[HN Gopher] Building an AI that watches rugby
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Building an AI that watches rugby
        
       Author : reddavis
       Score  : 76 points
       Date   : 2025-04-17 10:18 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nickjones.tech)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nickjones.tech)
        
       | xnx wrote:
       | Better title: "LLM OCR on Rugby screenshots to read score and
       | clock"
        
       | djtango wrote:
       | I don't quite get how diffing frames allows you to find the
       | scores.
       | 
       | TFA mentions comparing a frame with and without - but how do you
       | generate that frame without? If you can already do it, what's
       | useful about doing that?
        
         | barbegal wrote:
         | I think the text is wrong, it's diffing two frames and the
         | areas that are the same are where the scorebaord is as this
         | doesn't change between frames but everything else does.
        
           | nirvael wrote:
           | I was also confused by this. I think you're right, but in the
           | original text they specifically mention a 'static background'
           | that they remove, so it's not just a simple 'wrong way round'
           | error, it's a fundamental misunderstanding of what's
           | happening. Makes me wonder if the author actually knew what
           | they were doing, or just using an LLM to vibe-code
           | everything.
        
         | sebastiennight wrote:
         | He's diffing the frames, and then the only pixels that stay the
         | same are the UI, from which he doesn't directly get the UI (see
         | the example, it's illegible) but he can extract the POSITION of
         | the UI on the screen by finding all the non-red pixels.
         | 
         | And then he does a good ol' regular crop on the original image
         | to get the UI excerpt to feed the vision model.
        
       | itissid wrote:
       | Why does yolo not work?
        
       | mon_ wrote:
       | Why the focus on scorekeeping? I feel like an AI model is
       | overkill here, when you have text-based sources readily available
       | such as news apps, Twitter feeds, and apps such as Livescore
       | which would be easier and cheaper to scrape. They probably cover
       | more matches that aren't televised too.
       | 
       | I'd be curious to see what useful insights could be gleamed from
       | the match commentary. You have the main commentator giving play-
       | by-play objective reporting and then a 'colour' commentator
       | giving some subjective analysis during breaks in play. I bet
       | there's a lot of interesting ways this could be used.
        
         | dmurray wrote:
         | The only interesting part of the model's output was
         | 
         | { "current_play": "ruck", }
         | 
         | So the vision model can correctly identify that there's a ruck
         | going on and that the ball is most likely in the ruck.
         | 
         | Why not build on this? Which team is in possession? Who was the
         | ball carrier at the start of the ruck, and who tackled him? Who
         | joined the ruck, and how quickly did they get there? How
         | quickly did the attacking team get the ball back in hand, or
         | the defending team turn over possession? What would be a good
         | option for the outhalf if he got the ball right now?
         | 
         | All of these except the last would be straightforward enough
         | for a human observer with basic rugby knowledge going through
         | the footage frame by frame, and I bet it would be really
         | valuable to analysts. It seems like computer vision technology
         | is at a stage where this could be automated too.
        
           | MuffinFlavored wrote:
           | ESPN has play by play stuff for free like this on their
           | website for some other sports
           | 
           | not sure if it is done by a human or not
           | 
           | curious how "an AI can do it" yields much difference in terms
           | of result for the casual watcher
        
             | brookst wrote:
             | If this is the final product, not much difference at all.
             | 
             | But where the human version is pretty much as far as it's
             | going to go, this is v0.01 of the AI version. Pretty soon
             | the AI will be predicting what will happen next, commenting
             | on whether this was a good idea (based on statistics), and
             | letting the viewer ask questions about what exactly
             | happened and why.
        
             | dmurray wrote:
             | > curious how "an AI can do it" yields much difference in
             | terms of result for the casual watcher
             | 
             | An AI can do it in volume, and therefore cheaper. I don't
             | think a human could do everything I said _in real time_ -
             | maybe with a lot of training and custom software.
             | 
             | A human could transcribe the scoreboard, but the article
             | still thinks that's an interesting application of cutting-
             | edge machine vision.
        
               | thom wrote:
               | Humans can do _most_ of what you said in real time, both
               | providers using bespoke software and club analysts using
               | off the shelf stuff like Sportscode. For full positional
               | data on every player, every frame then yes, computer
               | vision is doing most of the work but the quality isn't
               | always great. Providers with in-stadium multi-camera
               | systems provide great data, but you don't necessarily
               | have access to the size of dataset you'd want for
               | recruitment, and so lower-quality broadcast tracking
               | exists (with all the problems you can imagine like
               | missing players, occlusions, crazy camerawork etc). Most
               | clubs also have wearables for their own analysis. Almost
               | every fully automated broadcast tracking solution has hit
               | a wall (sometimes on the first day of a season) in terms
               | of quality that is often only solved by human QA, or by
               | just discarding some games, so this is far from a
               | completely solved problem. Fun domain to work in, but
               | lots of horrible edge cases.
        
           | thom wrote:
           | Multiple companies sell Rugby data of various levels of
           | granularity. I don't know if rugby has all the toys (i.e.
           | full tracking outside of wearables) that soccer or American
           | football have because there's less money sloshing around.
        
             | jollygoodshow wrote:
             | Most pros now have the vests, but also they tend to have
             | additional tech in their mouth guards. This is mostly for
             | CTE monitoring, but I imagine that there's other data that
             | can be extracted
        
         | ookdatnog wrote:
         | The AI's job as described in this article is two-fold:
         | 
         | - The relatively trivial task of extracting textual data from
         | the screen.
         | 
         | - The task of obfuscating that they're publishing other
         | people's work as their own.
         | 
         | When I clicked the article I assumed they'd try to
         | automatically construct analysis of the game by using AI to
         | analyze frames of the game, but that's not what they are doing.
         | They are extracting some trivial information from the frames,
         | and then they process the audio of the referee mic and
         | commentary.
         | 
         | In other words, the analysis has already been done by humans
         | and they just want to re-publish this analysis as their own,
         | without paying money for it. So they run it through an AI
         | because in today's legal environment this seems to completely
         | exempt you from copyright infringement or plagiarism laws.
        
           | brookst wrote:
           | Perhaps the most surprising thing about the whole LLM
           | revolution is how quickly attitudes about IP have shifted in
           | the HN and similar communities.
           | 
           | A few years ago, media companies were rent-seeking parasites
           | who leveraged the jack-booted thugs of law enforcement to
           | protect an artificial monopoly using IP laws that were
           | massive overreach and contrary to the interests of humanity.
           | 
           | Today, suddenly, media companies are pillars of society whose
           | valuable contributions must be protected from the scourge of
           | theft by everything from VC backed AI companies to armchair
           | hackers who don't respect the sanctity of IP.
           | 
           | It's amazing how mutable these principles are. I'm sure
           | plenty of people are somewhere between the two extreme, but
           | the shift is so dramatic that I am 100% sure many individuals
           | have completely revised their opinions of IP companies based
           | largely on worries about their own work being disrupted.
           | 
           | At the very least it should create some empathy for the
           | lawyers and business folk we all despised for their rent-
           | seeking blah blah blah. They were just honestly espousing the
           | positions their financial incentives aligned them to.
        
             | bondarchuk wrote:
             | How do you know you're seeing peoples' opinions change, and
             | not just a change in which people express their opinions?
             | 
             | That said I'd personally be happy if LLMs cause the death
             | (or drastic weakening) of copyright and IP laws, however as
             | it is now, with no copyright for AIs but the same old
             | copyright for humans, it's the worst of both worlds.
        
               | Workaccount2 wrote:
               | I know people personally with strong gripes about AI
               | "infringement" (in quotes because I believe people are
               | just confused about how these models work), and every
               | single one of them -100%- have a stash of pirated media
               | they casually accumulated over the years.
               | 
               | People are in it for themselves. When you are young
               | everyone has righteous ideals, but then trends of society
               | eventually ebb, and you realize that just about everyone
               | was simply virtue signalling, and few people are
               | committed even to their own detriment.
               | 
               | 2005: "End copyright! Trash IP law! Liberate media!"
               | 
               | 2025: "Strengthen Copyright! Extend IP Protection!
               | Protect makers!"
        
               | bondarchuk wrote:
               | > _I know people personally with strong gripes about AI
               | "infringement" (in quotes because I believe people are
               | just confused about how these models work), and every
               | single one of them -100%- have a stash of pirated media
               | they casually accumulated over the years._
               | 
               | I don't know them, of course, but it is a consistent and
               | imho reasonable position to be against copyright yet,
               | while we normal people live in fear of copyright, ask for
               | it to be applied to AI as well.
               | 
               | It is even reasonable IMO to be against copyright for
               | individuals but in favour of copyright for businesses.
               | That's how it de facto works in a lot of places anyway.
        
             | ookdatnog wrote:
             | Not commenting on general trends, but I don't think my
             | opinion on IP shifted massively as a result of the rise of
             | LLMs. I can summarize it as follows:
             | 
             | - It seems desirable to have _some_ system that allows
             | creatives to be paid for their work.
             | 
             | - Whether current IP law is the best system we can come up
             | with is highly debatable. But nevertheless it is the system
             | we have, and its existence is to some extent justified.
             | 
             | - If we look at the "pefect case" where IP law functions as
             | intended (for example, an author publishes a book in which
             | they invested years of their life), then breaking IP law
             | (sharing that author's work without their consent) in that
             | instance seems, to me, immoral.
             | 
             | - Nevertheless there are plenty of excesses in the system
             | where I would judge that the application of IP law is
             | unjustified and breaking the law is morally justified
             | (naturally I still don't recommend it). This includes, for
             | example, paywalled papers from publicly-funded research,
             | works that can no longer reasonably be purchased (for
             | example games for old consoles), most if not all software
             | patents, ...
             | 
             | So the question simply boils down to: is sports commentary
             | justifiably protected under IP law? I think the answer is a
             | pretty clear-cut "yes" here, I don't see how it falls under
             | any case of IP law overreach.
        
       | walthamstow wrote:
       | I'm not a rugger bugger but every 5 seconds doesn't really seem
       | like often enough to be taking screenshots. In soccer anyway, a
       | lot can happen in 5 seconds.
        
         | conductr wrote:
         | My american football brain had the same reaction. Many of the
         | most pivotal plays are replayed in slow motion as commentators
         | and spectators debate on what actually happened and if the refs
         | got the call right. Also, the average play (ie. 'down') is 4-5
         | seconds, so not nearly enough data to determine what is going
         | on.
        
       | dncornholio wrote:
       | So Rugby is missing a lot of data beside the scoreline, so they
       | created an AI that can extract the scoreline.
        
       | patapong wrote:
       | I want AIs that clean my apartment while I watch rugby, not AIs
       | that watch rugby while I clean the apartment. ;)
       | 
       | In seriousness, this is a cool project and show how sophisticated
       | analysis LLMs can do in a plug and play manner. They may not
       | always be the best solution but a fantastic baseline that can be
       | deployed and adapted to a usecase in less than an hour.
        
       | petesergeant wrote:
       | > We can't hire analysts to watch every match and enter data
       | manually.
       | 
       | I'm surprised there's not enough fans willing to do that if you
       | could gamify it.
        
         | securingsincity wrote:
         | This is a position in baseball.
         | https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/03/30/fenway-park-boston-base...
         | Here's a radio piece about the official fenway park score
         | keeper from two weeks ago
        
       | goeiedaggoeie wrote:
       | Reading the scoreboard from a TV screen and selling that data is
       | restricted in many jurisdictions. This work is pretty naive I
       | think.
        
         | brookst wrote:
         | Has there ever been a hacker whose top priority is ensuring
         | compliance with every regulation in every jurisdiction
         | worldwide?
        
         | stronglikedan wrote:
         | Good thing they're in only one jurisdiction, not many.
        
         | hash872 wrote:
         | I don't think it's possible to be in compliance with every law
         | in every jurisdiction simultaneously. There are over 300,000
         | federal laws in the US, and apparently no one knows how many
         | laws each of the 50 states has. That's 1 of the world's 195
         | countries
        
       | sebastiennight wrote:
       | I love that as soon as he writes,
       | 
       | > The plan was simple.
       | 
       | You know you're in for a funny read.
       | 
       | More seriously though, the JSON example from a vision language
       | model is interesting but does not take into account how much
       | extrapolation (hallucination) the model will insert over time.
       | 
       | For instance, even if not visible in the image, your VLM will
       | probably start inserting details (such as the color of the team's
       | jersey) based on knowing the team's three-letter identifier.
       | 
       | So the reliability of the system will go down over time, and it
       | probably compounds if you're using some of that info to feed
       | further steps in the loop.
        
       | hummuscience wrote:
       | The moment I started reading this, I got reminded of this recent
       | study: https://arxiv.org/html/2503.10212v1
       | 
       | The scope is a bit different. The study uses an LLM to interpret
       | pose estimation data and describe the behavior in each frame. The
       | output is text which can be used to create embeddings of
       | behavior. As someone who works in ethology, that's a clever (but
       | maybe expensive) idea.
       | 
       | I think the author could use something similar. With multi-person
       | pose estimation models.
        
       | chrsw wrote:
       | Does this mean there's probably AI that's already watching high
       | profile football (soccer) matches?
        
         | thom wrote:
         | Depends on your definition of AI, but yes, lots of them, and
         | not just the high profile matches.
        
       | damnitbuilds wrote:
       | TL;DR: It extracts the score from the video and gets text from
       | the commentary in the audio.
       | 
       | I was hoping for more.
        
       | disjunct wrote:
       | I wrote a similar script that used a TV tuner during the last
       | World Cup. Since I had an ATSC source, I was able to just pull
       | the CTA-708 captions directly and with little delay.
        
       | numpad0 wrote:
       | aw. I thought this would be about an AI cat that makes wrong
       | commentaries that you can make pointless arguments against. There
       | should be one.
        
       | cewl123 wrote:
       | I want AI that does my job while I watch rugby
        
       | rfdearborn wrote:
       | > Sending a full-resolution screenshot every five seconds gets
       | expensive fast.
       | 
       | For now.
        
       | 4ndrewl wrote:
       | My observation is that watching Rugby on TV is no the same as
       | watching a Rugby match. You're watching something where choices
       | have been made around what you're to see, so your model is
       | already restricted in what it can see.
       | 
       | You really need to take a 'full pitch' feed directly from the
       | venue, rather than what is broadcast.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-04-17 23:01 UTC)