For Discussion... Referees

[SaintDawg]

Regarding NFL and Collegiate, do any of you think that a time will come where the human aspect of officiating a sport will become obsolete?
Is it possible that technology will progress to a point to where camera resolution and placement will officiate the games entirely?
I just happened to watch several games yesterday and Saturday (bowls) where the officials made major and minor errors and it just got me to thinking. I'm not belly-aching over any game in particular. Cameras don't lie and they're never wrong. Is the technology already there and we just choose to use the live refs?

Or looking at it another way, removing officials from the field of play altogether and have them make rulings on what the cameras show? I know that this is already done to an extent, but it seems like they are sometimes in the way and deliberately slow the game down when teams are attempting to use momentum.

The possibility for players to have "smart" helmets and uniforms to decide on specific calls would be available in the future too, if it isn't already.

And I'm not just talking about football either; I am curious about this including all sports. Or in the debate, is human officiating an integral part of the game and must never go away?

I don't know if this has been discussed here before or not. Just my mind wandering.:confused:

[smootness]

There will always be a need for officials on the field. You can't replace some of the angles officials can get with cameras. But yes, more and more calls will be handed over to cameras and automated devices over time. I can pretty much guarantee you there will be a time in the future where umps are not calling balls and strikes.

Spotting the ball in football, for example, will be difficult without officials until the technology advances way beyond where it is now.

But they're going to have to come a long way from where they are right now before I'd be comfortable handing over many of the calls. It bogs games down, and too often the cameras don't give you a better look than anything else, and sometimes even when they do, the officials still manage to get it wrong.

[BB30]

I think it is possible but I don't think it will ever happen. The problems I see arising are penalties/hackers. You would have to set whatever is making the calls with some AI room for error otherwise you would have a flag on most every play. Also, with the way things are now anything can be hacked. I am sure somebody would figure out a way to make money gambling and having some ability to control the outcome/people paying for their team to get the benefit of the doubt.

[Liverpooldawg]

Regarding NFL and Collegiate, do any of you think that a time will come where the human aspect of officiating a sport will become obsolete?
Is it possible that technology will progress to a point to where camera resolution and placement will officiate the games entirely?
I just happened to watch several games yesterday and Saturday (bowls) where the officials made major and minor errors and it just got me to thinking. I'm not belly-aching over any game in particular. Cameras don't lie and they're never wrong. Is the technology already there and we just choose to use the live refs?

Or looking at it another way, removing officials from the field of play altogether and have them make rulings on what the cameras show? I know that this is already done to an extent, but it seems like they are sometimes in the way and deliberately slow the game down when teams are attempting to use momentum.

The possibility for players to have "smart" helmets and uniforms to decide on specific calls would be available in the future too, if it isn't already.

And I'm not just talking about football either; I am curious about this including all sports. Or in the debate, is human officiating an integral part of the game and must never go away?

I don't know if this has been discussed here before or not. Just my mind wandering.:confused:

I doubt it ever happens. As was pointed out you can call something on nearly every play if you want to.

[SaintDawg]

There is a lot that goes on in that the technology is controlled by the NFL to "ensure fairness". E.g. the Cowboys/Giants game last week... How many of you really knew that the NFL killed the headset in the QB's helmet the last 15 seconds of the play clock? I had no idea that occurred.

[TheRef]

I seriously doubt human officials will be done away with completely. While technology is great and is making things better, the ability to take the context of the game and make determinations off of that will always be important.

With that in mind, I believe the relationship between officials and technology will improve to the point that it's a seamless transition between what is called by officials and what is determined by technology.

All in all, we won't do away with human officiating, but more and more will be assisted and checked by technology.

[Leeshouldveflanked]

Don't give the SEC any Ideas... if you think Alabama gets all the calls now, just think if the SEC could program a computer to Referee games... Alabama would never have a penalty called on them from now on...

[Hypnodawg]

I don't think they will ever do away with officials, but many of the duties that official have will be handed over to machines. This will in turn, make the officials better because they can concentrate fewer aspects of the game.

It is mind boggling to me that Umps still call strikes and balls in baseball as that tech is actively used to evaluate the Umps. I could easily build a system to call runners out/safe at first that would out perform humans.

[smootness]

Don't give the SEC any Ideas... if you think Alabama gets all the calls now, just think if the SEC could program a computer to Referee games... Alabama would never have a penalty called on them from now on...

Huh? That aspect, if you truly believe it exists, would absolutely be lessened by a greater reliance on technology.

[parabrave]

Taking the human element out of it and going all tech will kill the game. The game will never end, you can call a penalty on every play. and fans will lose interest. Overreffing is one of the reasons ratings are down. I wish that the refs would call less. I mean come on calling a holding call 20 yards away from the play is ridiculous. Heck every punt return or kickoff return is a flagfest now.

[PassInterference]

The NFL now has the best technology its ever had, but continues to make catch rules more and more ridiculous.

More technology has enabled officials to see exactly what happens between a football and receiver and they still can't define what a catch is.

[Jack Lambert]

I think a lot of them take bribes.

[TUSK]

Don't give the SEC any Ideas... if you think Alabama gets all the calls now, just think if the SEC could program a computer to Referee games... Alabama would never have a penalty called on them from now on...

I'm pretty sure the REC is working on this as we speak...

They won't let this shit continue:

http://www.cfbstats.com/2016/leader/national/team/defense/split01/category14/sort01.html

[dawgday166]

Don't give the SEC any Ideas... if you think Alabama gets all the calls now, just think if the SEC could program a computer to Referee games... Alabama would never have a penalty called on them from now on...

Awww mane ... Gumps can't program computers. **** That would favor MSU Engineers.

[EngDawg]

Automatic officiating would be like a self driving car. Eminently practical, but not as fun.

[Reason2succeed]

I think a lot of them take bribes.

I don't think it is necessarily "bribes" but if gifts and other opportunities present themselves you would be a fool not to take it. As long as no one can prove quid pro quo you are good. It's a squeaky clean as lobbying our government.***

[Reason2succeed]

A simple chip in the ball and on the knee and elbow pads of players could determine ball placement. When the knee or elbow chip comes in contact with the ground where there is some type of sensor then at that exact moment the computer tracks where the further tip of the ball was. That is sent to the spotter on the sideline who takes that responsibility off of the field refs hands.

Heck, we are an engineering school. One of you figure it out. Don't forget to plant a bug in the system to help State like Orso did for the rebels.

[Jack Lambert]

I don't think it is necessarily "bribes" but if gifts and other opportunities present themselves you would be a fool not to take it. As long as no one can prove quid pro quo you are good. It's a squeaky clean as lobbying our government.***

I agree and it happens.

[Commercecomet24]

Terminator,Skynet, It's Judgement Day!

[smootness]

I think a lot of them take bribes.

Goodness.

[BB30]

I don't think they will ever do away with officials, but many of the duties that official have will be handed over to machines. This will in turn, make the officials better because they can concentrate fewer aspects of the game.

It is mind boggling to me that Umps still call strikes and balls in baseball as that tech is actively used to evaluate the Umps. I could easily build a system to call runners out/safe at first that would out perform humans.

Yea, but that would take some of the fun out of baseball. Umps are a unique part of the game. Who will the fans heckle if you get rid of them? Who will coaches blame losses on? We would no longer get to see coaches break it off in an ump and get tossed. IMO that is part of what makes baseball special. Everyone loves seeing a coach give a good ass chewing to an UMP and sometimes that can completely flip a game when a team rallies around their coach.

[SaintDawg]

A simple chip in the ball and on the knee and elbow pads of players could determine ball placement. When the knee or elbow chip comes in contact with the ground where there is some type of sensor then at that exact moment the computer tracks where the further tip of the ball was. That is sent to the spotter on the sideline who takes that responsibility off of the field refs hands.

Right. "Smart" helmets, unis, equipment, etc.