Sport and Technology (8)
- 6 Nov 06, 10:42 AM
I was fortunate enough to be at Twickenham on Sunday to see There was plenty to talk about after the game.
While the result didn't go the way I wanted it to go, I thought it was interesting listening in on the Ref Link as to why England weren't awarded a try by the video referee when Jamie Noon had crossed the line.
The upshot was that the 4th referee couldn't see clearly that the ball had been grounded properly.
I still try to play rugby as and when I can, and I have no doubt that in a league game on a Saturday afternoon that score would have been given.
So, did technology get in the way here? You could argue that is the case, and it would be hard for me to argue the against that.
Without wanting to do myself out of a job, there is a time and a place for the use of innovative technology within sport where it used beyond giving people watching at home a better understanding of the event.
For example, I think the way was used successfully at the US Open tennis earlier this year where players had the option to make two challenges in a match for line calls. It worked nicely, and it will be used at next year's as well.
But where do we draw the line? Having umpired in cricket for a number of years, I know that anything that could help you make a decision more accurate would be welcome, but would it actually diminish the authority of the on-field umpire?
I don't think that the use of replays to prove whether a catch has been cleanly taken has proved to be a great success with too many inconclusive results being shown. However, the use of tools like Hawk-Eye for the viewer at home shows that the vast majority of time in international cricket, the umpire has got the LBW decision correct.
I don't deny that the video referee in Rugby Union and Rugby League has helped get more decisions right, but should there be an onus on the players in the sport to be honest enough to say what happened? After all, .
I fear I have opened a can of worms, and that's without even touching on goal line technology in football . . .
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Comments Post your comment
It’s not a question of where you draw the line. Using technology to make any decision legitimises replacing human judgement with a machine. It establishes a basic principle that fundamentally undermines any objections to bringing in more gadgets… it's the thin end of the wedge. Unfortunately the introduction of technology in football is inevitable for two reasons.
1 The media kicks up a huge fuss every time video evidence proves a ref got a big decision wrong in a game involving what they like to refer to as the ‘big four’. Sooner or later the footballing authorities are going to buckle under the pressure this creates.
2 Football PLC is always looking to sell more stuff by ‘improving’ the game. Like winter balls for example - an utterly pointless idea.
It’s the imperfections that make football unpredictable. Ironing them out will make the game duller than it has already become.
On a slightly different tack… Have the electronic boards used by officials at football matches improved the sport? Typing the numbers in seems to take forever and you can’t read them when it’s sunny.
Complain about this post
"But where do we draw the line? Having umpired in cricket for a number of years, I know that anything that could help you make a decision more accurate would be welcome, but would it actually diminish the authority of the on-field umpire?"
Hasn't it already undermined the umpire? An umpire has been driven from the game because his authority wasn't considered adequate (by the team involved or by the ICC) without video evidence to back it up.
Complain about this post
Sorry but i have to remark about what i feel, and others i have spoken to, is the deterioration in live coverage of rugby union. This weekends games were marred by replays when live play was going on, constant views of the coaching staff during play - missing the tap penalty from which a try resulted. Close ups when larger views were rquired. The last season or 2 has seen the increased referral to touchside comments - including a camera shot... why? Please let us have uninterrupted live coverage, do your stats after the game. Perhaps better camera coverage would have allowed the referee to give Noon's try.
Complain about this post
! Reality Check ! The try that wasnt a try occured in the very early stages of the first half. NZ went on to annihiate a rudderless english team ! It is a moot point, crying foul of the fourth offical system, i say !
Complain about this post
I completely agree with post no.3 in that I was very disappointed by the TV coverage of the England v All Blacks game on the ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½ - to the point that the artistic over-stadium sunset shots, touchline level views through crowds of players and panning close-ups of the action were getting very distracting and it definitely spoilt my enjoyment of the game (as if the score didn't!)
On a different point on use of technology, I thought the use of a mechanical ball launcher to "open" the new stand was just plain embarrasing! Not only is the stand not even finished, but I thought the act was very cheesy
Anyway, come on ÃÛÑ¿´«Ã½, let's get a more slick level of coverage for the next match and please can we see more than just the player with the ball when the action is unfolding!
Complain about this post
Hi John/Dave,
I have asked our TV rugby editor to write something on last weekend's coverage for the blog later this week so hopefully he will address some of the points you raise.
Thanks
Complain about this post
I have to agree with the comments concerning the coverage as a whole for the game. It was appalling. To have so many close ups that missed the ball being moved was pathetic and extremely frustrating. My family were actually screaming at the camera to move to keep up with the action. Was the director asleep!? At one point the camera followed the ball into touch, passing the touch line and hitting the advertising hoarding, with no players in shot! Barmy! Bring back the mix of close-up and mid-range shots so at least you can see the ball's progress being made!
Complain about this post
Technology eh?
Can we all remember that for all the business now involved, sport is a game? It reflects life and is messy. Things go wrong, justice is not done. That's the point, it's why we play it, watch it and discuss it - for the uncertainty.
The best sports shows understand this - soccer am for example or Danny Baker's version of 6-0-6. Aren't things just getting too po-faced when all anyone can complain about is a bad call?
It's the mark of a great team to shrug aside such things and still come through. England didn't because they're far from great.
On another note thanks to Claire for letting us know about the forthcoming blog. Look forward to the discussion.
Personally I don't understand the obsession with close ups when rugby is all about running lines and numbers of tacklers.
JF
Complain about this post