Funnily nuff I did some reading around after our last discussion

The tech specs of the manufactures.

Not their advertising blurb.

Not the back of a fag packet calculations that you can find on twitter.

The actual tolerances of the kit they're using.

(it's spread across a number of patent specs).

Currently the max accuracy is limited by:

1) the number of high readout cameras around the pitch (Nb - the ones that the screen feed come from aren't fast enough for the theoretical accuracy that they quote, nor are they placed regularly enough, nor do they track well enough)

2) the placement of tracking chips (whereabouts in the boot/on the body/within the interior of the ball.

3) timing - the system has a timing slot from which it is all drawn - this in turn gives a bandwidth of wiggle room

4) computationally, bringing in all the feeds and then guesstimating how they interrelate.

In the period since I last worked on it the kit hasn't been upgraded at most of the grounds and, at best, the tolerance would be around 20cm. Being generous.

The stuff they're talking about bringing in can narrow down this further, but it's not as accurate as the commentators assert.

I think it's the future and could be great now, just think it's not being used properly.

Still justice seems to have been done for the Dutch now anyway.

Posted By: Cardiff Canary, Jul 13, 21:31:52