Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 102
F
Dawg Talker
OP Offline
Dawg Talker
F
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 102
I wondered when I watched Baker run (the high step play) about how the spot is determined. It really looked to me like he advanced the ball past the first down marker before any part of his body touched out of bounds. I assume the sideline is not a plane like the goal line is.

Anyone else feel like the ball was past the FD mark before he touched OOB?

I realize a trailing official would have a tough call on that too.

Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
M
Legend
Offline
Legend
M
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 12,602
Likes: 585
I felt it was a first down and was 100% sure it was a first down after the slo-mo replay.


The more things change the more they stay the same.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
It was a first down



Joe Thomas #73
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
The sideline IS a plane just like the goal line. It's just different in the respect to interpreting where the ball should be placed. Goal line is cut and dried -- break the plane, score a TD. Sideline? You need multiple camera angles (and ideally, an overhead view) for proper ball placement.

The problem with that play is that it is very hard to determine where the ball is when it actually "breaks the plane".

I thought he came up short, but that was just based on the angle on the line the ball was traveling on. There would be no way to be sure without an overhead view on that play.

The trend in the NFL seems to be giving the runner the benefit of the doubt when he sticks the ball out like that, Baker was not given that benefit yesterday.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
I think it was definitely a first down. I was upset with Stefanski for throwing the challenge flag when he did, and also upset when he didn't throw the challenge flag when he didn't.


Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Originally Posted By: dawglover05
I think it was definitely a first down. I was upset with Stefanski for throwing the challenge flag when he did, and also upset when he didn't throw the challenge flag when he didn't.


That all worked out well, though, because those last timeouts were very handy for giving our D a breather on that last drive. If he'd challenged and lost, we wouldn't have had that last TO to give our gassed DLine a breather before the last play.


Browns is the Browns

... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
I thought there was an overhead view



Joe Thomas #73
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted By: BADdog
I thought there was an overhead view

Maybe I missed it. YTTV wouldn't let me watch the game until it was a recording here in Fort Wayne. I was moving through at a pretty good pace while trying to avoid phone calls, texts and all the other updates that often spoil sporting events for me.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 11
C
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
C
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,753
Likes: 11
I don't recall who the announcers were, but both said it was a first down. I thought it was too.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,924
Likes: 344
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,924
Likes: 344
If it's the play I am thinking of, they never replayed the same angle they originally had, I can't remember the other shot they used, but they also used one shot from behind a coach's butt.

Really helpful.


Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.

John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,003
Likes: 128
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,003
Likes: 128
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
Originally Posted By: dawglover05
I think it was definitely a first down. I was upset with Stefanski for throwing the challenge flag when he did, and also upset when he didn't throw the challenge flag when he didn't.


That all worked out well, though, because those last timeouts were very handy for giving our D a breather on that last drive. If he'd challenged and lost, we wouldn't have had that last TO to give our gassed DLine a breather before the last play.


That's one of those damned if you do and damned if you don't things.. Beside, no coach has a crystal ball


#GMSTRONG

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan

"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
He was out of bounds. Think of a TD in the corner. If the ball carrier hits the pylon, it is a TD. If the ball of outside the pylon, it is out of bounds at the 1.

End of story.


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
D
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
D
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 9,558
Likes: 589
There are different rules for both, IIRC?


Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown

#gmstrong
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Likes: 136
E
Legend
Offline
Legend
E
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,475
Likes: 136
The refs still suck and are biased against us tongue


Defense wins championships. Watson play your butt off!
Go Browns!
CHRIST HAS RISEN!

GM Strong! & Stay safe everyone!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
Originally Posted By: dawglover05
There are different rules for both, IIRC?


Maybe slightly, but at least to me, baker was well out of bounds after he leapt. The ball still has to cross scrimmage in bounds.

That is why you see receivers reach out with the inbounds hand as they are going out of bounds near the marker.


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 102
F
Dawg Talker
OP Offline
Dawg Talker
F
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,151
Likes: 102
Originally Posted By: FATE
The sideline IS a plane just like the goal line. It's just different in the respect to interpreting where the ball should be placed. Goal line is cut and dried -- break the plane, score a TD. Sideline? You need multiple camera angles (and ideally, an overhead view) for proper ball placement.

The problem with that play is that it is very hard to determine where the ball is when it actually "breaks the plane".

I thought he came up short, but that was just based on the angle on the line the ball was traveling on. There would be no way to be sure without an overhead view on that play.

The trend in the NFL seems to be giving the runner the benefit of the doubt when he sticks the ball out like that, Baker was not given that benefit yesterday.



Just want to make sure others know I did not ask because I feel like we were "hosed" on the call and I am not saying you implied it either.

I truly have seen that situation called different ways. If the OOB line is truly a plane, then wouldn't a runner tiptoeing down the sideline carrying the ball on his outside arm who clearly breaks the plane be down where the ball first was OOB? I know the answer, of course not, but if it truly is a plane that would be the case.

I still think the way they call that play normally it was spotted about 1 yard short.

Again, not complaining , just something I have noticed. But then, I disagree with a lot of spots when Qbs slide or dive while running.

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
As I understand it the ball should be spotted where it left the playing field when the runner goes out of bounds.

So hanging the ball out of bounds while the runner stays inbounds doesn't matter.

It is a bit weird and it is a judgement call. I think some runners get more benefit of the doubt than others.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,692
Likes: 909
Legend
Online
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,692
Likes: 909
There is a simple solution to this:

Chips in balls.

We have the tech necessary to know exactly where a ball crosses a plane. Even so, there will always be judgement calls on the field by the refs. A WR tiptoeing the sidelines should still be given every earned yard before stepping out, regardless if the ball crosses the sidelines plane.

Chips in balls would also eliminate the guesswork involved in punts that travel out-of-bounds. Exact placement. No guesswork.


I could see this being considered down the road.


.02


"too many notes, not enough music-"
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,783
Likes: 920
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 18,783
Likes: 920
I've given that some thought in the past. Is there a chip that is capable of recognizing the exact shape and size of the ball and be able to sense when one of the edges crosses a plane?
There are also multiple padded bodies blocking the signal much of the time.

Belichik or Tomlin would probably have one of their players have a chip in their pads to trigger it, lol.


And into the forest I go, to lose my mind and find my soul.
- John Muir

#GMSTRONG
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 10,932
Likes: 1778
Originally Posted By: FORTBROWNFAN
Originally Posted By: FATE
The sideline IS a plane just like the goal line. It's just different in the respect to interpreting where the ball should be placed. Goal line is cut and dried -- break the plane, score a TD. Sideline? You need multiple camera angles (and ideally, an overhead view) for proper ball placement.

The problem with that play is that it is very hard to determine where the ball is when it actually "breaks the plane".

I thought he came up short, but that was just based on the angle on the line the ball was traveling on. There would be no way to be sure without an overhead view on that play.

The trend in the NFL seems to be giving the runner the benefit of the doubt when he sticks the ball out like that, Baker was not given that benefit yesterday.



Just want to make sure others know I did not ask because I feel like we were "hosed" on the call and I am not saying you implied it either.

I truly have seen that situation called different ways. If the OOB line is truly a plane, then wouldn't a runner tiptoeing down the sideline carrying the ball on his outside arm who clearly breaks the plane be down where the ball first was OOB? I know the answer, of course not, but if it truly is a plane that would be the case.

I still think the way they call that play normally it was spotted about 1 yard short.

Again, not complaining , just something I have noticed. But then, I disagree with a lot of spots when Qbs slide or dive while running.

Good point, that's where how we view "the plane" needs clarification. The classification of "out of bounds" is not met until the player is out of bounds (has touched something besides a player, official or pylon that is not in the field of play) or the ball actually touches the sideline, therefore "the plane" is only used to determine forward progress, not to determine when the play ends... So in other words, once the player is deemed to be out of bounds, the ball is spotted where it broke the plane of the sideline.

From the rule book:

Quote:
Section 22 Out of Bounds and Inbounds Spot
PLAYER OR OFFICIAL OUT OF BOUNDS
Article 1 A player or an Official is Out of Bounds when he touches:
(a) A boundary line; or
(b) Anything other than a player, an official, or a pylon on or outside a boundary line.

BALL OUT OF BOUNDS
Article 2 The Ball is Out of Bounds when:
(a) the runner is out of bounds;
(b) while in player possession, it touches a boundary line or anything other than a player or an official on or outside such line; or
(c) a loose ball touches a boundary line or anything on or outside such line.

INBOUNDS SPOT
Article 3 The Inbounds Spot is a spot 70 feet 9 inches in from the sideline on the yard line passing through the spot where the ball or a runner is out of bounds between the goal lines. Under certain conditions, the ball is dead in a side zone or has been placed there as the result of a penalty. See 7-6-2.

Note: Ordinarily the out-of-bounds spot is the spot where the ball crossed a sideline. However, if a ball, while still within a boundary line, is declared out of bounds because of touching anything that is out of bounds, the out-of-bounds spot is on the yard line through the spot of the ball at the instant of such touching.

A.R. 3.9 Runner A1, with his feet inbounds, touches an official who is touching a sideline.
Ruling: Inbounds.
A.R. 3.10 Runner A1, with his feet inbounds, touches any player who is touching a sideline.
Ruling: Inbounds.
A.R. 3.11 Runner A1 fumbles backwards, and the loose ball touches a defensive player B1 who is standing on sideline, and then ball rebounds into the field of play where B1 falls on it.
Ruling: Dead ball and out of bounds as soon as the loose ball touches the player on sideline. Offensive team’s ball at inbounds spot. Start game clock on the ready.
A.R. 3.12 Runner A1 touches the defensive team’s pylon with any part of his body.
Ruling: Not out of bounds. The runner is not out of bounds until he touches anything other than a player, an official, or a pylon on or outside the boundary line. Position of the ball is determined by its position when the runner touches out of bounds.


HERE WE GO BROWNIES! HERE WE GO!!
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Originally Posted By: jfanent
I've given that some thought in the past. Is there a chip that is capable of recognizing the exact shape and size of the ball and be able to sense when one of the edges crosses a plane?
There are also multiple padded bodies blocking the signal much of the time.

Belichik or Tomlin would probably have one of their players have a chip in their pads to trigger it, lol.


There would likely need to be at least 6 chips inside the ball. One at each nose, and four 90 degrees apart from each other ringing the waistline of the ball.

You could easily prevent cheating like you suggest by each chip having a unique ID and the Refs scanning the chips into service when they put a ball out there.

Problems that would have to be solved include getting the chips to absolutely, 1000%, stay in place no matter what. Kicking, tackling, punting, etc.. CANNOT ever allow a chip to be dislodged. Also, whatever method you use to hold them in place cannot alter the balance and throwability of the ball. Lastly, it has to be 'manufacturable' and not cost $10k per ball.

After that, every field in the league would likely need something like a wire with reader chips placed at every yard marker buried at the edge of every boundary.

Standard RFID chips & readers could handle all of this, and signal strength from the chips in the ball measured at the most nearby readers would give pinpoint placement.


Browns is the Browns

... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.

Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater

There would likely need to be at least 6 chips inside the ball. One at each nose, and four 90 degrees apart from each other ringing the waistline of the ball.


The enemy of 'good' is perfection. Burying a single chip in the ball doesn't solve all problems, but it solves many without creating new ones. Start there and then improve, IMO.


There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.

-PrplPplEater
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
for early development, sure. Start with a single chip, but that won't be useful at all for any granularity. It's good for basic proof-of-concept, but you already have that with RFID in general. Automotive keys that know you're inside the car are a prime example.


Browns is the Browns

... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398
Likes: 280
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,398
Likes: 280
We are getting down to nano-inches in a game where, when a player goes down, they just mark the ball to the nearest yard line to make it easier on themselves.


yebat' Putin
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,942
Likes: 762
and a game where if the nose of the ball touches the face of an imaginary plane, it is a 1st Down, or even a scoring play.


Browns is the Browns

... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.

Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
Dawg Talker
Offline
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2015
Posts: 2,954
Likes: 386
I suspect most of the technology is there, or would be fairly easy to manufacture. Does the technology make the game better? It would be hard to say. We all hate the judgement calls that go against us, would chips in balls make every single play suddenly ruled by the technology and take some of the randomness out of the game?

I am a huge fan of solving issues with technology but this might introduce unpalatable issues.

To be honest I wonder if more cameras and image processing wouldn't be better solution to this.

Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
B
Legend
Offline
Legend
B
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 38,474
Likes: 795
Originally Posted By: PrplPplEater
and a game where if the nose of the ball touches the face of an imaginary plane, it is a 1st Down, or even a scoring play.



I agree. Forget chips and all that. When the ball is touched down in the endzone, you have a score.

Sometimes we make things way too hard.


If everybody had like minds, we would never learn.

GM Strong




[Linked Image]
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,924
Likes: 344
Legend
Offline
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 49,924
Likes: 344
Just set up more cameras, and utilize that technology they use to give you every view possible on one of their pay plane. Add that to a little holography and you should be able to get a 3-D view of any play. I don't know how fast such a thing could happen, from play end to review, but I bet if they put the right people to work on it, they could get something solid in place in no time flat, that would instantly create a 3-D hologram, viewable from every angle, for a dedicated replay official to review.

(I do admit that this is outside of my area of expertise, whatever that may be, but it sure seems like there would be a ton of brilliant people who would almost be willing to die to work on something like this)


Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.

John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,692
Likes: 909
Legend
Online
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 14,692
Likes: 909
Quote:
(I do admit that this is outside of my area of expertise, whatever that may be, but it sure seems like there would be a ton of brilliant people who would almost be willing to die to work on something like this)


My thought, too.
What a project.


"too many notes, not enough music-"
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 32,556
Likes: 668
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 32,556
Likes: 668
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
Quote:
(I do admit that this is outside of my area of expertise, whatever that may be, but it sure seems like there would be a ton of brilliant people who would almost be willing to die to work on something like this)


My thought, too.
What a project.



3D would have to be computer generated on the fly in real time, you would need an AI and a server farm for that. And if that were to happen, the spacing of layers to create the 3D effect, the use of fill, wireframing(?), and numerous other processing decisions would have to be made by an AI... sounds nuts, except something like that would be possible now with a little help from the Big Tech Giants. Google has created image and video contents recognition AI (or an advanced algorithmic process) and honed its skills to identify everything. If you worked with that AI tech and trained it to spot fouls, judge lines, make calls, and anything else a stationary remote ref might be able to do... That is doable now and could ref every second of every game. Use that like a replay official with life refs reviewing what was spotted, in the hooded viewer. Cool idea.

Facebook, Twitter, and a few others have similar tech. And I must stop now before I start really geeking out.

Last edited by OldColdDawg; 10/07/21 01:36 AM.

Your feelings and opinions do not add up to facts.
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
Hall of Famer
Offline
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,698
Likes: 105
Originally Posted By: OldColdDawg
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
Quote:
(I do admit that this is outside of my area of expertise, whatever that may be, but it sure seems like there would be a ton of brilliant people who would almost be willing to die to work on something like this)


My thought, too.
What a project.



3D would have to be computer generated on the fly in real time, you would need an AI and a server farm for that. And if that were to happen, the spacing of layers to create the 3D effect, the use of fill, wireframing(?), and numerous other processing decisions would have to be made by an AI... sounds nuts, except something like that would be possible now with a little help from the Big Tech Giants. Google has created image and video contents recognition AI (or an advanced algorithmic process) and honed its skills to identify everything. If you worked with that AI tech and trained it to spot fouls, judge lines, make calls, and anything else a stationary remote ref might be able to do... That is doable now and could ref every second of every game. Use that like a replay official with life refs reviewing what was spotted, in the hooded viewer. Cool idea.

Facebook, Twitter, and a few others have similar tech. And I must stop now before I start really geeking out.


If you can electronically drive and park a car you can locate a football



Joe Thomas #73
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
O
Legend
Offline
Legend
O
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 12,205
Likes: 586
Originally Posted By: OldColdDawg
Originally Posted By: Clemdawg
Quote:
(I do admit that this is outside of my area of expertise, whatever that may be, but it sure seems like there would be a ton of brilliant people who would almost be willing to die to work on something like this)


My thought, too.
What a project.



3D would have to be computer generated on the fly in real time, you would need an AI and a server farm for that. And if that were to happen, the spacing of layers to create the 3D effect, the use of fill, wireframing(?), and numerous other processing decisions would have to be made by an AI... sounds nuts, except something like that would be possible now with a little help from the Big Tech Giants. Google has created image and video contents recognition AI (or an advanced algorithmic process) and honed its skills to identify everything. If you worked with that AI tech and trained it to spot fouls, judge lines, make calls, and anything else a stationary remote ref might be able to do... That is doable now and could ref every second of every game. Use that like a replay official with life refs reviewing what was spotted, in the hooded viewer. Cool idea.

Facebook, Twitter, and a few others have similar tech. And I must stop now before I start really geeking out.


IMO, doing this can be paid for a simple "brought to you buy" whenever they trot it out on the feed. Name drop, and then nerd it up with the presentation and I think the companies with the capabilities will be lining up to take a shot at it.


There is no level of sucking we haven't seen; in fact, I'm pretty sure we hold the patents on a few levels of sucking NOBODY had seen until the past few years.

-PrplPplEater
DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2021 NFL Season Looking Back: Browns 14 Vikings 7 Question regarding Baker's diving attempt for a first down.

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5