| World Cup ball/shots 22:22 - Jul 10 with 514 views | Zx1988 |
Maybe it's just that I've watched a lot more of this tournament than other recent World Cups, but does it seem that more shots (both normal and penalties) are being skied than usually seems to be the case? |  |
| |  |
| World Cup ball/shots on 22:32 - Jul 10 with 461 views | barcelonablue2 |
There was something about the fact that the ball has internal sensors and a dramatic reduced number of parts stitched together. Normally 12 this one has 3 I think that make it like the ball in SA world cup where it can just occasionally fly off completely randomly. A lot of players complaining about it at the start but assumedly this is the sort of thing elite players adapt quicker to | | | |
| World Cup ball/shots on 23:00 - Jul 10 with 402 views | Kievthegreat |
| World Cup ball/shots on 22:32 - Jul 10 by barcelonablue2 |
There was something about the fact that the ball has internal sensors and a dramatic reduced number of parts stitched together. Normally 12 this one has 3 I think that make it like the ball in SA world cup where it can just occasionally fly off completely randomly. A lot of players complaining about it at the start but assumedly this is the sort of thing elite players adapt quicker to |
It's an interesting thing the Jabulani ball from the SA world cup.
In simplest terms, a normally struck ball has some level of spin on it. That spin creates a relatively stable airflow around the ball. Put lots on and it will curve in flight (magnus effect), a little bit of spin just makes it fly nice and stable. Either way it should be predictable.
If you propel a ball with zero spin at all, it's called a knuckleball (originally baseball because you released it off your knuckles so you fingers didn't spin it, but now also football). Here the airflow is unstable. As soon as any tiny force takes the ball away from it's path, it will just go in that direction. The craziest examples will have multiple movements in different directions.
The Jabulani ball (from South Africa world cup), was extremely smooth with basically no surface texture and far fewer stitch lines which makes this effect far worse. Plus NASA tested the ball and essentially found the speeds which make this effect worse (it's some ratio of drag to size, can't remember exactly) was right in the range of a hard driven shot. [Post edited 10 Jul 23:00]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
