.
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
CIFP -
International Fair Play Committee Introduction, From: http://www.fairplayinternational.org/introduction.php
Connelly, J.
(2003), “Doing the Best They Can”, The
World and I. Washington: Oct 2003: 18-10,162.
Erlandson,
D. A. (1993), Doing a Naturalistic
Inquiry: A Guide to Methods, Newbury Park, CA.
FIFA
(2007) FIFA and Fair Play, From:
www.fifa.com/en/fairplay/index.htm
Ford, G. G.,
Gallagher, S. H., Lacy, B. A., Birdwell, A. M., Bridwell, A. M. and Goodwin, F.
(1999), “Repositioning the Home Plate Umpire to Provide Enhanced Perceptual
Cues and More Accurate Ball-Strike Judgments”, Journal of Sports Behavior;
22(1): 28-44.
Garcia, R.
(2001), “Elite sports in the net. Is there a virtual community for elite sports
in the Internet?”, Proc of CAR 2001: 2nd
International Forum on Elite Sports, 81-82
Griffiths,
K. M. and Christensen, H. (2000), “Quality
of Web Based Information on Treatment of Depression: Cross Sectional Survey”, British
Medical Journal, 321 (7275) Dec: 1511-1515.
Hawking, D.,
Craswell, N., Bailey, P. and Griffiths, K. (2000), Measuring search engine
quality. Information Retrieval, 2000. In Press. Available from URL: http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/hawking01measuring.html
IOC (2007), The
International Committee for Fair Play, From: http://www.olympic.org/uk/organisation/actions/index_uk.asp
Jones, M.
V., Paull, G. C. and Erskine, J. (2002), “The Impact of a Team’s Aggressive
Reputation on the Decisions of Association Football Referees”, Journal of
Sports Sciences, 20, 991-1000.
Legrand, C.
(2006), “Referees: From Amateurism to Professionalism in France”, Proc. of INSEP 2006: 4th
International Sports Sciences, 41-42
Lincoln, Y.
and Guba, E. (1985), Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Mascarenhas,
D. R. (2005), “The Accuracy, Agreement and Coherence of Decision-Making in
Rugby Union Officials”, Journal of Sport Behaviour, 28, 254.
McCraken, G.
(1988), The Long Interview, Newbury
Park, CA.
National
Association of Sports Officials (NASO) (2007), Sports Officials Code of
Ethics, From: http://www.naso.org/benefits/ethics.htm
Patton, M.
(1990), Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods (2nd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Price , K.
(2006), “Officials Encouraged to Blow it”, Sporting News, May 5: 230, 18.
Robinson, W.
S. (1951), “The Logical Structure of Analytical Induction”, American
Sociological Review, 16, 812-818.
Spink, A. (2005), “Web Search
Trends Project: 1997-2005”, paper presented at The Faculty of Information
Technology Research Seminar, University of Technology, Sydney 25 May.
Sullivan,
D. (2001), The
Search Engine Report [Online] from: http://www.searchenginewatch.com/reports/sizes.html