Forsyth-Barr Kicking Woes

It can't be coincidental that virtually all usually reliable kickers can't perform at the FB stadium in Dunedin.

The ball does not seem to travel true from the impact, and it seems obvious there is some kind of swirling air current created by the Stadium.

Is this a deliberate design feature to force the game to be about scoring tries I wonder? is it just coincidence that NZ chose this evening to have such an "undisciplined" performance and concede so many "kickable" penalties?

Were you not rather disparaging of the Argentinian and English goal kickers when they played there last year?

I don't recall being Tiger. Do you have me mistaken with someone else? I only joined this year after all!!

Ah yes, I was mistaking you for a departed member.

Can I also join the chorus commending your improved English.

Thanks! But I prefer to talking about rugby now. So what is your view about FB stadium? Does this now replace the old athletic park in wellington as the worst place in world rugby to take a kick at goal?

Hey AWOP - I won't have anyone talking ill of the old dear! Athletic Park is the only place I have ever seen a box kick from a 5 mtr scrum go dead at the other end of the park, resulting in a 5 mtr scrum to the opposition!

(kicked by Jon Preston in 1996, Wellington v Southland)

AWOP I defended you on your touchline decision, but this is pure nonsense.

How do you design a stadium to deliberately influnce kicking accuracy?

We can put a robot on Mars Biltong! We can surely build a stadium that makes a funnel of disrupted air!!

In fact it is easy to know how to create such a wind effect because it is used in engineering all the time deliberately - for example to disrupt the regular flow of wind across the face of a building, or through lift shafts and so on.

The question is not is it possible to do this deliberately, the question is did they?

Its an enclosed space AWOP, you need to be able to manipulate air density and barometric air pockets without anyone being sucked from their seats in the stands.

It's not enclosed at all! But it is close enough to being enclosed to be able to control the airflow. Most importantly, also the turf is elevated and air passes through cavities underneath...and importantly a river flows right underneath the stadium.

There are multi levels of heat differentials caused by the circulation of air, the pitch, the stands, the lighting and glass. Which is all you need to do.

You don't need to generate the force required to whip people away to create a vortex of unstable air to affect the flight of the ball! This is why kicking in predictable directional wind is difficult enough long before people get blown out of their seats in the outdoor stadium.

last year wilko was complaining about the balls for his kicks and commentators did say superxv 16 from 17 went over there or something like that.

F steyn and goosen got good goals so it was really just m steyn that was off, and that's really cos he was off...everything.

No it was`nt!!! Cruden missed kicks too,at least a couple of Morne Steyns kicks looked dead on then faded away.Justin Marshall commented on it too in the early part of the match.Some comments were made about kicking last year to
and that the toe punt style was more successful than the round the corner method.It was also mentioned that kicks in practice presumeably empty were a lot better.Maybe when full it changes atmospheric conditions make it difficult to kick,is there any similar feedback from other closed stadia?

Rumour is there are "vents" that can be opened "in some circumstances" by "the groundsmen" especially under some circumstances when the "ground is full" say for instance when the atmosphere is very tense and an opposition kicker is lining up a shot at goal, for instance.

Too much carbon dioxide in the arena. Blame it on the glass house design, grass respiration during night games, and 20k+ humans breathing. Surprised the players aren't keeling over for lack of oxygen.

emack2 wrote:No it was`nt!!! Cruden missed kicks too,at least a couple of Morne Steyns kicks looked dead on then faded away.Justin Marshall commented on it too in the early part of the match.Some comments were made about kicking last year to
and that the toe punt style was more successful than the round the corner method.It was also mentioned that kicks in practice presumeably empty were a lot better.Maybe when full it changes atmospheric conditions make it difficult to kick,is there any similar feedback from other closed stadia?

Yes cruden missed a couple. Not six alan. He also got a couple, not one. Goosens and two of crudens flew beautifully through. So it comes back to m steyn as the only bad performer this year there. The sxv matches were near full every time and through sxv and itm accuracy is higher than the outdoor stadia. Steyn is simply getting worse. Look at the figures biltong posted. He's at around 55℅ at best.

Yeah, this is the reason Cruden misses alot of kicks for the All Blacks

Cruden was actually the best kicker on the day with 4 from 7.
F steyn missed two long ones. Goosen got one from two. M steyn was 20% with one from five. So steyn is really the poor stat of that lot, by some distance, given his kicks are presumably the closer ones. None looked difficult for a kicker of his calibre. Clearly it was pressure, and playing the abs, as he's not handled them well.

A solitary seagull was flying around inside there just now.

Just thought AWOP should know this potentially important piece of information.

Seagull? I heard it was an Albatross...

Bloody big seagull or albatross.

Kick from the sideline now. Normal pressurisation achieved.
Not many people there. Maybe it is a CO2 thing?

I reckon it's just that kickers compensate better in the elements, whereas in a protected arena they are prone to misjudgement (don't know how to compensate?) or simply have trouble with certain match balls at a particular time.

Otago 54 North Harbour 25.

If an up and under hits the albatross, is it play on?

Play on. Same as a pigeon in a cricket match. Wipe the blood and feathers off the ball and carry on...

The council should consider growing tomatoes in it during the off season to recoup some of the costs, keep the miserable rate payers down there happy.

I'll post to the ask the ref thread.

Where's the ask the ref thread gone?

Ixcellent bro!

Maybe they could borrow some fog machines... thicken up the air a bit more?

It's ok, call off the dogs, I found it.

Bloody good idea there LB, and when the fog condenses on the ceiling and rains down it'll be just like playing at carrisbrook again, only without the frostbite.

If they had 'vents' that could change the air flow they would have to be huge. I.E. people might just notice. Under turf flows wouldnt have any impact as the turf provides a lot of resistance.

Turf temperature wont have an impact as it would have to be significantly different from the air in the stadium, and even then you are talking about an area very close to the turf itself. The ball wont spend much, if any, time in a zone where the temperature varies.

Humidity might be a factor - but its not something that is going to be controllable. Its going to take a very long time for stuff like that to spread through the stadium and anything like prevailing winds would totally overwhelm its influence

What is entirely possible is that you get some odd air flow patterns when the prevailing wind is from certain directions (Like when AWOP opens his mouth..)

anotherworldofpain wrote: Where's the ask the ref thread gone?

Don't panic it's still there. Rugby - sticky section.

https://www.606v2.com/t9133-ask-the-ref

lostinwales wrote:If they had 'vents' that could change the air flow they would have to be huge. I.E. people might just notice. Under turf flows wouldnt have any impact as the turf provides a lot of resistance.

Turf temperature wont have an impact as it would have to be significantly different from the air in the stadium, and even then you are talking about an area very close to the turf itself. The ball wont spend much, if any, time in a zone where the temperature varies.

Humidity might be a factor - but its not something that is going to be controllable. Its going to take a very long time for stuff like that to spread through the stadium and anything like prevailing winds would totally overwhelm its influence

What is entirely possible is that you get some odd air flow patterns when the prevailing wind is from certain directions (Like when AWOP opens his mouth..)

Are you an architect lostinwales? If not, I suggest you listen to those that are. Actually, many small vents will create more air disruption than "large" vents. In the same way that if you open all your windows a crack in the car on the motorway, you'll get a thin baffling effect that you feel like beating in your ears, as opposed to the static equillibrium and smooth continuous "laminar" flow you get if you crank the windows all down.

There is a very expensive and prestigious high rise apartment in Canary Wharf where the lifts stop working when the side reception door is open for this very reason. Incredible pressure at a particular frequency of air flow.

Are you Al Baxter in disguise AWOP? Good answer.

I always thought you were more like a Robbie Robinson...

I do computational fluid dynamics and I have done for a very long time. I dont doubt that small vents have an impact but its a question of range of effect. You are talking about 'something' having an impact on a rugby ball going at speed at a good distance away. Its not a draught in a kitchen

As for the Canary Wharf thing well yes there are lots of examples of that kind of thing but thats a lot to do with 'local' conditions next to features. A better example of what might cause issues is the towers on the Essex university campus where interference between the wakes of the towers under certain conditions make for big gusts

Thinking about other things that might have an impact - external conditions. Day going to evening must be interesting with changes in temperature and how quick that spreads into the stadium - also changes in wind direction due to same.

C'mon. If you do computational fluid dynamics you will know the answer to this one already... as I say to Biltong already, you don't need to make a tornado to knock a ball off course. They are very very light these days and so aerodynamic and regular that small pressure variances make a huge difference! Look how true a modern ball flies when kicked in flat air, and look how regular the kickers are in heavy wind. The flight is very true and deviance very true and regular.

Look at the flight pattern on the balls. They are going dead straight then suddenly go through a clockwise spiral away from the posts. Every. Single. Time. And always towards one end more than the other.

The more accurate kickers like Cruden are compensating by drilling it low and hard *almost* like they are kicking on an unpredictable gusty day, right?

It's not rocket science. It's just airflow.

Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

I never said there weren't environmental effects that could produce strange gusts but they will be due to external weather and conditions and the geometry of the stadium. You could also have regions of relatively static air with different properties (e.g humidity) which may change how the ball goes with spin etc. What I am saying is that its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button.

You can puff and blow over, say, an empty plastic water bottle thats a meter away pretty easily but its hard to do it from the other side of the office.

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

.

Impressive. Though I didn't know they had rockets in Wales?

What was the barometric pressure on Saturday in Dunedin? I'm no computational fluid rocket designer, but could low pressures outside affect air flow inside, given there are gaps in the side where air can flow from high to low?

Taylorman wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

.

Impressive. Though I didn't know they had rockets in Wales?

Sssshhh! It's a secret.

Where do you test them lostinwales? Up north?

Trained as - didnt say I was practicing. Views on local levels of technology I will keep to myself .

Will also have to change my tag soon as am in the process of escaping back to the motherland.

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

I never said there weren't environmental effects that could produce strange gusts but they will be due to external weather and conditions and the geometry of the stadium. You could also have regions of relatively static air with different properties (e.g humidity) which may change how the ball goes with spin etc. What I am saying is that its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button.

You can puff and blow over, say, an empty plastic water bottle thats a meter away pretty easily but its hard to do it from the other side of the office.

Yeah, when I am reading that I hear "Blah blah blah waffle waffle waffle retraction step back waffle waffle waffle blah blah blah" which I interpret as "Yeah, maybe I was wrong and you are right".

Except the bit where you said "its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button." which (a) isn't what I was claiming and (b) it's true

anotherworldofpain wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

I never said there weren't environmental effects that could produce strange gusts but they will be due to external weather and conditions and the geometry of the stadium. You could also have regions of relatively static air with different properties (e.g humidity) which may change how the ball goes with spin etc. What I am saying is that its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button.

You can puff and blow over, say, an empty plastic water bottle thats a meter away pretty easily but its hard to do it from the other side of the office.

Yeah, when I am reading that I hear "Blah blah blah waffle waffle waffle retraction step back waffle waffle waffle blah blah blah" which I interpret as "Yeah, maybe I was wrong and you are right".

Except the bit where you said "its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button." which (a) isn't what I was claiming and (b) it's true

to be fair who should we believe, someone with experience in air tunnels/ rockets etc or someone who dismisses a comment with "Waffle waffle waffle" and no meat to their argument.

Lostinwales is back tracking and essentially saying the same thing I said in the first place. "geometry of the stadium", "external weather" "regions of static air". After saying initially that wasn't the case.

He's re-positioning his argument by making the sentence structure impregnable hopes nobody notices he is admitting he was wrong.

You don't need rocket science for that, you just need grammar and logic.

Make no mistake FB is designed specifically to create this effect to take kicking and penalties out of the equation and favour a running try scoring game. In fact, hot air is channelled in such cunning ways within FB Stadium that the original name for the stadium was mooted as "Robert Muldoon Stadium"

anotherworldofpain wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

I never said there weren't environmental effects that could produce strange gusts but they will be due to external weather and conditions and the geometry of the stadium. You could also have regions of relatively static air with different properties (e.g humidity) which may change how the ball goes with spin etc. What I am saying is that its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button.

You can puff and blow over, say, an empty plastic water bottle thats a meter away pretty easily but its hard to do it from the other side of the office.

Yeah, when I am reading that I hear "Blah blah blah waffle waffle waffle retraction step back waffle waffle waffle blah blah blah" which I interpret as "Yeah, maybe I was wrong and you are right".

Except the bit where you said "its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button." which (a) isn't what I was claiming and (b) it's true

Whatever...

OK - 'The ball suddenly swerves because the 'little people' make it so - that better?

And I didnt backtrack. AWOP suggested that they are capable of doing things in the ground to effect how the ball flies.

I just listed the reasons why the initial things he suggested were a load of rubbish. but I did say in post one

What is entirely possible is that you get some odd air flow patterns when the prevailing wind is from certain directions

And then expanded on that a little. To be picked on for not explaining stuff clearly by someone who often claims to be crap at English is quite something.

lostinwales wrote:

anotherworldofpain wrote:

lostinwales wrote:Well tough I am trained as a rocket scientist.

I never said there weren't environmental effects that could produce strange gusts but they will be due to external weather and conditions and the geometry of the stadium. You could also have regions of relatively static air with different properties (e.g humidity) which may change how the ball goes with spin etc. What I am saying is that its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button.

You can puff and blow over, say, an empty plastic water bottle thats a meter away pretty easily but its hard to do it from the other side of the office.

Yeah, when I am reading that I hear "Blah blah blah waffle waffle waffle retraction step back waffle waffle waffle blah blah blah" which I interpret as "Yeah, maybe I was wrong and you are right".

Except the bit where you said "its really really hard to significantly change whats happening to a ball in flight 20m away at the press of a button." which (a) isn't what I was claiming and (b) it's true

Whatever...

OK - 'The ball suddenly swerves because the 'little people' make it so - that better?

Seriously, if we can't have a little bit of an ironic joke without getting into a personal insult slinging match it's a sad indictment of humanity. Let's all chill out.

Yeah, that's exactly what I said. Whatever. Clearly you have an enormous need to make yourself out to be the master scientist and beholdent of all knowledge, despite the fact you've crashed a tongue-in-cheek thread that essentially parodies the position you are now taking so seriously in your argument. Good luck with wearing that chip as you go through life, because it'll be tough. Hang in there. Rolling Eyes

Well we all know what you seem to have an enormous need to make yourself out to be. I'm done

lostinwales wrote:I'm done

Remember to wipe up.

anotherworldofpain wrote:

lostinwales wrote:I'm done

Remember to wipe up.

do you usually bully people out of posting?

you received an informed opinion and because you dont agree with it you talk utter nonense with no substance other than pure waffle.

Let's all calm down. Nobody was "bullied". If any "bullying" was done, it was directed toward me.

This is all a bit of a giggle, you know. Where did the atmosphere come from? it's making the conversation swerve unpredictably. Let's play nicely huh?

fair enough but from where i stand you owe the man an apology.

other than that an interesting article. Lansdowne road has something similar although this was down to planning permission rather than creating difficult kicking conditions