National Forum

Hawk Eye

(Oldest Posts First) - Go To The Latest Post


Sure Hawkeye is only a cartoon, you might as well use bugs bunny.
Lads make up the nil and Ta stuff

maroondiesel (Mayo) - Posts: 1218 - 30/07/2024 15:38:24    2563047

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "When umpiring football and the ball goes directly over the post and not to the outside of it, I always call a score as there is no way of saying if it hit the post that it might well have gone over anyway… I would side with the guy who got his shot away and it was that close…. Think of the Armagh point that went over of the post … if he kicked it higher and it went over the post hawk eye would have called it wide and Armagh might not have won… It's a flawed system"
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.

Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2636 - 30/07/2024 15:56:56    2563054

Link

Is there anyway we can increase height of posts or would they then sway??

There was no doubt in my mind comer would be given we were right on 45 behind

jm25 (Galway) - Posts: 1298 - 30/07/2024 15:59:50    2563056

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "When umpiring football and the ball goes directly over the post and not to the outside of it, I always call a score as there is no way of saying if it hit the post that it might well have gone over anyway… I would side with the guy who got his shot away and it was that close…. Think of the Armagh point that went over of the post … if he kicked it higher and it went over the post hawk eye would have called it wide and Armagh might not have won… It's a flawed system"
The rules clearly state that to score a point the ball must pass between the posts. If the ball strikes the upright and is deflected and passes between the posts a point is awarded but if the ball is higher than the upright and over it then it is not deflected and does not pass "between the posts" which the rule says it must for a point to be awarded. I suggest that is why the hawkeye is calibrated to indicate "níl" for a ball striking the virtual continuation of the post, even on the inside. If you have been awarding points for balls travelling over the top of the post I respectfully suggest that you have erred because the rule is clear "the ball must pass between the posts" (whether by deflection or not).

sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 808 - 30/07/2024 16:30:18    2563068

Link

Replying To 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…

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3091 - 30/07/2024 16:51:15    2563076

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "When umpiring football and the ball goes directly over the post and not to the outside of it, I always call a score as there is no way of saying if it hit the post that it might well have gone over anyway… I would side with the guy who got his shot away and it was that close…. Think of the Armagh point that went over of the post … if he kicked it higher and it went over the post hawk eye would have called it wide and Armagh might not have won… It's a flawed system"
And you wonder why football is in a state? When you have the likes of yourself who clearly cannot do the thing right. A ball of any sort going over a post is not a score. A point is awarded when the ball goes over the cross bar and between the posts. It's simple for most people to understand. The system isn't flawed.

Saynothing (Tyrone) - Posts: 2162 - 30/07/2024 17:08:08    2563083

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "You are right about the hurling… if a goalie puts his hurl above the bar to stop a point going over and the umpire calls for Hawk Eye to intervene it will always give a point as it can only determine if the ball is between the uprights but can't determine if it's actually gone fully behind the crossbar… It's a totally over expensive system that the GAA have great faith in despite all its flaws and failures….."
Completely wrong. Not for the first time. Hawkeye determines if ball has cleared bar. Happened in Tipp Wexford semi five years ago.

Claretandblue (Westmeath) - Posts: 1933 - 30/07/2024 17:34:38    2563095

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "When umpiring football and the ball goes directly over the post and not to the outside of it, I always call a score as there is no way of saying if it hit the post that it might well have gone over anyway… I would side with the guy who got his shot away and it was that close…. Think of the Armagh point that went over of the post … if he kicked it higher and it went over the post hawk eye would have called it wide and Armagh might not have won… It's a flawed system"
You simply don't know the rules. Ball directly over post is a wide.

Claretandblue (Westmeath) - Posts: 1933 - 30/07/2024 17:35:51    2563096

Link

Replying To 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."
From plenty angles the ball actually wasn't higher than posts and went between.Hawkeye is a load of rubbish.Saying that we still should have won even without that but we didn't and that's all there is about it.

Alwaysencourage (Galway) - Posts: 369 - 30/07/2024 17:48:09    2563099

Link

Replying To jm25:  "Is there anyway we can increase height of posts or would they then sway??

There was no doubt in my mind comer would be given we were right on 45 behind"
It was a clear score. The GAA went with the cheapest option not the most reliable in Hawkeye. The fact the cartoon looks completely different to the flight of the ball raises many questions. In hurling the ball doesn't moving like in football. How is Hawkeye set up differently for each code?

Kew (Galway) - Posts: 110 - 30/07/2024 18:24:40    2563104

Link

Replying To Claretandblue:  "Completely wrong. Not for the first time. Hawkeye determines if ball has cleared bar. Happened in Tipp Wexford semi five years ago."
No it can't … that's the problem with it.. It can only detect if it's over the bar and between the posts but not behind the bar…

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3091 - 30/07/2024 18:35:29    2563108

Link

Would it be worth trying a second cross bar at the top of the posts and make that area a clearly defined point scoring zone. In hurling it might actually stop the point bore from 100 yards.

MLR (Carlow) - Posts: 77 - 30/07/2024 18:57:35    2563114

Link

Replying To Saynothing:  "And you wonder why football is in a state? When you have the likes of yourself who clearly cannot do the thing right. A ball of any sort going over a post is not a score. A point is awarded when the ball goes over the cross bar and between the posts. It's simple for most people to understand. The system isn't flawed."
The umpire should be simply able to make the call… In football anyway… The line tracker on the hawk eye showed the ball going inside but came up as a Nil… so the system is plainly flawed unless you are a pure simpleton…

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3091 - 30/07/2024 19:20:11    2563122

Link

It was Mickey Harte and Oisin McConville on BBC whose studio is in line with it that both said it was a point.
Harte said it wasn't even above the posts. Very strange

smallfrank (Galway) - Posts: 443 - 30/07/2024 20:43:28    2563135

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "
Replying To 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.

Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2636 - 30/07/2024 21:03:45    2563141

Link

Replying To MLR:  "Would it be worth trying a second cross bar at the top of the posts and make that area a clearly defined point scoring zone. In hurling it might actually stop the point bore from 100 yards."
That's a thought I've actually had myself a few times. Make all goalposts a regulation height, and put a second crossbar across the very top of them.

Not sure how practical it would be though, if every set of posts in every club ground had to have them. For one thing, probably far more likely that goalposts would be damaged by strong winds in the sort of storms we have every winter.

Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2636 - 30/07/2024 21:06:18    2563144

Link

Replying To Pikeman96:  "
Replying To 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…

ForeverBlue2 (Cavan) - Posts: 3091 - 31/07/2024 08:20:44    2563176

Link

Folks, there are a good number of phone camera views online now from multiple angles all providing the same evidence - that Damien Comer's shot was over the bar. You can say, sure its just phone cameras, but even in video setting they're at a higher resolution than a lot of TV cameras used today. All the detail is online to prove this point - I won't go into pixelation here!
Also, Comer himself is a fair guy and certainly not prone to claims and exaggeration and he's absolutely adamant that it clearly went over. Armagh folks around us even said it! His marker knew it.
Hawkeye is flawed and I know some folks working there and rather than be accused of a conspiracy theory, they know quite a bit about what it can and can't detect and I'm pretty sure from what I'm hearing that it was wrong here. The ones to blame are the umpires though, they could have seen it go inside the top of the post. Anyway, there's nothing we can do on that one now, but Hawkeye has to improved or be ripped out.

togoutlads (Galway) - Posts: 979 - 31/07/2024 10:03:08    2563198

Link

@ForeverBlue2 - you're flip-flopping between talking about three different things:

1. A hypothetical shot that goes directly over a post in a match you're umpiring yourself, where you say you'd give a point, even though the Rule Book shows you'd clearly be wrong in doing so.

2. An Armagh point where the ball went over the bar (and between the posts!) after first striking the inside of one of the posts.

3. A Galway shot which Hawkeye ruled as a 'Níl' but where some pundits on the BBC felt a point should have been awarded.

I only became involved here to address point number 1, and as stated, others here have pointed out the error of your ways in that one too.

Pikeman96 (Wexford) - Posts: 2636 - 31/07/2024 10:55:48    2563207

Link

Replying To ForeverBlue2:  "
Replying To 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.

sligo joe (Dublin) - Posts: 808 - 31/07/2024 11:03:48    2563209

Link