Technology in Sport

       I was already to finish up my review of the US Open when the rain came down and force Nadal versus Djokovic till this Monday evening at 2100 BST.  So I have a gap in my schedule to write about something else, something I was waiting for the next major controversy so I could share my opinion with you.  Of course by the title of this post you know I am talking about technology in sport.  I am going to talk about technology in sport history, this current use of instant replays in sports and finally, in my opinion, what the future holds in some sports.
     
       In 1888 in New Jersey an idea that would revolutionise world sport took place in practise for the first time.  Ernest Marks took the first Horse Race Photo Finish, he had a darkroom onsite, and in about three minutes he produced a negative for the judges. This image has not been found. The earliest known photo of the finish of a race to survive was taken on June 25, 1890 by John C. Hemment in New York in the borough of Brooklyn at the Sheepshead Bay Race Track.

     Now most of you might not think that timekeeping is that important, but back in its day it was the biggest controversy in sport. OMEGA‘s first official appearance at the 1932 Olympic Games was remarkable in two ways: it was the first occasion that timekeeping had been assigned to a private company and the first time that winners and medallists were timed to the nearest 1/10th of a second.  In previous Olympic Games only the winner's time had been recorded but with the split-seconds facility of the OMEGA stopwatch meant that intermediate times could also be measured for the first time.

      In 1968 for the first time in the history of the Olympic Games, electronic timekeeping was officially used in all sports in Mexico City. The swimming events witnessed an even more revolutionary innovation, with so-called “touch pads” introduced by OMEGA to solve the problem of recording when swimmers touched the wall.

     Nowadays sport and technology goes hand in hand. There are many technologies in sport that we take for granted including timekeeping and photo finishing cameras but there are plenty of others, manufacturing of equipment being just one.  But there is one technology in sport that is on the tip of everyone's tongues and that is use of instant/video replays by officials.  

      Leagues and sports using instant replay in official decision making include the NHL, NFL, NBA, MLB, Tennis, Field Hockey, RugBy League and Union and Cricket but not Football.

• In NBA, the officials must watch an instant replay of a buzzer beater to determine if the shot was released before time expired, neither team can initiate a review.
• In NHL, only goals are reviewed and they happen in certain situations e.g. to check if the puck was in the net prior to goal frame being dislodged, neither team can initiate a review.  NHL also allows asks replay judges at games to review the plays, or to mete out punishments to players for illegal on-ice actions that were not noticed by the on-ice officials.
• In Field Hockey, the officials can request the opinion of a video umpire for, validity of a goal or if there was a foul in the build-up to a goal.  Ordinarily, teams are not allowed to make such a request or to press the match umpire to do so.  On a trial basis, the 2009 Men’s Champions Trophy allows for "team referral" by each team captain, to query a goal, penalty stroke, or penalty corner decision. The team retains the right to a referral if its previous referrals were upheld.
• In MLB, the officials can only use an instant replay to be used to review boundary home run calls to determine: a) fair (home run) or foul, b) whether the ball actually left the playing field or c) whether the ball was subject to spectator interference.  Neither team can initiate a review.
• In Tennis, Hawk-Eye and MacCAM are used so players can appeal to have the system's calculation used to override a disputed call by the umpire, a player can make up to three unsuccessful challenges per set, and a fourth in a tie-break.
• In Rugby League and Union the video referee can be called upon by the match official to determine the outcome of a possible try. The "video ref" can make judgements on knock-ons, offside, obstructions, hold-ups and whether or not a player has gone dead, but cannot rule on a forward pass.  A coach cannot challenge a call made by the pitch referee.
• In cricket, and instant replays can be used by the third umpire for run outs, stumpings, doubtful catches and whether the ball has crossed the boundary for a six or short of a four.  A review system has also been introduced which allows each team can make three unsuccessful requests per innings, only the batsman involved in a dismissal can ask for a review of an "out" decision; in a "not out", only the captain or acting captain of the fielding team.  The TV umpire can use Hawk-Eye, Snicko and Hot Spot if they are available to make his decision.
• In NFL, a coach may 'challenge' on-field calls of plays. A challenge can only be made on certain reviewable calls (for a full list see here) on plays that initiated before the two minute warning and only when a team has at least one time-out remaining in the half. The coaches now throw a red flag onto the field, indicating the challenge to the referees.

       In all of these sports the video replay comes into use when there is a natural stop in play.  With the exception of tennis where a player may challenge an 'in' call mid rally but if they're wrong they lose that point. 

       In football there are no such stoppages in play, lets take for example the Frank Lampard shot for England against Germany in the World Cup.  Let's go through what happened,

1. Frank Lampard shoots from 25 yards out.
2. The ball smashes into the crossbar and goes down.
3. The ball bounces back up and the Germany keeper picks up the ball.
4. The keeper then passes the ball out to his defence and Germany start an attack.

      When in this passage of play is the call for a video replay going to take place,

Do you stop play immediately?

No, you can't stop play at the end of it due to the fact that the Germans have the ball and the match is continuing because if you do stop the play then for what turns out to be not a goal then the Germans have lost their attacking advantage through no fault of their own. 

Do you have the replay when the ball next goes out of play? 

No, what happens if the next time the ball goes out of play one of the teams has scored a legitimate goal.  Do you count that goal than review the play and if the video replay shows there was a goal count that one as well? Or do you only count the goal from the video replay?  Both are utterly daft.

       The problem is there is no stoppage of play in this and most cases where a video replay can be used effectively and most importantly fairly.  The way forward for football in these situations is for there to be some other form of goal line technology like microchips in the ball and goal line which will send a message to the referee that the ball crossed the line.  The problem with this is FIFA & UEFA have always wanted a system that could be used across as many levels of football as possible and my suggestion would be expensive.  Currently FIFA & UEFA have gone with testing two extra officials behind the goal lines on each side as this is a fix which can be introduced in all levels of football.

      Is that the right way forward I don't know.  All I know is that instant video replays are not the way forward for football.