The problem with using cameras is an accuracy limitation, the problem is similar to VAR where a person’s interpretation of one pixel is the difference. On top of that the camera in an F1 car is vibrating.
Yeah its not going to mm perfect, but then its still going to be far better than just doing the static load test that is clearly inadequate to settle the issue beyond reasonable doubt when the wings are clearly flexing on camera.
By putting a calibrated ruled mark set on camera you will be able to measure the max deflection with a level of accuracy. Setting a upper and lower limit, then if its a clear breach the wing has to be changed I think is fair. If its just about on the line then it not going to be mm perfect for a ruling but should be enough to trigger more investigations.
VAR in the Prem is fucking useless, its not much more than an old man squinting at various TV angles. VAR elsewhere uses SAOT system that should be coming to the Prem later.
The problem with using cameras is an accuracy limitation, the problem is similar to VAR where a person’s interpretation of one pixel is the difference. On top of that the camera in an F1 car is vibrating.
Yeah its not going to mm perfect, but then its still going to be far better than just doing the static load test that is clearly inadequate to settle the issue beyond reasonable doubt when the wings are clearly flexing on camera.
By putting a calibrated ruled mark set on camera you will be able to measure the max deflection with a level of accuracy. Setting a upper and lower limit, then if its a clear breach the wing has to be changed I think is fair. If its just about on the line then it not going to be mm perfect for a ruling but should be enough to trigger more investigations.
VAR in the Prem is fucking useless, its not much more than an old man squinting at various TV angles. VAR elsewhere uses SAOT system that should be coming to the Prem later.