Human Referees versus Electronic Referees

Human Referees

 Versus

 Electronic Referees

Author’s note: This year the NFL added several new rules and tools to the game, including instant replays on every scoring play. This triggered tons of thoughts in my head about referees in general and how they compare. I am focusing on grammar, an intriguing introduction, and a thoughtful conclusion.

There is only two seconds left in the game. Twenty four seventeen clearly reads the scoreboard. They disperse from the huddle and prepare for the snap. “Hike!” screams the quarterback. Half a dozen receivers tear down the field. The ball is chucked into the end zone.  It’s right on target! Touchdown!  You scream running around the room. As you return to the television the referee signals no good. He stepped out of bounds on his second step. The game is over. Your team lost. After the game, you watch the replay and it turns out the receiver was in bounds. The referee made a terrible call, but could you have done any better? With the new technology it isn’t even sports anymore. The best referee is one that will call a game fairly and realistically, and the best way to accomplish that is with human referees. 

Human referees are the only judges we have ever seen. Human Referees create more jobs for the plummeting economy.  An advantage of a human referee is they can judge the penalty. If the penalty didn’t have an effect on the play why is it worth calling? This is a major flaw in an electronic referee.

In football, if every player was reviewed on every down, imagine how long every play would take. The first quarter would last two hours with all the commercial breaks and the not so instant replays. Although they would be accurate, most of the penalties would not even matter. There would be multiple fouls, creating even more rules to complicate the game. The only point where electronic refs would be useful is on scoring plays. The electronic ref could easily make a call through programming. Except, you still have the problem of an unimportant penalty being called.  In football, electronic referees will cause a train wreck.

An electric umpire may be a different story though. An electronic home plate umpire will make the right call every pitch. One flaw in baseball is the definition of the strike zone.  Different umpires have different feelings about what is a strike and what isn’t.  Every game is different for that reason. Electronic umpires will continue to call the same pitch a strike every game.

Watching baseball today, the telecasts have a strike zone on the side of the screen. It tells you if a pitch was a strike. Although, half the time the human umpire will call a baseball at your feet a strike even though on the side screen it was a ball. This adds an advantage to the fans so they can see every pitch, but it creates more stress for the viewers when the wrong call is made. It is not that referees are making worse calls than they used to, it is just that the new technology will tell you if it is right or wrong showing things only computers can show you.

Technology in sports has huge advantages though. In horse racing and NASCAR, if technology wasn’t used, photo finishes would not be available and tough and inaccurate calls would be forced without them. A replay will show you something you never should see. If a penalty or call is wrong, and can only be proven incorrect through zooming in and slow motion. I believe that is unthinkable. Take this instance, a wide receiver catches the ball in the end zone. Then it is reviewed, and usually ends up that he didn’t have full possession for the half of a second it counted. A better example of this is if you are playing a piece on the piano, and you miss one note. Almost everyone wouldn’t notice. But with advanced electronic judges everyone would realize you messed up.

Electronic referees should not be used extensively in sports throughout the world, only when it is essential.  Too many reviews lead to lengthy games which lead to bored fans. Yet a review when it is necessary makes the game more interesting. Reviews should be at the speed they were taken at not several times as slow. A combination of human referees and seldom, accurate reviews formulate the best way to judge sports.