Technology in Sport: Should we have it?

One of the hottest topics of debate in all of sport that polarises opinion is the use of technology to assist officials in making on-field decisions. In the red corner is the supporters of technology. They are adamant that the use of technology helps officials make more correct decisions (supposedly the main reason why technology is implemented) and thus reduce the confrontation and backlash from players, coaches and fans when their team gets screwed over. Then in the blue corner are the opponents to technology. They believe that technology will interrupt the flow or authenticity of the sport,  that bad calls are part and parcel of the sport and that they even up over time or that it simply won’t work to reduce refereeing mistakes.

This debate was recently reignited in AFL after a controversial goal-line incident during the big 1st v 2nd match between Collingwood and Geelong. In short, the goal-line umpire thought the Geelong player had failed to kick the ball in time before crossing the line and hence awarded a behind (1 point) instead of a goal (6 points). The television coverage showed a goal-line replay of the incident and revealed that the player had clearly kicked the ball before crossing the line and therefore a goal should’ve been awarded.



AFL is one of the few sports in the modern era that does not use technology. It doesn’t even use audio equipment for officials to communicate with each other. Last week’s incident has supporter’s of technology demanding the use of video replays to help officials rule on close goal-line decisions. Even the league’s umpiring boss believes video technology could’ve prevented three mistakes made by goal umpires in the last round of matches. Other incidents such as when a ball grazes the goal post could also be reviewed though the AFL is contemplating changing it’s unique rules regarding shots on goal hitting the ‘woodwork’.

The biggest question to ask is how would video technology work in AFL? AFL is a very fast, free-flowing sport which has few breaks during the normal course of play. The game is not designed for every close goal-line decision to be checked before play can resume again - especially if the original decision by the umpire is to ‘play on’. Video replays and referee challenges work fantastic in sports such as NFL where there is a break after every single play. A decision to review a play, either by a coach or by a tv official can be done during these breaks thus not interrupting the live play of the game.

The best way that AFL could implement video replays is to use the system currently used in league and union. If the referee is not sure if a try has been scored correctly, he goes to the video referee to help make the decision. Fortunately for AFL, close goal-line decisions are few and far between and the rules defining how a goal is scored is quite clear meaning that the technology would work quite well. In the NRL however, the rules governing how a try is scored has become quite muddied while it feels that at least every second attempted try is sent to the video referee. Fans have become frustrated that trys that look legitimate during live play are not awarded because of a bizarre interpretation using slow-mo replays. The NRL is the best example of video technology going wrong. It is a severe blight on the game where fans are continuously frustrated by either delays in awarding clear trys by going to the video referee or, even worse, getting the decision wrong after using the video technology.

Another sport hotly debating the use of technology is the biggest game in the world - football (soccer). Most people would’ve seen or at least heard about the goal that wasn’t awarded for England against Germany in the second round of this year’s World Cup. On video replay, it was clearly shown that the ball had crossed the line and should’ve been awarded a goal. In that game, the goal would’ve levelled the scores up at 2-all. Even before this incident, FIFA had experimented with implementing a chip inside the ball that would alert the referee if the ball had crossed the line or not. However, FIFA’s president was a staunch opponent of implementing goal-line technology, but has changed tact since this incident. Ironically, England had a goal scored against them in their very next match that failed to fully cross the line.



Like AFL, football is a continuous free-flowing sport that doesn’t have many breaks. Therefore, it’d ruin the game if a referee decided to go to a video referee (or if there was a challenge system used by the players or coach) and thus the play would then be stopped whilst everyone waits for the decision. Goal-line technology that could send a signal back to the referee almost instantaneously would be the only method viable that would still allow the game to flow freely. It also helps too that the definite of a goal is pretty simple and clear - something a try in the NRL is not.

So while we are in the midst of the technology-age, the use of such devices to help make crucial refereeing decisions is varied from sport-to-sport. Has the technology alleviated and reduced officiating errors in the sports that have used it? I think if you ask a cricket or a rugby league fan they would say “no”. However, at the same time you have fans in sports that don’t use technology demanding it be introduced so that their team is not treated unfairly. But really, since was professional sport ever fair? Well that’s another blog for another day...