Remake of AI vs. People: The necessity of technology in sports officiating by Chisako A. Cole

Introduction

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Sports culture has become an emotional experience. Watching games often pushes fans to pour their hope into a single team or individual, then cheer, laugh, and cry with and for them. Watching games also often initiates the release of adrenaline and high tensions that pose a danger if snapped at the wrong time. Unfortunately, this occurs far too often, with controversial plays, calls, and game outcomes leaving athletes at the mercy of fans’ outbursts of anger and frustration. With the rise of social media, athletes are not even able to escape these outbursts once they have left the stadium.

Such instances of danger are not limited towards athletes; referees also often bear the brunt of the abuse by both fans and athletes in major league sports, while referees at recreational/youth levels receive such from players and participants. One weekend soccer player took this abuse to the next level, having so much frustration during a game that he punched and fatally injured the referee officiating his game (White). Measures must be taken to mitigate the animosity and hostility directed towards game officials during and after games not only to protect them as people, but also ensure that people will still want to pursue their jobs in the future. Especially in professional sports, fairness and accuracy are principles of sports that allow the activity to maintain an air of dignity and civility while retaining strong emotions of anger, excitement, grief, and pride.

The technological revolution our modern world faces today provides an attractive opportunity to athletics and professional sports in increasing the level of accuracy at which they are officiated. In order to fully take advantage of this opportunity in a way that could potentially increase viewer engagement in addition to ensuring fair play within games, it may be necessary to more deeply integrate a variety of forms of technology into how professional sports are officiated. Incorporating a non-human source of regulation within sports could lead to a reduction in the internal biases human officials inevitably demonstrate and reduce the risk of controversy associated with ambiguous calls that might allow for the perpetuation of negative stereotypes.

Research Question

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Why should AI and technology play a larger role in officiating competitive sports?

Category 1: Increasing Fan Engagement

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Figure 1

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

It has always been necessary in competitive games to officiate in response to the environment of the game, amount of tension present, skill level and reputation of the athletes, etc. often through bending the rules. In many cases, this adds to the entertainment factor of the game, creating more uproar in the crowd, highlighting long-standing rivalries, giving highly reputed athletes more screen time. However, in baseball, this bending of rules proved to do the opposite- as umpires looked the other way as pitchers took several minutes to simply throw the ball, the duration of games began to increase, peaking at a near 5 hour game in 2020 between the New York Yankees and Cleveland Indians (Frommer). In response to the increasing dead time during games, game attendance and viewership have displayed decreasing fan engagement, as seen in Figure 1, which the MLB has chosen to solve through the implementation of technology to aid umpires- a pitch clock that limited the amount of time pitchers both pitchers and hitters had on their respective blocks (Frommer). There has not yet been a sufficient amount of MLB games to gauge the success or failure of this clock, but history is often reflective of the future, and the implementation of a clock in football yielded overly positive results in terms of scoring, attendance, and overall engagement (Frommer). Baseball is a favorite American pastime whose history began far before technology was anywhere near what it is today, and is therefore deeply rooted in tradition, in contrast to American football, so, the backlash against the integration of technology is significantly higher. Competitive sports though is undeniably a major sector of the entertainment industry, and as the rest of this industry continues to industrialize and incorporate modern technology, it too must follow along to successfully retain its fans.

Source: The Usage of Video Assistant Referee and its Impact on Players' and Fans' Emotional Experience of Football

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

As a part of the entertainment industry, the successful broadcasting and ability to retain viewer attention of competitive sports relies largely on the ability to instill strong emotion. Simply watching sports has been an activity people use to freely shout, celebrate, even cry. The addition of technology into watching sports has been a controversial topic in this aspect of spectatorship, with many reporting that the addition of instant replay and Virtual Assistant Referees (VAR), referees that use a complex system of cameras to rewatch and analyze ambiguous plays to advise referees on the court/field, have changed the flow of and emotions derived from watching games. Some fans report that VAR “adds to the emotional experience… it creates more anxiety. But I believe that is a good anxiety”(South 34), or that they “went through a roller coaster of emotion” (South 35). A general consensus though seems to be that the implementation of VAR has “[created] a different dimension of emotion” where hope and doubt have become the more prominent emotions felt instead of instant joy and disappointment (South 34). One might argue that although such instant feelings are more memorable, hope and doubt are the emotions that keep eyes glued to the screen and build suspense to make the release of joy or disappointment all the more rousing. Even for fans that might see this change in a negative light, there is another consensus that technology is not the issue; “It’s how the technology is being utilised” (South 39). While VAR specifically may not be the answer in terms of integrating technology into competitive sports, people do seem to be open to its more general idea.

Category 2: Reducing Controversy that uphold oppressive stereotypes

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Source 1: Umpire Ruled out after Serena row

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Competitive sports has become a sort of intersection between entertainment, activism, marketing, technology, politics, and more. It has also brought to attention the intersectional identity of individual athletes, a notable one being Serena Williams, a legendary name in the world of tennis. Her career took off in 2001 in the Indian Wells tournament, where she faced racism to such an extent that she chose to boycott the tournament for 14 years, then faced her first major controversy in 2004 in the U.S. Open Quarter-final where umpire Mariana Alves made a series of incorrect and disputed calls that cost her the match. Alves’ calls were only determined to be incorrect based on replays, yet the umpire still was able to overrule them. A similar instance occurred again in 2009 with an alleged foot fault that was not recorded. Had the video replay or technology similar to Hawkeye, a virtual line-calling system, been provided the final say, these controversies could have been prevented, and the racist undertones of the hate Serena received for her responding outbursts with umpires may have not culminated in the release of a blatantly racist cartoon released in 2022 following her match with Naomi Osaka.

Category 3: Reducing effect and presence of bias

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Source: The Issue of Unconscious Bias in Referee Decisions in the National Rugby League

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Variation of the degree to which rules are enforced in competitive sports are a major source of entertainment and engagement, but game officials and fans must remember that these competitions are not simply games to the athletes playing them; they are their career and life, and determine their reputation and future. In order to ensure that these athletes are able to fairly continue in their careers and ensure that fans are able to view a just game, referees should more heavily rely on technology when making calls to avoid the influence of unconscious biases that may be counterproductive to this. Studies examining the number of calls and penalties directed towards home and visiting teams for both rugby and football found that the idea of a home advantage likely is not only perpetuated by the team’s comfort in their environment, but also by referee bias, which also may be influenced by crowd size and density (O’Brien & Mangan). Bias is not limited to home advantage either; related studies have found likely correlation between referee decision and player status/reputation, height, crowd reactions, and even cultural closeness (O’Brien & Mangan). Referees are also only human, and inevitably experience exhaustion sometimes comparable to that of the athletes on field, causing them to fall back to the crowd and popular decision to make decisions. Nonetheless, the implementation of technology able to more accurately officiate games or even identify potentially biased activity may have major implications on bias reduction not only in sports officiating, but also in individual referees who are forced to confront their thought processes behind inaccurate or disproportionate calls/penalties.

Figure 2

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

For those that are more hesitant to accept or are even completely opposed to the idea of technological integration, perhaps their opposition stems from ideals adjacent to the ones present in Neo-Luddism established to combat its integration altogether in an effort to preserve tradition and our humanity. Figure 2 depicts Ned Ludd, the name given to the nonexistent leader of the Luddite movement in the early 1800s. This original movement was characterized by its resistance to the application of and advancement of technology largely out of concern of unemployment and safety. Today, this concern has extended to environmentalism and community preservation. In the context of sports and from the perspective of fans, Luddite ideals might apply when in the interest of preserving the human aspect of games, or could even arise in the argument that refereeing is an art of sport of its own meant to be carried out by people and people alone. Yet, not only does it seem immoral to reduce accuracy in officiating for the sake of engagement as it comes at the potential cost of athletes’ careers, but also ineffective as even fans themselves engage in the technological revolution the modern world is undergoing. Even in the specific instance of the pitch clock in baseball which has faced backlash in its variance from tradition, which baseball is deeply rooted in as America’s National Pastime, preventing the integration of this simple technology for umpires is counterproductive as seen in the formerly declining attendance rates. It is also necessary to mention that with only human officiators present, controversial calls could be disputed for years to come, causing negative emotions to only continuously boil and potentially drive people away from spectatorship due to the animosity associated with it. Technology offers a more clear end to such controversy that result in more assured feelings of joy and relief, or disappointment that drive fans to watch games again to pursue that rush of dopamine.

Source: Paradoxical Tensions Related to AI-Powered Evaluations Systems in Competitive Sports

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

That is not to say that Luddite ideals are completely in the wrong though. Preserving at least part of the “human” aspect of competitive sports is essential to maintaining fan engagement and ensuring that the same levels of emotion and intensity are felt. It is possible for technology and AI to be “too exact”, leaving too little room for imagination by fans or being too harsh on athletes, with the mistakes made by athletes and referees leveling each other out so the idea of “perfection” really does seem attainable (Mazurova, et al.). A major aspect of competitive sports is its ability to test and boast the capabilities of humans, and the excessive or sole use of methods that increase technology and eliminate all mistakes in judging, refereeing, etc. may be seen to counteract the purpose so many people flock to these sports. Many fans that choose to become very involved in a sport/sports also enjoy participating in analyzing games or competitions as referees do, and technology or AI programs that display explicit data on athlete stats, form, distance, accuracy, etc. that referees are often not able to supply due to a common reliance on intuition and experience rather than hard data that is difficult to produce in the high stress environment of a game give these fans a chance to engage in competitions on a level not able to be achieved before (Mazurova et al.). Fans themselves are able to officiate in a way and subsequently feel more included in the game, allowing them to more fully immerse themselves in the sport and experience emotions associated with the game to a greater extent.

Bibliography

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Frommer, Frederic J. “Opinion: A clock saved the NBA. Can it save baseball?” CNN. Cable News Network. 18 Feb 2023. cnn.com/2023/02/18/opinions/mlb-pitch-clock-baseball-new-rules-frommer/index.html

Gordon, Anna. “Ai Healthcare? Robots Created to Help Patients Pass Trial.” Time, Time, 31 Jan. 2024, time.com/6590440/robots-hospital-patient-testing-phase-ai-assistance/.

Kegu, Jessica. “Are there different standards for men and women in tennis? USTA head says ‘yes’”. CBS Mornings. CBS News. 11 Sep 2018. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/serena-williams-us-open-loss-usta-ceo-katrina-adams-men-women-held-to-different-standards/

Keh, Andrew. “Gymnastics’ Latest Twist? Robot Judges That See Everything.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 10 Oct. 2019, www.nytimes.com/2019/10/10/sports/olympics/gymnastics-robot-judges.html.

Mallen, Cheryl. “Chapter 6: Artificial Intelligence and Implications for Sports Officiating”. Emerging Technologies in Sport: Implications for Sport Management. Routledge. 30 Sep 2020. pp. 87-104. https://ucill.vdxhost.com/zportal/zengine?VDXaction=DocFetch&docfetch_seencopyright=true&

Mazurova, Elena et al. “Paradoxical Tensions Related to AI-powered Evaluation Systems in Competitive Sports”. Information Systems and Frontiers. Springer Link. 29 Nov 2021. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10796-021-10215-8#Sec12

“Ned Ludd.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 25 Feb. 2024, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ned_Ludd.

Newman, Brooke. “The Long History behind the Racist Attacks on Serena Williams”, The Washington Post. 11 Sep 2018. www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2018/09/11/long-history-behind-racist-attacks-serena-williams/.

Nielsen. “Average TV viewership of Major League Baseball World Series games in the United States from 2000 to 2022”. Statista. Christina Gough. 15 Nov 2022. https://www-statista-com.libproxy.berkeley.edu/statistics/235678/world-series-tv-viewership-in-the-united-states/

O’Brien, Katherine A., and John Mangan. “The Issue of Unconscious Bias in Referee Decisions in the National Rugby League.” Frontiers, Frontiers, 23 Aug. 2021, www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fspor.2021.739570/full.

Park, Yoonyoung and Hu, Jianying. “Bias in Artificial Intelligence”. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology. National Library of Medicine. American Society of Nephrology. 1 Feb 2023. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10103344/

Prime/USTA, Source: Amazon. “Alizé Cornet Hit with Code Violation for Changing Shirt on Court – Video.” The Guardian, Guardian News and Media, 29 Aug. 2018, www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2018/aug/29/alize-cornet-hit-with-code-violation-for-changing-shirt-on-court-video.

“Racial Bias in Fans and Officials: Evidence from the Italian ...” Frontiers In, Frontiers Media S.A., 28 Feb 2023. journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00380385221138332.

South, Zin. “The Usage of Video Assistant Referee (VAR) and its impact on Players’ and Fans’ Emotional Experience of Football”. University of Canterbury. 2022. https://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/server/api/core/bitstreams/5f75027c-55ac-4ff7-beaa-bab7054568b4/content

“Umpire Ruled out after Serena row”. CNN. Cable News Network. 8 Sep 2004. https://edition.cnn.com/2004/SPORT/09/08/tennis.umpire/

Uzoma, Anyanwu Udo. “Hawkeye- The Facts Behind the Controversy”. Tennis View Magazine. Tennis View Magazine. 24 Aug 2023. http://www.tennisviewmag.com/tennis-view-magazine/article/hawkeye-facts-behind-controversy

White, Ed. “Soccer Player Gets 8 Years in Prison for Killing Referee.” AP News, AP News, 13 Dec. 2023, apnews.com/general-news-9c6ffd0841024f8f8f3823ed94e69e8e.

Source: Alizé Cornet hit with code violation for changing shirt on court

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Finally, Serena Williams has not been the only athlete subject to such disproportionate penalties based on a part of her identity. In a US Open tournament, tennis player Alizé Cornet was given a penalty for changing her shirt on the court after realizing it was backwards. A clear double standard is seen when this penalty is compared to the countless times when male tennis players change their shirt or even sit with it off for the duration of a break. Again, this calls for a more standardized way of sports officiating that might only be able to come from the use of algorithms and technology to step away from the human biases that are able to similar uphold unequal treatment. An algorithmic and computerized approach to making calls and distributing penalties also might serve to prevent the generation of controversy surrounding players that forces aspects of their identify aside from being an athlete from coming into play. Such algorithms would be able to explain exactly what movement or gesture had initiated the need for a penalty with concrete evidence rather than the a few words by a single referee.

Source: Bias of Artificial Intelligence

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

In an attempt to eliminate the presence of such damaging biases, a common proposal put forth by many both inside and outside of the sports industry is the introduction of AI into game officiating. This project has already begun in gymnastics, when judges were aided by AI in the 2019 world championships. It created a standardized method of scoring that would output the exact “thought process” that generated scores, yet still left room for judges to account for the subjectivity necessary to recognize the artistry and feeling behind performances (Keh). However, AI is not the perfect answer to the elimination of bias. It is still subject to the potential bias of its creators and the data it is shown. Especially in sports, the data an AI must be shown is based on historical images, information, and events that often have underlying themes of inequity, discrimination, and preference. This is even seen in AI's application in medicine, where the data algorithms were fed tended to cause them to recognize race as a risk factor for kidney disease specifically in people of African descent (Park and Hu). Therefore, any historical patterns of bias or discriminatory practices within sports, like gymnastics, may cause AI to develop a bias of its own. So, similarly to the method necessary to consider viewer engagement in a world undergoing a technological revolution and the need for accuracy, a balance between the power of humans and technology in game officiating must be struck so they officiate not only the players and game, but also each other.

Source: Are there different standards for men and women in tennis? USTA head says "yes"

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

The grievances Serena Williams faced were not limited to racist tournament attendees, point losses, penalties, and racist caricatures. Outbursts towards umpires are often penalized not only during the game, but also with an ensuing fine named by game officials. When comparing the amount Serena was called on to pay to her male counterparts, a clear disparity can be seen. In response to her arguments against the umpire during her game with Osaka, Serena was fined a total of $17,000 for verbal abuse, a coaching violation, and racket abuse. Roger Federer, another tennis legend who is also known to have his share of outbursts during matches, was only fined $1,500 following his "expletive-laden outburst during the 2009 U.S. Open Men's final" (Kegu). The clear difference in these fines in addition to the caricature of Serena seem to only perpetuate negative stereotypes surrounding black women that label them as too loud or criticize their body shape. It is unsustainable and unethical to allow such practices to continue, and a more standardized method of distributing penalties seems necessary to prevent other black and/or female athletes from experiencing this perpetuation to the extent Serena did. This standardization may be only achieved through the use of technology, perhaps with AI algorithms that analyze speech. One might even argue that line judges in tennis specifically could be eliminated from the game altogether and replaced with Hawkeye, an idea supported by Novak Djovic, another tennis great (Uzoma).

Figure 3

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Figure 3 depicts Serena’s match with Osaka where a series of arguments with the umpire regarding score and penalties for coaching during the game, a practice that Serena had consistently frowned upon. The artist also chose to depict Osaka and the umpire as white, in addition to depicting Serena in a style akin to the racist caricatures drawn of people of African descent that had been used during times of slavery, colonialism, and extreme perpetuated racism. Inaccuracies in calling penalties not only gives room for potential racial bias, in addition to bias based on other aspects of an athlete’s identity, but also for onlookers to warp the situation into a caricature like this.

Level 3 Conclusion

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Looking to the future, the possibility of AI being integrated into more fields and careers is becoming less of a possibility and more of a reality. In some cases, jobs that we never would have thought would fall susceptible to being replaced by machines and robots are falling prey to this technological revolution. The medical field offers a unique take on this. In recent years, a project to create robots that would be able to respond to patients and visitors in hospitals in order to provide more comfort to them and relieve hospital staff of some duties has been steadily progressing. Earlier this year, the project, SPRING (Socially Assistive Robots in Gerontological Healthcare) seems to be close to reaching success (Gordon). These robots are able to provide instructions and directions, engage in conversation, and facilitate assistance. It is very possible that humans will eventually learn to respond positively to them as well. In Japan, elderly homes are incorporating robots, with seniors interacting with them and showing clear signs of the development of strong emotional attachments and connections to them (Wright).

Places of medical care are sites where emotions often and consistently run high, similarly to stadiums and living rooms full of fans and tension. It is nearly impossible to predict from our perspective from the present the kinds of social norms that will develop and exist regarding human-AI relationships, or what AI game official assistants, or just game officials, may look like in the future. Nonetheless, the rate of integration, or invasion as some might view it, of technology into our daily lives only seems to be increasing and it is unclear whether we will be able to determine the potential effects of replacing people with AI in game officiating and similar jobs before it actually occurs.

Source: Artificial Intelligence and Implications for sports officiating

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

“... a game officials’ ‘word is law… and a crooked ref has enormous power to control the game’” (Mallen 89). This is a dangerous concept when the careers, lives, and futures are held in the hands of only a few people and a few calls that are deeply influenced by the flow of the game, the current physical and mental state of the referee, their internal views, the roar of the crowd. It is arguable that because of this, the power of a crooked ref extends far beyond the game and into the personal lives of athletes and the minds of fans. In order to reduces the risk of conscious or unconscious discriminatory practices in game officiating, not only can more algorithmic, technology-based methods be implemented into game officiating, but such may also be implemented into teaching new officials and referees.

Figure 4

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

A major, pressing bias that everyone must identify and mitigate within ourselves is racial bias, something that is known to plague all aspects of our society. Professional, and even recreational, sports are far from exempt from this. Figure 4 depicts a study of colorism in the Italian Serie A, a professional Italian football league competition, where skin ranges from 0-20 with 0 being the lightest and 20 the darkest. This study was chosen because Italy is a major player in international soccer tournaments, and therefore their referees will likely be more involved on a similar international level. The study shows that people of darker complexions are more likely to have red cards called on them. The presence of racial bias in professional athletics is especially damaging because sports is known to be an activity where people are free to play and interact regardless of their identity. The unconscious, or unfortunately sometimes conscious, choice by game officials to disproportionately call out and bring negative attention to certain races may be seen to quietly perpetuate themes of racism and discrimination. Perhaps the negative interactions with tennis umpires experienced by Serena Williams could be linked to racial bias in this way also, whether this be solely by biases held within game officials or fans who helped shape the mindset of the umpires before and during her matches.

Source: Gymnastics’ Latest Twist? Robot Judges That See Everything

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

Reflection Letter

chisakoasakawa — 2024-09-07 16:11:55 UTC

I really enjoyed and appreciated the way the class was structured almost around this project, as it gave me a better understanding of what we were meant to learn from it and what you want to see in it. I enjoyed looking at the projects of other people the most and analyzing them, as not only was it impressive to see the work of others, but I feel that the activities you gave us that corresponded with them were very useful. Working backwards to identify their research question or level 3 question was interesting and really made me more deeply consider every piece of information included in my own project and its relation to my thesis and research question.

Regarding finding sources, I did struggle in finding ones I believed were the most relevant to my topic and effective for my argument, and ended up using some that I believe are not quite as effective or relevant as they could have been. It was a bit difficult finding visual statistics through statista and the library website for my topic, so I began turning more towards researching related studies and using their figures, statistics, and quotes rather than only looking at articles or images. This process of looking through studies also ended up being more interesting and allowed me to develop a greater understanding of several subtopics within my project in general, so I will likely continue to use this method in future assignments and projects.

In hindsight, I wish that I could have spent more time on this project and taken full advantage of how the class was formatted in respect to it. I do work best under pressure with a more immediate deadline in sight, but unfortunately due to the sheer amount of work I have given myself this semester and poor planning, I was unable to spend as much time as I would have liked modifying this.