Technology at the Club.

[Frenchay Red]

1 hour ago, Phileas Fogg said:

Surely it would apply to rugby too then, both short, sharp burst sprinting sports. I didn't know that about hamstrings if true, even so - surely these days there are better ways of earning up properly than jogging up a narrow touchline.

I don't know about rugby players, apart from they're not all about kicking and ball control so not so much concentrated effort is going through the legs perhaps.

Anyway aren't they all overweight, slow and rolling about in the mud?

[Guest]

10 hours ago, EnderMB said:

As someone that works with computers for a living, I share that worry.

In my opinion, Bristol Sport in general could be using far more technology. Hell, if I were Lansdown and co I'd go all-in with the available technology, and look towards the research going on in our own back yard for help.

We have a decent university, the best tech scene outside of London, and possibly the strongest sports research in the country within an hour drive. Anything other than technical excellence is insane.

Then you'll know that IT is a licence to print money - more money is spent on marketing than on the bod actually producing/supporting/etc. it. Sometimes IT is like the Emperors New Cloths, no-one has the balls to say what a waste of time or how shit it is.

I also do tech, but I also know the BS that surrounds it. First know what you want, then check if the IT does it (it's called requirement analysis). Don't be dazzled by the shiny wrapping paper because underneath it's probably a turd. Bells and whistles look good but half the time you ain't going to use all of it. Beware of fads. Don't try and keep up with the Joneses. Etc. All of this common sense is forgotten as soon as the bloody stuff is turned on with the associated ooooo and ahhhhh's

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Eddie Hitler said:

Quite.  That Gary thought Lee was worth keeping in because of Prozone's analysis of successfully completed passes when not one went forwards shows that it was over-relied upon.

Lee didn't give him the context, so it was LJ's fault.

[EnderMB]

9 hours ago, bcfcfinker said:

Then you'll know that IT is a licence to print money - more money is spent on marketing than on the bod actually producing/supporting/etc. it. Sometimes IT is like the Emperors New Cloths, no-one has the balls to say what a waste of time or how shit it is.

I also do tech, but I also know the BS that surrounds it. First know what you want, then check if the IT does it (it's called requirement analysis). Don't be dazzled by the shiny wrapping paper because underneath it's probably a turd. Bells and whistles look good but half the time you ain't going to use all of it. Beware of fads. Don't try and keep up with the Joneses. Etc. All of this common sense is forgotten as soon as the bloody stuff is turned on with the associated ooooo and ahhhhh's

Absolutely, but as with most things, if you want something done well then you have to pay for it. More often than not, the tech is shit because the client has skimped on price, or has implemented an unrealistic deadline for delivery.

It's why I was so keen to mention the research going on in the south west. You'd think that a club like Bristol City would be banging on the doors at Bath Uni asking for any kind of competitive advantage they could offer.

 

[nathredwood]

We use a drone at Bristol Apache American football. Great for getting a clear picture of how a play develops.

If it helps Kodjia to time his runs better or the midfield to retain shape then I'm all for it.

Won't ever be allowed during an actual game but I wouldn't be surprised to see camera's placed on the top of a couple stands to give the same perspective.

Not a great way to watch as a fan but for coaching it must be so much clearer.

[Guest]

3 hours ago, EnderMB said:

Absolutely, but as with most things, if you want something done well then you have to pay for it. More often than not, the tech is shit because the client has skimped on price, or has implemented an unrealistic deadline for delivery.

It's why I was so keen to mention the research going on in the south west. You'd think that a club like Bristol City would be banging on the doors at Bath Uni asking for any kind of competitive advantage they could offer.

 

In regards to research...

Bristol Sport should be sponsoring some PhD student. Set/suggest the outcomes expected, engage actively so that they get what they are looking for and if there is some tangible outcome, buying into the end product with a view to creating another revenue stream. Cost of this would be peanuts compared to some of the big bucks I expect they are paying for some half baked pile of poo.

[Ivorguy]

Agree with those who argue for in house expertise

My own experience, although not in football, is that one enormous advantage of in house is that the people understand the context in which they are working and thus what they are being asked to produce - no tweaking of other programmes. 

Moreover if things go wrong, and IT is very prone to that, you can deal with problems instantly, with generous overtime to get the job done, rather than being told 'we may be able to get to you in four days time', and 'no we don't work Saturdays or Sunday's, and certainly not through the night'

[spudski]

10 hours ago, nathredwood said:

We use a drone at Bristol Apache American football. Great for getting a clear picture of how a play develops.

If it helps Kodjia to time his runs better or the midfield to retain shape then I'm all for it.

Won't ever be allowed during an actual game but I wouldn't be surprised to see camera's placed on the top of a couple stands to give the same perspective.

Not a great way to watch as a fan but for coaching it must be so much clearer.

Lets hope it's not used during a game or this ever happens during training...