A

PROJECT
On

HOTSPOT AND HAWKEYE TECHNOLOGY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT OF Master of Business Administration Second Year SUBMITTED TO

GANDHINAGAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

MBA DEPARTMENT
AFFILIATED TO GUJARAT TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY AHMADABAD

Prepared by: Rushang Patel

Enrollment No. 127150592031

YEAR 2013

OBJECTIVES
Useful for the techicnical department to improve to game Hawkeye using for refereed system Find the defect in the players or decision system Its give the players to improve the personal game

improvement and performance

 HOTSPOT: History: Hot Spot is an infra-red imaging system used in cricket to determine whether the ball has struck the batsman, bat or pad. Hot Spot requires two infra-red cameras on opposite sides of the ground above the field of play that are continuously recording an image. Any suspected snick or bat/pad event can be verified by examining the infrared image, which usually shows a bright spot where contact friction from the ball has elevated the local temperature. Where referrals to an off-field third umpire are permitted, the technology is used to enhance the on-field umpire's decision-making accuracy. Where referrals are not permitted, the technology is used primarily as an analysis aid for televised coverage. Hot Spot uses technology developed in the military for tank and jet fighter tracking. The technology was founded by French scientist Nicholas Bion, before being worked upon by many companies in Paris and being bought and adopted by the Australian Nine Network. The technology was adapted for television by BBG Sports, the Australian company responsible for the Snickometer, in conjunction with Sky Sports.] The technology was first used during the first Test match of the 2006-07 Ashes at The Gabba, on 23 November 2006. The ICC announced that Hot Spot images would be available for use as part of its ongoing technology trial during the second and third Tests (March 2009) in South Africa. The system was to be available to the third umpire in the event of a player referral. For the 2012 season BBG Sport introduced a new generation of HOT Spot using the very high performance SLX-Hawk thermal imaging cameras provided by UK based SELEX Galileo. These cameras provided sharper images with improved sensitivity and much less motion blur than earlier HOT Spot technologies. As a result, the latest HOT Spot system is able to detect much finer edge nicks than in previous seasons, essentially ending all earlier doubts about the capability of the technology. Following the success of this updated HOT Spot system, BBG Sport and SELEX Galileo signed an exclusivity agreement for the supply of SLX-Hawk cameras for HOT Spot in cricket and other sports.

Mechanism: Hot Spot uses two infra-red cameras positioned at either end of the ground. These cameras sense and measure heat from friction generated by a collision, such as ball on pad, ball on bat, ball on ground or ball on glove. Using a subtraction technique a series of black-and-white negative frames is generated into a computer, precisely localising the ball's point of contact. USE: Its principal application in cricket is in deciding whether the ball has struck the batsman's bat or pad this determination being critical in determining if a batsman is dismissed or not on appeal for LBW or caught. In considering whether a batsman is out when the ball strikes bat then caught by a member of the fielding team or caught in front of the stumps when ball hits pad, one of the most difficult decisions is whether the ball struck the pad only, or the bat only, or (if it struck both) whether the pad or the bat was struck first. If the ball strikes the bat only, or strikes the bat followed by the pad, then the batsman could be out caught but not LBW. If the ball strikes the pad in front of the stumps or inline with stumps, then the batsman could be out LBW but not caught. If the ball strikes the pad followed by the bat, then the batsman could be out LBW or out caught if a fielder catches the ball. The batsman's bat and pad are often close together, and it can be very hard to determine by eye which was struck first, whereas the hotspot technology can often resolve the question. Hot-spot imagery is also used to show which part of the cricket bat hit the ball, as ideally the batsmen try to "middle" the ball i.e. hit it where the sweet spot lies. Hot spot camera provides some valuable information while analysing the strokes played by a batsman. Advantages/Disadvantages: Hot Spot has two main advantages over its competing technology, the Snickometer, which is a sound-detection based system. Snicko meter often produces inconclusive results indicating contact (potentially any combination of bat, pad and ball) only, whereas the Hot Spot clearly shows exactly what the ball strikes. Precise synchronization of the Snickometer sound with associated pictures takes time, making it currently not suitable for use in the umpire decision review system.

Hot Spot technology, even though claimed to be extremely accurate, is not used in many matches. The main reason for this is its expense: $6000 per day for the use of two cameras and $10000 for the use of four cameras. Warren Brennan, the owner of BBG Sports, said the unwillingness of the International Cricket Council or national cricket boards to pay to use the expensive technology had restricted its use: "We won't be supplying Hot Spot to the World Cup next year, even for the semis or finals, if the cricket boards want a feed of that for adjudication purposes, they should contribute to the costs. The Ashes could be the last hurrah." In the India-England ODI Series in 2011, there were controversial decisions based on the Hot Spot technology going against India's Rahul Dravid on more than one occasion where Hot Spot replays proved inconclusive and yet Dravid was given out. On one occasion, there seemed to be a nick which Hot Spot wasn't able to detect. These incidents threw the role of Hot Spot technology into doubt once again. In the 2013 Ashes, many decisions again cast doubts on Hotspot Technology.

Hawk-Eye Umpire Decision Review System

 HAEK-EYE:
Hawk-Eye is a complex computer system used officially in numerous sports such as cricket, tennis, Gaelic football, hurling and association football, to visually track the trajectory of the ball and display a record of its most statistically likely path as a moving image. Hawk-Eye was developed in the United Kingdom by Dr Paul Hawkins. The system was originally implemented in 2001 for television purposes in cricket. The system works via six (sometimes seven) high-performance cameras, normally positioned on the underside of the stadium roof, which track the ball from different angles. The video from the six cameras is then triangulated and combined to create a three-dimensional representation of the trajectory of the ball. Hawk-Eye is not infallible and is accurate to within 5 millimetres (0.19 inch) but is generally trusted as an impartial second opinion in sports. It has been accepted by governing bodies in tennis, cricket and Association football as a technological means of adjudication. Hawk-Eye is used for the Challenge System since 2006 in tennis and Umpire Decision Review System in cricket since 2009. Hawk-Eye is currently in the process of being implemented in association football for the Goal Decision System. The system was rolled out in time for the 2013-14 Premier League season as a means of goal-line technology.

Method of operation:
All Hawk-Eye systems are based on the principles of triangulation using the visual images and timing data provided by a number of high-speed video cameras located at different locations

and angles around the area of play. For tennis there are ten cameras. The system rapidly processes the video feeds by a high-speed camera and ball tracker. A data store contains a predefined model of the playing area and includes data on the rules of the game. In each frame sent from each camera, the system identifies the group of pixels which corresponds to the image of the ball. It then calculates for each frame the 3D position of the ball by comparing its position on at least two of the physically separate cameras at the same instant in time. A succession of frames builds up a record of the path along which the ball has travelled. It also "predicts" the future flight path of the ball and where it will interact with any of the playing area features already programmed into the database. The system can also interpret these interactions to decide infringements of the rules of the game. The system generates a graphic image of the ball path and playing area, which means that information can be provided to judges, television viewers or coaching staff in near real time. The pure tracking system is combined with a backend database and archiving capabilities so that it is possible to extract and analyse trends and statistics about individual players, games, ball-to-ball comparisons, etc.

EVALOUATION OF HAWKEYE TECHNOLOGY:

It is inverted by, Dr Paul Hawkins who used to be cricketer and played for country side. He is PhD in artificial intelligence

Hawk-Eye Innovations Ltd:

Engineers at Roke Manor Research Limited, a Siemens subsidiary in Romsey, England, developed the system in 2001. Dr Paul Hawkins and David Sherry submitted a patent for the United Kingdom but withdrew their request. All of the technology and intellectual property was spun off into a separated company, Hawk-Eye Innovations Ltd, based in Winchester, Hampshire. On 14 June 2006, a group of investors led by the Wisden Group bought the company, who included Mark Getty, a member of the wealthy USA family and business dynasty. The acquisition was intended to strengthen Wisden's presence in cricket, and allow it to enter tennis and other international sports, with Hawk-Eye working on implementing a system for basketball. According to Hawk-Eye's website, the system produces much more data than that shown on television, which could be easily shown on the internet. Put up for sale in September 2010, it was sold as a complete entity to Japanese electronic giant Sony in March 2011.

Cricket:
The technology was first used by Channel 4 during a Test match between England and Pakistan on Lord's Cricket Ground, on 21 May 2001. It is used primarily by the majority of television networks to track the trajectory of balls in flight. In the winter season of 2008/2009 the ICC trialled a referral system where Hawk-Eye was used for referring decisions to the third umpire if a team disagreed with an LBW decision. The third umpire was able to look at what the ball actually did up to the point when it hit the batsman, but could not look at the predicted flight of the ball after it hit the batsman. Its major use in cricket broadcasting is in analysing leg before wicket decisions, where the likely path of the ball can be projected forward, through the batsman's legs, to see if it would have hit the stumps. Consultation of the third umpire, for conventional slow motion or Hawk-Eye, on leg before wicket decisions, is currently sanctioned in international cricket even though doubts remain about its accuracy in cricket. The Hawk-eye referral for LBW decision is based on three criteria:

Where the ball pitched The location of impact with the leg of the batsman

The projected path of the ball past the batsman

In all three cases, marginal calls result in the on-field call being maintained. Due to its realtime coverage of bowling speed, the systems are also used to show delivery patterns of bowler's behaviour such as line and length, or swing/turn information. At the end of an over, all six deliveries are often shown simultaneously to show a bowler's variations, such as slower deliveries, bouncers and leg-cutters. A complete record of a bowler can also be shown over the course of a match. Batsmen also benefit from the analysis of Hawk-Eye, as a record can be brought up of the deliveries batsmen scored from. These are often shown as a 2-D silhouetted figure of a batsmen and colour-coded dots of the balls faced by the batsman. Information such as the exact spot where the ball pitches or speed of the ball from the bowler's hand (to gauge batsman reaction time) can also help in post-match analysis.

BOWLER: See how fast they can bowl Watch each delivery back in virtual reality Measer how far they turning the ball through spin, swing or seam

BATSMAN: Anlayze ttheir play against spin seam or swing Improve their awerness footwork and standing Genrate wagonweel

Tennis:
In Serena Williams's quarterfinal loss to Jennifer Capriati at the 2004 US Open, many crucial calls were contested by Williams, and TV replays confirmed that the calls were indeed erroneous. Though the calls themselves were not reversed, the chair umpire Mariana Alves was removed from consideration for further matches at that year's U.S. Open. These errors prompted talks about line calling assistance especially as the Auto-Ref system was being tested by the U.S. Open at that time and was shown to be very accurate. In late 2005 Hawk-Eye was tested by the International Tennis Federation (ITF) in New York City and was passed for professional use. Hawk-Eye reported that the New York tests involved 80 shots being measured by the ITF's high speed camera, a device similar to MacCAM. During an early test of the system at an exhibition tennis tournament in Australia (seen on local TV), there was an instance when the tennis ball was shown as "Out", but the accompanying word was "In".

This was explained to be an error in the way the tennis ball was shown on the graphical display as a circle, rather than as an ellipse. This was immediately corrected. Hawk-Eye has been used in television coverage of several major tennis tournaments, including Wimbledon, the Queen's Club Championships, the Australian Open, the Davis Cup and the Tennis Masters Cup. The US Open Tennis Championship announced they would make official use of the technology for the 2006 US Open where each player receives two challenges per set. It is also used as part of a larger tennis simulation implemented by IBM called PointTracker. The 2006 Hopman Cup in Perth, Western Australia, was the first elite-level tennis tournament where players were allowed to challenge point-ending line calls, which were then reviewed by the referees using Hawk-Eye technology. It used 10 cameras feeding information about ball position to the computers. Michalla Krajicek was the first to use the system. In March 2006, at the Nasdaq-100 Open in Miami, Hawk-Eye was used officially for the first time at a tennis tour event. Later that year, the US Open became the first grand-slam event to use the system during play, allowing players to challenge line calls. The 2007 Australian Open was the first grand-slam tournament of 2007 to implement Hawk-Eye in challenges to line calls, where each tennis player on Rod Laver Arena was allowed 2 incorrect challenges per set and one additional challenge should a tiebreaker be played. In the event of an advantage final set, challenges were reset to 2 for each player every 12 games, i.e. 6 all, 12 all. Controversies followed the event as at times Hawk-Eye produced erroneous output. In 2008, tennis players were allowed 3 incorrect challenges per set instead. Any leftover challenges didn't carry over to the next set. Once, in one of Amlie Mauresmo's matches, she challenged a ball that was called in, Hawk-Eye showed the ball was out by less than a millimetre but the call was allowed to stand. As a result, the point was replayed and Mauresmo didn't lose an incorrect challenge.

Ball compared with impact.

The Hawk-Eye technology was used in the 2007 Dubai Tennis Championships with some minor controversies. Defending champion Rafael Nadal accused the system of incorrectly declaring an out ball to be in following his exit. The umpire had called a ball out; when Mikhail Youzhny challenged the decision, Hawk-Eye said it was in by 3 mm. Youzhny said afterwards that he himself thought the mark may have been wide but then offered that this kind of technology error could easily have been made by linesmen and umpires. Nadal could only shrug, saying that had this system been on clay, the mark would have clearly shown Hawk-Eye to be wrong. The area of the mark left by the ball on a hard court is a portion of the total area that the ball was in contact with the court (a certain amount of pressure is required to create the mark). The 2007 Wimbledon Championships also implemented the Hawk-Eye system as an officiating aid on Centre Court and Court 1, and each tennis player was allowed 3 incorrect challenges per set. If the set produced a tiebreaker, each player was given an additional challenge. Additionally, in the event of a final set (third set in women's or mixed matches, fifth set in men's matches), where there is no tiebreak, each player's number of challenges was reset to three if the game score reached 66, and again at 1212. Teymuraz Gabashvili, in his 1st round match against Roger Federer, made the first ever Hawk-Eye challenge on Centre Court. Additionally, during the finals of Federer againstRafael Nadal, Nadal challenged a shot which was called out. Hawk-Eye showed the ball as in, just clipping the line. The reversal agitated Federer enough for him to request (unsuccessfully) that the umpire turn off the Hawk-Eye technology for the remainder of the match. In the 2009 Australian Open fourth round match between Roger Federer and Tom Berdych, Berdych challenged an out call. The Hawk-Eye system wasn't available when he challenged, likely due to a particularly pronounced shadow on the court. As a result, the original call stood. In the 2009 Indian Wells Masters quarterfinals match between Ivan Ljubii and Andy Murray, Murray challenged an out call. The Hawk-Eye system indicated that the ball landed on the center of the line despite instant replay images showing that the ball was clearly out. It was later revealed that the Hawk-Eye system had mistakenly picked up the second bounce, which was on the line, instead of the first bounce of the ball.] Immediately after the match, Murray apologised to Ljubicic for the call, and acknowledged that the point was out. The Hawk-Eye system was developed as a replay system, originally for TV Broadcast coverage. As such, it initially couldn't call ins and outs live, only the Auto-Ref system could produce live in/out calls as it was developed for instant line calling. Both systems can produce replays.

The Hawk-Eye Innovations website states that the system performs with an average error of 3.6 mm. The standard diameter of a tennis ball is 67 mm, equating to a 5% error relative to ball diameter. This is roughly equivalent to the fluff on the ball.

Association football:
Hawk-Eye has been proposed for use in Association football but has yet to win general approval from the major governing bodies of the sport. The Football Association, English football's governing body, has declared the system as "ready for inspection by FIFA", after tests suggested that the results of a goal-line incident could be relayed to the match referee within half a second (IFAB, the governing body for the Laws of the game, insists on goals being signalled immediately i.e. within five seconds). FIFA secretary general Jerome Valcke admits Hawk-Eye goal-line technology will be considered if the system's developers guarantee a 100% success rate. Football's governing body have previously been reluctant to use video technology to settle on-pitch disputes. Testing of the Hawk-Eye's suitability in football is expected to continue and there could be a trial run in the Premier League, according to Paul Hawkins. "We will speak to FIFA over the next week or so to get the detail, but it looks positive I think," Hawkins said. On 3 March 2012, Hawk-Eye and another system, GoalRef were approved by the IFAB and advanced to a second phase of testing. If either of the two systems meet FIFA's requirements, they may be approved in time for use in the 2014 FIFA World Cup. Hawk-Eye was tested in the Hampshire Senior Cup final between Eastleigh and Totton on 16 May 2012 at Southampton Football Club's St Mary's Stadium, although only FIFA staff had access to the system readings and Hawk-Eye was not available to the match officials to assist with refereeing decisions. On 2 June 2012, the system was tested during a friendly between Belgium and host England in Wembley. During these tests the results of the systems won't be used for the game; the referee won't be informed about the calls from Hawk-Eye. On 5 July 2012 FIFA approved of this technology along with GoalRef to be part of the new goal line technology system.

On 11 April 2013, Hawk-Eye was approved for use in the Premier League from the start of the 2013-14 football season is officially called the Goal Decision System, and it was used for the first time in a game between Liverpool and Stoke City at Anfield on 17 August 2013. It will use seven cameras per goal to analyse whether or not the ball has crossed the line.

Snooker:
At the World Snooker Championship 2007, the BBC used Hawk-Eye for the first time in its television coverage to show player views, particularly in the incidents of potential snookers. [30] It has also been used to demonstrate intended shots by players when the actual shot has gone awry. It is now used by the BBC at every World Championship, as well as some other major tournaments. The BBC uses the system sporadically, for instance in the 2009 Masters at Wembley the Hawk-Eye was at most used once or twice per frame. In contrast to tennis, the Hawk-Eye is never used in snooker to assist referees' decisions.

Gaelic games:
In Ireland, Hawk-Eye was introduced for all Championship matches at Croke Park in Dublin in 2013. This followed consideration by the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) for its use in Gaelic football and hurling. A trial took place in Croke Park on 2 April 2011. The double-header featured football between Dublin and Down and hurling between Dublin and Kilkenny. Over the previous two seasons there had been many calls for the technology to be adopted, especially from Kildare fans, who saw two high profile decisions go against their team in important games. The GAA said it would review the issue after the 2013 Sam Maguire Cup was presented.[31] Hawk-Eye's use was intended to eliminate contentious scores. It was first used in the Championship on Saturday 1 June 2013 for the Kildare versus Offaly game, part of a double header with a second game of Dublin versus Westmeath. It was used to confirm that Offaly substitute Peter Cunningham's attempted point had gone wide 10 minutes into the second half. Use of Hawk-Eye was suspended during the 2013 All-Ireland hurling semi-finals on 18 August due to a human error during an Under-18 hurling game between Limerick and Galway. During the minor game, Hawk-Eye ruled a point for Limerick as a miss although the graphic showed the ball passing inside the posts, causing confusion around the stadium - the referee ultimately waved the valid point wide provoking anger from fans, viewers and TV analysts covering the game live. The system was subsequently stood down for the senior game which followed, owing to "an inconsistency in the generation of a graphic". Limerick, who were narrowly defeated after

extra-time, announced they would be appealing over Hawk-Eye's costly failure. Hawk-Eye apologised for this incident and admitted that it was a result of human error. There have been no further incidents during the GAA. The incident drew attention from the UK, where Hawk-Eye had made its debut in English soccer's Premier League the day before.

Australian football:
On July 4, 2013, the Australian Football League announced that they would be testing Hawk Eye technology to be used in the Score Review process. Hawk Eye was used for all matches played at the MCG during Round 15 of the 2013 AFL Season. The AFL also announced that Hawk Eye was only being tested, and would not be used in any Score Reviews during the round.

Doubts:
Hawk-Eye is now familiar to sport fans around the world for the views it brings into sports like cricket and tennis. Although this new technology has for the most part been embraced, it has been recently criticised by some, particularly some specific, high profile calls[citation
needed]

. The

Australian media in cricket were critical of a specific LBW appeal made by Anil Kumble when Andrew Symonds was batting. The ball, as suggested by Hawk-Eye, would have bounced over the stumps, but to the naked eye looked absolutely out. In the Nadal-Federer final at Wimbledon in 2008, a ball that appeared out was called in by 1 mm, a distance smaller than the advertised margin of error (3.6 mm). Some commentators have criticised the system's 3.6 mm statistical margin of error as too large. Others have noted that while 3.6 mm is extraordinarily accurate, this margin of error is only for the witnessed trajectory of the ball. Its use in broadcasts to predict the trajectory of a ball had it not hit a batsman is less certain, especially in situations where the conditions of the turf would affect its future trajectory, i.e. where the ball is headed to the ground or has only a short hop before hitting the batsman. Currently, the system is not used officially in such circumstances, though it is used in television broadcasts and analysis. In 2008, an article in a peer-reviewed journal consolidated many of these doubts. The authors acknowledged the value of the system, but noted that it was probably fallible to some extent, and that its failure to depict a margin of error gave a spurious depiction of events. The authors also argued that the probable limits to its accuracy were not acknowledged by players, officials, commentators or spectators. They hypothesised that Hawk-Eye may struggle with predicting the

trajectory of a cricket ball after bouncing: the time between a ball bouncing and striking the batsman may be too short to generate the three frames (at least) needed to plot a curve accurately. However, the paper did not attempt to establish the accuracy of the system, and the only technical information presented was taken from an article on the Cricinfo website. The article also argued that Hawk-Eye's depiction of line decisions in tennis ignored such factors as the distortion of the ball on bouncing and the less-than-complete precision with which the lines on the court are drawn. The makers of Hawk-Eye strongly attacked many of these claims, but the authors have not withdrawn them.