National Forum

Hawk Eye

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Replying To sligo joe:  "
Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "[quote=Pikeman96:  "[quote=ForeverBlue2:  "[quote=Pikeman96:  "Well then, to be blunt about it....you're wrong. If the ball goes directly over a goalpost, it's not a point.

The rule states: 'A point is scored when the ball is played over the crossbar between the posts by either team.'

If the ball goes directly over a post, then it clearly hasn't gone between them.

The fact that it might have gone between them if the posts were taller and the ball struck one and bounced a certain way is irrelevant."
That may well be the case… it's a call I always make and no referee has ever overruled me on it…. The rule does indeed say the ball must go between the posts but there is nothing to say it can't go between the posts via hitting the post as with the Armagh winner… Hawk eye would disallow that in your opinion…"
????

Why would Hawkeye disallow a point when the ball has gone between the posts?

The 'Níl' would come, and correctly so, if the ball had passed directly over a post.

I don't know why you're still arguing here. You're clearly wrong, and I'm not the only one pointing that out."]But the ball clearly didn't go directly over the post as the guys on BBC clearly showed.. it went inside and Hawk eye put up a NIL… so it is clearly flawed and it's not the first time it got it wrong either… An expensive flop but the GAA hierarchy will never admit to that.. they never get anything wrong you know…"]Did anyone ever tell you, when you've lost the debate, stop digging, over and out."]Lost no debate as proven by the BBC…. Hawk eye is a flawed system simple…. over and out yourself

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 31/07/2024 11:29:29    2563216

Link

Why are we not getting camera angles of the point ? just a cartoon which shows no correlation with reality?

Kew (Galway) - Posts: 88 - 31/07/2024 11:44:39    2563220

Link

The problem I see with hawk eye is that if say Armaghs late point that went over off the post had to be kicked higher and kept the same line but was above the post Hawk Eye would call it as NIL because it would ( correctly ) determine the ball hitting the post…but can't determine that it would actually go between the posts…. So anybody with an ounce of intelligence can see that this is a flawed system… End of argument

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 31/07/2024 11:52:16    2563223

Link

Its just a pity they cant get it right . I have watched Damian Comers point several times and from several angles, spoken to people who had seen it from different angles and the only conclusion I have is that it was absolutely a point.
These things happen and over the course of a game it generally balances out.
I do think though that it was more significant than the point itself. Damian was struggling to get in to the game, and getting that score should have boosted his confidence.
Before I get accused of having sour grapes, I have to say that Armagh are worthy champions and even if that score was given and the game ended in a draw , I am thinking that Armagh would have won in extra time ( they finished the 70 mins with a stronger team than us).
However, as part of my personal therapy to get over the disappointment I keep telling myself that since that was a score the game was 0-14 to 1-11 . Sad I know, but we all have our own ways of dealing with defeat.

anotheralias (Galway) - Posts: 933 - 31/07/2024 12:02:59    2563227

Link

The BBC box is directly behind the angle where Comer took the shot. McConville wrote it down. Mickey Harte said it wasn't even above the posts. Also mentioned Comer went in unhappy to the umpire after. McConville said Comer wasn't happy because he knew it was a point, because it was one. Very strange

smallfrank (Galway) - Posts: 429 - 31/07/2024 12:12:01    2563228

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "The problem I see with hawk eye is that if say Armaghs late point that went over off the post had to be kicked higher and kept the same line but was above the post Hawk Eye would call it as NIL because it would ( correctly ) determine the ball hitting the post…but can't determine that it would actually go between the posts…. So anybody with an ounce of intelligence can see that this is a flawed system… End of argument"
I have suggested bringing in an umpires call similar to cricket.

This would mean umpires can't signal for Hawkeye the must signal point or wide.

If Hawkeye shows part the ball over the post we go with umpire decision.

Only downside is you could have two shots which are near identical where one is given a point another a wide depending on umpires decision.

Like rugby tmo depending what questions the ref asks TMO influence the decision

jm25 (Galway) - Posts: 1259 - 31/07/2024 12:28:35    2563233

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "The problem I see with hawk eye is that if say Armaghs late point that went over off the post had to be kicked higher and kept the same line but was above the post Hawk Eye would call it as NIL because it would ( correctly ) determine the ball hitting the post…but can't determine that it would actually go between the posts…. So anybody with an ounce of intelligence can see that this is a flawed system… End of argument"
Can you not understand that a ball that goes higher than the post and over the post (however marginally) is a wide under the rules whether decided by hawkeye or umpires. You say that as an umpire you have credited these as scores.
This is the only thing that is flawed and faulty in this issue, your decision making as an umpire.

sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 782 - 31/07/2024 12:55:55    2563239

Link

The amount of scores in both codes that have been got correct is among one of the best additions to our sport. I have said it before there is an element in our game who don't want decisions by the ref or umpires to be correct. Some thing to whine about or excuses for losing. Complaining about the one in a million that goes over the post is another piece of b. s. Anyway if the rule is a point is scored by the ball going between the uprights I am okay with that. After all if it went over the height of the uprights that is not between the posts.

Canuck (Waterford) - Posts: 2854 - 31/07/2024 13:28:12    2563243

Link

Replying To sligo joe:  "Can you not understand that a ball that goes higher than the post and over the post (however marginally) is a wide under the rules whether decided by hawkeye or umpires. You say that as an umpire you have credited these as scores.
This is the only thing that is flawed and faulty in this issue, your decision making as an umpire."
No my decision making was never called into question but this ridiculous hawk eye farce is making a mockery of the sport…. How many legitimate scores has it ruled out in its time… We all remember the famous one in the semi final against Galway that went straight over the black spot from a 45… That was even embarrassing for the referee and 2 umpires who stood there and allowed it to happen… It took until half time for someone else to bring it to their attention and therefore getting it changed and the useless Hawk eye stood down…. As I say a flawed system that has caused more problems than it has solved….

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 31/07/2024 14:30:49    2563255

Link

Replying To Canuck:  "The amount of scores in both codes that have been got correct is among one of the best additions to our sport. I have said it before there is an element in our game who don't want decisions by the ref or umpires to be correct. Some thing to whine about or excuses for losing. Complaining about the one in a million that goes over the post is another piece of b. s. Anyway if the rule is a point is scored by the ball going between the uprights I am okay with that. After all if it went over the height of the uprights that is not between the posts."
So over the height of the posts but directly over the black spot you think that's not a score….that's basically what you have just said… and why would anyone want the decisions by the referee or umpire to be incorrect…? Are you mad or just smoking the wrong stuff by any chance…?

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 31/07/2024 14:38:24    2563258

Link

I'm saying for years the GAA should consider introducing a net across the highest points of the uprights down to the top top of the goals. Then if somebody scores a point, the ball or sliotar will hit the upper net and fall down behind the goals. If they miss or hit it over the upper net then consider it wide. No need for hawk eye anymore and one umpire at each goal would suffice going forward. Easily enough replicated at every club pitch in the country also.

LimerickandProud (Limerick) - Posts: 92 - 31/07/2024 16:46:41    2563277

Link

Replying To LimerickandProud:  "I'm saying for years the GAA should consider introducing a net across the highest points of the uprights down to the top top of the goals. Then if somebody scores a point, the ball or sliotar will hit the upper net and fall down behind the goals. If they miss or hit it over the upper net then consider it wide. No need for hawk eye anymore and one umpire at each goal would suffice going forward. Easily enough replicated at every club pitch in the country also."
Not sure how practical it would be at club grounds but I have heard of worse ideas… Hawk eye for one

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 31/07/2024 18:11:41    2563289

Link

Waterford Whispers news would baulk at posting some of the stuff posted here lately, nets at top of posts, points awarded when ball not between posts, Jarlath Burns' speech causing offence. Pity to see a good forum reduced to trite posts

Claretandblue (Westmeath) - Posts: 1833 - 31/07/2024 18:29:52    2563292

Link

Replying To LimerickandProud:  "I'm saying for years the GAA should consider introducing a net across the highest points of the uprights down to the top top of the goals. Then if somebody scores a point, the ball or sliotar will hit the upper net and fall down behind the goals. If they miss or hit it over the upper net then consider it wide. No need for hawk eye anymore and one umpire at each goal would suffice going forward. Easily enough replicated at every club pitch in the country also."
Maybe put couple feet onto uprights as well.Hawkeye is only used a handful if times and sometimes it's like they just use it so they can justify the cost.

Alwaysencourage (Galway) - Posts: 343 - 31/07/2024 18:40:22    2563293

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "No my decision making was never called into question but this ridiculous hawk eye farce is making a mockery of the sport…. How many legitimate scores has it ruled out in its time… We all remember the famous one in the semi final against Galway that went straight over the black spot from a 45… That was even embarrassing for the referee and 2 umpires who stood there and allowed it to happen… It took until half time for someone else to bring it to their attention and therefore getting it changed and the useless Hawk eye stood down…. As I say a flawed system that has caused more problems than it has solved…."
You said you indicated points scored for balls that you judged to have passed over the top of the upright. That your decisions were not called into question is irrelevant you acted wrongly according to the rules whether through ignorance (which seems to be a forte of yours) or a simple refusal to adjudicate correctly according to rule.

sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 782 - 31/07/2024 19:14:58    2563298

Link

In the same way the pole vault height has increased over the years can the height of the posts in The main grounds not be increases to corelate to players increase in putting ball over bar. Surely some anorak out there can explain to us the design of posts and how high they can go??!!

Onion_Sack (Dublin) - Posts: 249 - 31/07/2024 20:35:36    2563302

Link

Replying To sligo joe:  "You said you indicated points scored for balls that you judged to have passed over the top of the upright. That your decisions were not called into question is irrelevant you acted wrongly according to the rules whether through ignorance (which seems to be a forte of yours) or a simple refusal to adjudicate correctly according to rule."
I didn't act wrongly as I made the call that if the ball had hit the post it would still have gone between the posts ( same as Armaghs point Sunday )… The rare occasion when this had to be explained every referee agreed with my interpretation…. Are you trying to say all these referee's are wrong too…?

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 01/08/2024 07:10:58    2563333

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "I didn't act wrongly as I made the call that if the ball had hit the post it would still have gone between the posts ( same as Armaghs point Sunday )… The rare occasion when this had to be explained every referee agreed with my interpretation…. Are you trying to say all these referee's are wrong too…?"
Dig up to get out of the hole.

But you said when the ball goes directly over post you give a point. I don't know how many times you have to be it is wrong whatever you agree with the refs pre game

Yes without doubt all those refs are wrong too if they agree a ball going over the post is a point.

This is resembling Fr Ted explaining to Dougal near and far away

jm25 (Galway) - Posts: 1259 - 01/08/2024 08:41:09    2563340

Link

Replying To jm25:  "Dig up to get out of the hole.

But you said when the ball goes directly over post you give a point. I don't know how many times you have to be it is wrong whatever you agree with the refs pre game

Yes without doubt all those refs are wrong too if they agree a ball going over the post is a point.

This is resembling Fr Ted explaining to Dougal near and far away"
And you are Dougal.... If the ball crosses over the top of the post and the umpire and referee determines that the ball would have went between the posts if making contact then who are you to say they are wrong…. are you some sort of expert or something..? All on here are missing the main point that Hawk eyes calls every shot that makes even the slightest contact with the simulated uprights as being a miss… That's why the line shown is often inside the post and the caption comes up as a NIL… this is what happened with Comers effort on Sunday.. BBC showed that nearly all of the ball was inside the post but it came up as a NIL.. and you agrees with this…?

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 2811 - 01/08/2024 10:08:42    2563353

Link

It's amusing to see ForeverBlue2 continue to dig his heels in when he's so clearly wrong, but he did say something at one stage that has had me thinking.

Consider the case where a ball passes directly over the black spot at the centre of the crossbar, but also passes above the height of the posts. This is the best I can do by way of graphically representing it here:

o
| |
| |
| |
---------
| |

The ball is clearly passing between the planes of where the posts would be if they were taller. However, it's not passing between the posts themselves. Therefore, a strict interpretation of the Rule Book means this is not a point.

To be clear - I'm not suggesting a referee or umpire should not award a point there. I'm suggesting it's an anomaly of the Rule Book that maybe should be addressed.

Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2487 - 01/08/2024 10:22:10    2563356

Link