|
Title: Overhead camera company responds to interference claims Post by: Coach Hank Crisp on November 06, 2011, 01:03:02 AM http://dailybamablog.com/2011/11/06/overhead-camera-company-responds-to-interference-claims/
Quote Earlier you read Marquis Maze’s claim of the fourth-quarter punt striking the wire guiding the overhead camera in tonight’s game. Well, there’s another side to the story. P.J. Bennett of Action Cam, the operators of the CBS suspended camera, said the ball never made contact with the wire. “We checked in the truck,” he said standing outside Bryant-Denny Stadium early Sunday morning. “We looked at all different angles. It did not hit the line.” The punt went 73 yards and changed the field position at a critical moment. But don’t blame the camera, Bennett said. “As a matter of fact, we saw the shot through our camera,” he said. “And through our lens, if it would have hit the line, it would have giggled the camera. Saw nothing. So there’s no evidence.” Title: Re: Overhead camera company responds to interference claims Post by: SUPERCOACH on November 06, 2011, 01:33:03 AM It seems like it would have made the punt stop short in front of him instead of go over his head.
Title: Re: Overhead camera company responds to interference claims Post by: SUPERCOACH on November 06, 2011, 01:34:41 AM They should release the footage of the punt through the camera. I agree it would probably jiggle if the the ball hit one of the wires.
Title: Re: Overhead camera company responds to interference claims Post by: Coach Hank Crisp on November 06, 2011, 01:55:49 AM That camera has 5 cables. Two X cables two Y cables and an Z cable.
Camera is always jiggling. It has gyros to keep it steady. That camera is just a swinging and keeps a perfect picture just like an Abrams M1A1 tank turrent compared to the body of the tank.. Title: Re: Overhead camera company responds to interference claims Post by: SUPERCOACH on November 06, 2011, 01:56:59 AM That is a good point. It might not jiggle even if it was hit.
|