In general, the use of technology in refereeing and match management fell under either all or some of the following three categories:

 A.   Post Event – Match Analysis

Video and game analysis software is used by citing commissioners and referees to support decision making in several of the sports. The citing commissioner watches the match for any incidents of foul play that occur which the referee may or may not have seen. Even if the referee has not seen the incident it can be reported by the citing commissioner, requiring the offending player(s) to appear before the sport’s judiciary or tribunal. The commissioner’s report is supported with video of the incident – often showing the incident from different angles.

B.   During the Match – Specific Incident Review

Depending on the sport, there exists a mechanism where the referee may used a third party for the assistance in the declaration of a decision. This is typically in situations where a critical decision needs to be made which may affect the outcome of the match. Such instances are, for example, on a line call in tennis, the fall of a wicket in cricket, or the scoring of a try in rugby union or rugby league.

All incidences of this type of review require the match to stop and immediate assessment to take place. The time period involved ranges from roughly 30+ seconds in tennis using the “Hawkeye” video line calling system, and up to a few minutes in the other sports. Using these systems also allows for transparency in decision making as the incident shown to the spectators in most sports was the same as viewed by the referee and the third party. As one of the interviewees commented:

 If I’m uncertain about a call, I won’t hesitate to go to the third umpire. I know that everyone watching at the ground and on the TV is going to see it (the situation) and they get it in slow motion and from all angles – so why can’t I have that same opportunity to make the right call.

 The third party – usually a third or off-field referee, has access to video technology and multiple angles of the incident in which the centre referee seeks assistance. The centre referee stops play and requests that the third referee examine the incident in relation to a specific request based on fact. These requests were all bound by constraints as to the juncture in the play in which they can be made, and only under specific conditions. The requests cannot be made on the basis of seeking another general viewpoint. An interviewee noted:

 I can only call to the video ref in certain situations, for example, about a try being scored with regards to matters relating to the grounding of the ball or if I might be undecided if a breach of the rules occurred in that play, such as a forward pass – and when I do use the video ref I have to be explicit in what I ask, e.g., was so and so in an off-side position when receiving the ball or with correct grounding of the ball in a try.

 The sports differ in the initiator of the request, as some sports allow the request from the player , e.g., tennis. With the latter, there is some form of control mechanism in place – in tennis the players are permitted to have two “incorrect” challenges per set.

The “post-interview” discussion group addressed these uses with the game of Taekwondo. Most felt that during a match this would not be appropriate, as a match is very dynamic and to have a facility where a player or referee stops the flow of the match to check on a decision, or potential decision, would be disruptive. It was considered also not appropriate for the player to have this facility as it could be used tactically by a player.

However, this group did feel that the application of the immediate video analysis/feedback could be used in a Sudden Death match. Especially in contentious situations, such as when two players kick a scoring kick at almost at the same time, a process involving immediate video feedback could be utilized to confirm or even ensure the correct winner. However, the method and situations of use would have to be clearly defined. This was probably best summated by one participant’s comment:

 It’s important not to interrupt the match with endless use of “going to the video” for decisions – that would make the match boring. Anyhow, its up to the referee to make decisions and keep the game flowing - that’s part of the job. But video ref, or something like that, could work really well in an important match, like a gold medal match, which goes to sudden death when its almost impossible to see who actually scored first. At least that way everybody can be certain the right person is the winner.

C    During the Match – Advice to the Centre Referee

Considerable research is being conducted in some sports to develop or enhance technologies that will act in an advisory capacity during the match, without the need to stop the match, but rather while maintaining the normal tempo of the game. Football (soccer) has been closely examining and testing the micro-chipping of the ball, to signal a scored goal. In other sports, such as rugby, the side-line touch judges contact the center referee via microphones and earpieces, without stopping play. This includes volunteering information to the referee on off-side, foul or illegal play, line calls, etc, as it occurs. If appropriate this is then assessed by the referee to determine if any action is warranted or not, without interrupting the continuity of the match:

 Since the touch judges have been wired to the ref, a huge amount of foul play, especially in back play, has been stamped out and there is now a greater deterrent for illegal play; because the players know if they cheat, they are not going to get away with it. And it interesting enough – they’re now just getting on with playing the game.

In general, when players knew that the referee had additional resources to assist in their judgments directly via other match officials, there was less tendency for players to commit intentional fouls. And when unintentional fouls were being addressed, there was some greater degree of acceptance of the referee’s subsequent action by both the players and coaching staff, as this statement demonstrates:

 … you really notice the difference in games when I’m reffing [sic] and wired to the touch judges, compared to when I am not, as the penalty count for the intentional penalties virtually always drops when I’ve got the touch judges helping out …and I also don’t seem to get as many complaints from the coaches and players.

 The “post interview” group identified that, in the sport of Taekwondo, the main areas that coaches and players often complain about is holding, falling and crossing the boundary line. It was felt that there could be a role for technology in these areas, however it was stressed it should be as an aid to the referee in decision making. The referee should still be the administrator of any warranted penalty, as one participant explained:

 In some games you virtually know there is some holding going on and one of the players and his coach is complaining – but it’s on the blind side and you can’t see it, and as soon as you’re in a position to actually see it, the player lets go. And the really frustrating part is that the corner judge can probably see it as clear as day. It would be great if they (corner judge) could say something like Chung [Blue] is holding or pulling on Hong’s [Red] hogue [chest protector]. I bet if the players knew there were extra sets of eyes on them, and they could be caught, they’d stop doing it.

Discussion

Those interviewed and the discussions groups felt there was a definite place for technology in refereeing to support their decisions. It was evident that it should only be used as an aid in the decision making process and that ultimately the referee should be the final arbitrator. The referee should also not become dependent on technology. All felt that sport needed to be officiated by a referee(s) – not by technology – due to the myriad of situations that occur in competition which ultimately could not be interpreted purely by technology.

 The participants currently using some form of technology with refereeing, identified that there is a learning curve and adaptation process to be met. The success of the technology is dependent on all the officials understanding the role of the technology being used, the guidelines or regulations for its use being appropriately structured, and the group officiating in a match using the technology constructively to support the decision making process of the referee. This was identified by the following comment:

 When you first start reffing [sic] with a microphone, it take a bit of getting used to hearing somebody’s voice talking in your ear every now and then, but once you’re used to it, and the touch judges are helping you with your calls, it works really well. I now use the mics [microphones] whenever I can – even in club games. I like it, the players like it, it helps me eliminating illegal play and in general helps to call a fairer and more enjoyable game.

Conclusion

 This work shows that differing technologies have successfully been implemented in various sports, and this has greatly improved the playing environment and assisted the referee/umpire to promote fair play. In some of the contact sports illegal play and foul play have been greatly eradicated via the use of technology. This promotes a more attractive sport for both the spectators and the players due to the contest being determined without illegal play or tactics, but rather on the athletic ability and performance of the participants.

 This work also shows that there is a certain acceptance that must be achieved by the referee/umpire and the players of the sport. This can be achieved by the technology being used as an aid in the management of the game, rather than a tool to administer the rules and regulations during the game. As with the ability of the athlete to vary and adapt the way in which he/she plays the game, so too should the management of the game remain ultimately a human function. There will always be the need to interpret and assess an infraction based on the situation surrounding it, and this could not be done purely using technology. If rule interpretation were to be administered using technology without the application of the referee’s knowledge, then the overall flow of the competition would more than likely cease, and even the most minor and possibly insignificant and unintentional infractions would be penalized. Appropriate technology should be an aid to the referee to further enhance better decision making in order to improve the quality of the match and provide fairer competition.

Further Research

 These results are drawn from only a limited sector of today’s professional and elite sports, and only from those to which the author had immediate access. The findings of this study should be considered in that light. The study does lay the foundations for further, more detailed research to be constructed to examine the potentiality of technology and its impacts on a range of sports with respect to fair play, usability and acceptance of technology by the referee, player, coach and spectator. A further and more detailed study would provide a more solidified confirmation of the findings of this study. The results of such studies would enable sports administrators to be able to introduce technologies with a more complete understanding, and to be able to tailor their introduction to focus on promoting better decision making, a fairer competition platform and subsequently improved player performance.

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the participants from the various sporting groups who volunteered their time for this study.

References