BritinUSA Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 USPSA Rule: 11.1.5 Retain Evidence – An appellant is required to inform the Range Master of his wish to present his appeal to the Arbitration Committee and may request that the officials retain any and all relevant documentary or other evidence pending the hearing. Photos, audio and/or video recordings will not be accepted as evidence. I have provided video/photographic coverage of USPSA/IPSC matches for a few years now and I have seen questionable DQ's and violations that should have resulted in a DQ. So I am wondering if USPSA should consider video evidence in DQ-only situations. I am not advocating video evidence from competitors or media but rather official video provided by some of the small unobtrusive video cameras that are now available. Such cameras would only be required on stages where there is a strong likelihood of sweeping or 90 violations and the camera would be placed at the correct point (such as pointing towards the start position along the 90 degree line). If the RO calls for a DQ or believes that a DQ offense MAY have occurred then the memory card of the camera can be removed and handed to the RM for review, a replacement card could then be inserted allowing the other competitors to continue the course of fire while under review. If there are no issues with the squad then the memory card can be reset ready for the next squad. Our sport moves at lightening fast speeds and violations can occur in the blink of an eye, competitors have most likely escaped from a DQ situations because of the speed that the violation occurred; Similarly RO's may think they have seen a DQ offense when in fact they were mistaken (everyone is fallible, competitor and RO alike) so the use of video evidence may help to alleviate errors in both directions. I am not suggesting the use of such video for foot-faults or other procedural violations as that may slow down the match as every minor problem is 'red-flagged', but rather it would only apply for safety/DQ situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 No. How many times have we seen a video or picture that looked one way and in actuality it was totally distorted as to angle, distance, etc.? I say leave it as is and make the calls as you actually SEE them. If you can't make the call then don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctay Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 The only issue I have is that this kind of opens up a lot of other possible issues. For example: How good of an angle does the camera really have? I know it is tough to really figure out exactly where a camera should be to capture a specific shot so I expect it will be tough for RM and MD's to position the camera's to capture what they actually want in the right angle. I can see quite a few competitors arguing that if video evidence is good enough for a 180 call, it should be good enough for some other call - procedural, reloading AD, what have you. Everyone with a camera will be wanting to use the video to make an argument for something. What if the camera gets bumped or battery dies or gets shut off and not turned back on? That seems like it would lead to a situation where one competitor gets the benefit (or detriment) of video evidence while another may not. I really do think at some point we will go to video evidence, I just don't think we are there yet. When camera's get a little cheaper and batteries get a little better we will be closer to working this out. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 It would be necessary to provide equivalent video coverage for ALL competitors, meaning lighting, position,etc would have to be "calibrated" and consistent for all participants over multiple days. That would be difficult at Level 3 matches like Area 2 that push dawn and dusk. Rain is another factor as is equipment reliability. It could be done but it is worth the effort? If we think there is a big issue with reliability of RO judgements, why stop at "DQ situations"? There will be pressure to bring in instant replay for all aspects of the game. Let's not do that until we can have NFL-like coverage (at least).Later,ChuckPS: And I will call interference if a drone comes into the shooters FOV... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parallax3D Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Video evidence is obviously COMPLETELY trustworthy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Video evidence is obviously COMPLETELY trustworthy! What do you mean! I am totaly sure that guy does not have a right hand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester121 Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 No. How many times have we seen a video or picture that looked one way and in actuality it was totally distorted as to angle, distance, etc.? I say leave it as is and make the calls as you actually SEE them. If you can't make the call then don't. I agree. A stationary camera cannot be pre-adjusted in anticipation of precisely where the competitor's muzzle will be when it crosses the supposed "probably" 180 degree spot. If I'm 6" further back from the reference point, it might look like I broke the 180, when in fact I was farther away than the other guys. This is exacerbated by the very wide angle lenses that are normally used on the small Go-Pro type cameras. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 24, 2014 Share Posted October 24, 2014 Not unless you're going to hire people who are expert videographers to take care of camera set-up, filming, and interpretation of what the video shows.... The average layperson has no business making calls based on photographs or videos..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitedog Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Nope. Too difficult to really know from a picture. If the RO saw it, then it happened. If not...well it didn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stumpyv8 Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 Yeah, bolt GoPros to their heads Every other main stream sport has incorporated technology at top level. (even that wierd frenchie Sep Blatter has finally decided that soccer should have goal line technlogy) I don't go for the "if you can't have it at local level you shouldn't have it at top level" argument. Look at Baseball, Football, Rugby, Soccer, Cricket. All massive sports, all have technology to help the refs at top level but not at grass roots It would act as protection for the ROs and also gives the MDs the opportunity to review issues. It would help as evidence if there were a law suit & could be used as footage for future marketing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeeter Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 while i agree that we can't have video on the range to maybe catch a DQ. i've always thought that if a video was taking that clearly shows that the RO got a DQ call wrong then it should be used to get the right call. while i know that it can't be used for everyone but if there is a chance to get the right call one in a hundred then we should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twodownzero Posted October 25, 2014 Share Posted October 25, 2014 No professional sport would have a review process without professional camera crews and HD video. We don't have that and thus our calls should stand as made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frag316 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Sorry, but a "replay" is really only useful in sports where you have trained (or allegedly trained) personnel to review the footage and make a call. At the collegiate level, there are rarely replays outside of football and basketball, and none of the conferences use replays to determine an official's call, AFAIK. At the professional level, replays have only recently been introduced to baseball and they don't impact awarding of red or yellow cards in soccer. Even in football, you can't use a replay to overturn a call where a player is ejected from the game (e.g., in college football, the "targeting" penalty is not subject to review--the call of the on-field official stands at all times). Furthermore, how often do the replay officials get it wrong? As an example, I watched the fOSU and Penn State game on Saturday night. The network replay clearly showed that PSU did not throw an interception, which was the ruling on the field. However, due to technical issues, the replay officials did not see the correct angles to review the play and did not overturn the officials' call of an interception. PSU got screwed, especially since they lost by a TD in 2OT and fOSU's subsequent drive after the turnover was for a touchdown. Unless you can level the playing field by providing, setting up, and running the appropriate video equipment for every single competitor AND provide officials who are trained to review the footage and make a call, I think we should probably put a pin in this one. The other thing that makes this extraordinarily difficult is the fact that the games where replays are available for review of officials' calls are single events--the replay equipment is set up solely for that contest and no other. During a major match (which is the only place this would work), you really have 10-30 separate contests going on simultaneously (every stage), those contests turn over approximately every five to seven minutes (from the competitor getting to the shooting area and making ready to the final reset prior to the next competitor shooting), AND the players change venues about once an hour. During the course of a major, you'll have 200ish people shooting anywhere from 5-15 separate contests every day. That's somewhere between 1000 and 3000 events. Even if you only looked at DQable events, you're still talking about cuing up the video and reviewing it, AFTER getting the call from the MD and being given the parameters of what you're looking for, for anywhere from 10-20 people during the course of a given match. How many of those could a replay official possibly review in a day? How long do you give them to make the call? What happens with the squad while that's going on? What happens to the rest of the squads if the guy who gets the review is allowed to continue and he's two (or more) stages behind? I just don't see it, at least not right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 (edited) Every other main stream sport has incorporated technology at top level. Since when is USPSA a main stream sport? We wouldn't even make it onto the "ocho". Edited October 27, 2014 by Sarge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadeslade Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Bring video in, not that big a deal. Is always helpful. You guys got some concrete examples of video in sport really f******* it up? Getting homered by refs is a far more frequent happening, which is why football and basketball started using it. And nick, just like we don't need "professional ROs", we don't need "professional" videographers. So many anti- anti- people. Really amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LilBunniFuFu Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Make the calls as you actually SEE them. If you can't make the call then don't. That's how I was trained as an RO, leave the cameras out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frag316 Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Bring video in, not that big a deal. Is always helpful. You guys got some concrete examples of video in sport really f******* it up? Getting homered by refs is a far more frequent happening, which is why football and basketball started using it. And nick, just like we don't need "professional ROs", we don't need "professional" videographers. So many anti- anti- people. Really amazing. OK, so here's a hypothetical: You're shooting a stage at an Area match, and one of the guys in the squad has a buddy who's taking video. He does something, gets the DQ, argues it, they allow the video his buddy shot to overturn the DQ, he continues in the match. You're the next competitor. You wind up doing the EXACT same thing in the EXACT spot and the RO DQs you for it. You don't have a buddy taking video. You're DQ'd and the other guy is not, for the same infraction. Are you going to be OK with that? And does that provide a level playing field? If you answer anything but "no" to either question, you're kidding yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ziebart Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Frag316 Did you read the entire original post? It specifically said there would be official cameras and competitor video would not be accepted. Personally it seems like a lot of work for little payoff, but nobody knows until it is tried. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Makdaddy Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 a Cable mounted video camera system over the pit that follows the competitor with a top down view as he moves through COF. But video only to be viewed if there is a disputed DQ. Video of shooters will be available for purchase after the match... for a nominal fee of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remoandiris Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 a Cable mounted video camera system over the pit that follows the competitor with a top down view as he moves through COF. But video only to be viewed if there is a disputed DQ. Each shooter will get a red flag to throw to challenge the call. Flag has to be tossed before the start signal of the next shooter. Only 2 challenges per match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadeslade Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 a Cable mounted video camera system over the pit that follows the competitor with a top down view as he moves through COF. But video only to be viewed if there is a disputed DQ. Video of shooters will be available for purchase after the match... for a nominal fee of course Pretty cool idea. Rio Salado had that video camera in a box on stage 2 or 3 for a while, don't know if it's still there.Put a quarter in, get video. Video is used everywhere in shooting-training, practice, recon, missions, daily work, match videos,instructional material. No reason to keep it out of USPSA rules interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jadeslade Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 a Cable mounted video camera system over the pit that follows the competitor with a top down view as he moves through COF. But video only to be viewed if there is a disputed DQ. Each shooter will get a red flag to throw to challenge the call. Flag has to be tossed before the start signal of the next shooter. Only 2 challenges per match. Well, you need to lose something if your challenge is wrong-so +2 for unsuccessful challenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remoandiris Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 a Cable mounted video camera system over the pit that follows the competitor with a top down view as he moves through COF. But video only to be viewed if there is a disputed DQ. Each shooter will get a red flag to throw to challenge the call. Flag has to be tossed before the start signal of the next shooter. Only 2 challenges per match. Well, you need to lose something if your challenge is wrong-so +2 for unsuccessful challenge. +2 only happens if the RO is PVH. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 At the "local" level, I would not support it in any manner. At Area and Nationals, I might be able to see a time where it could be valuable, but then it will also encourage stage designers to get closer to the edges and ROs to be out of position because, hey, it is on film. Not sure I would bet on a cost-benefit analysis, nor a pro-con balance sheet, indicating it would be a good idea. USPSA has more pressing needs right now anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted October 27, 2014 Share Posted October 27, 2014 Bring video in, not that big a deal. Is always helpful. You guys got some concrete examples of video in sport really f******* it up? Getting homered by refs is a far more frequent happening, which is why football and basketball started using it. And nick, just like we don't need "professional ROs", we don't need "professional" videographers. So many anti- anti- people. Really amazing. OK, so here's a hypothetical: You're shooting a stage at an Area match, and one of the guys in the squad has a buddy who's taking video. He does something, gets the DQ, argues it, they allow the video his buddy shot to overturn the DQ, he continues in the match. You're the next competitor. You wind up doing the EXACT same thing in the EXACT spot and the RO DQs you for it. You don't have a buddy taking video. You're DQ'd and the other guy is not, for the same infraction. Are you going to be OK with that? And does that provide a level playing field? If you answer anything but "no" to either question, you're kidding yourself. Exactly the problem with allowing competitor video Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now