a TD, and they would have called Allison's fumble incomplete. They want Aaron Rodgers in the playoffs more than they want Jerry Richardson's team anywhere NEAR a chance at winning a Super Bowl before he sells the team. The NFL does not want the Patriots in the playoffs much less with homefield advantage. They know that they're another Patriots Super Bowl win away from even MORE NFL fans leaving the sport. Patriots constantly winning kills the whole parity angle. If the NFL was rigging games, they'd rig games to help them, not hurt them. This is just complete and total incompetence by refs. What was the highest rated Super Bowl lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwny Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Just now, INbengalfan said: Yes. And by doing this, they don't have to measure nearly as much. Then what is being measured here? And what is going on here, where the marker is clearly past the yard line? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INbengalfan Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 The first one is clearly re-setting the ball before a snap. The second one looks to be a measurement where the fresh set of downs didn't start exactly on a hash. I said it happens a lot, not 100% of the time. I am saying that kick and punt returns get spotted on a hash just about every single time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.