Fair decisions or fun to watch?
Discussion question | This is for ages 14 to 16
Technology like VAR (Video Assistant referee) in football or Hawk-Eye in tennis helps referees make more accurate decisions. While this can improve accuracy, removing the human element may also make the game less exciting for fans.
Should fan experience be prioritised over referring accuracy?
Tell us what you think
You might want to structure your answer like this:
I think the fans' experience of a sport [should / shouldn't] take priority over refereeing accuracy because [your reason]. For example, [give an example]. However, others might feel that [an opposite view].
Make sure you read the comments from other Topical Talkers to see whether you agree or disagree with them.
Comments (252)
This topic is now one of the most debated issues in modern sport so I'm excited to take a part in this topic. I think the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over referring accuracy because fairness is fundamental.
The most important part in a sport is the competition with agreed rules. If these rules are not followed, so the results can be unfair and fans will not feel interested "even the bias was towards their team not against". While fans enjoy their excitement, they prefer their team to lose "fairly" than to win because of an unfair decision. However, some fans say that the VAR in a football match slows down the game, creating suspenseful pauses, so this annoys them. Let me ask you a question, AS A FAN, DO YOU FEEL CHEERFUL WHEN YOUR TEAM SCORES A GOAL, IN A WAY THAT IS NOT FOLLOWING THE RULES? You may say yes, but, for sure, if this is repeated, your trust will be lost in the team. Think of it like the accuracy is the roots and fans' excitement are the flowers. Accuracy is the referee's whisper that keeps the game honest, and the fans' roar is what gives it energy.
To conclude, I strongly believe that accuracy is much more important than the excitement of the fans. It makes the game organized and satisfying for everyone so if a team wins, the fans of the other team will appreciatively understand that these are the rules and the winning team deserves to win.
I agree with you and will like to give another point as to why accuracy is a bit more important than the joy of the fans, first of all as a fan your team can never always win look at all the big teams in world football like Real Madrid, Barcelona, Chelsea among others and the popular individuals in tennis such as Alcaraz, Sabalenka, Nadal, Djokovic just to mention a few, it is not always that they win, TRUE OR FALSE. So as a fan, the first lesson you need to learn is simply the fact that who you support will have times to win and times to lose. So the fair decision is always best as there are other fans who want to win which encourages preservation and practice of fairness in order for the correct individual or team to be able to win.
Secondly, I would like to lay a point based on fun to watch aspect, imagine your team winning the champions league and doing it unfairly, wouldn't it feel bad for others who were supposed to win but were unfairly the losers, this would feel bad and lead to the fun of the game being tarnished as they believe that the officials didn't do what they were payed for to do and attracting less viewer attention to the game.
I agree, it would feel wrong if a team won unfairly. Can you give an example of how unfairness and technology are linked in tennis or football?
The examples that I would like to give are on the football game.
In the 2023/24 football season, Liverpool's Luis Dias had a clear onside goal disallowed by the VAR (the technology in football that checks for offside and other offences by players) in a game against Tottenham Hotspur . The disallowed goal led to the expense of Liverpool losing that game 2-1, which led to a massive 3 points drop by the team but at the end of the season didn't have much impact as they ended 7 points behind second placed Arsenal, but the 3 point gained by Tottenham ultimately allowed them to finish 5th, 3 points ahead of 6th placed Chelsea .
Another example that I would like to give is the game between Aston Villa and Sheffield United in the 2019/20 season which ended goalless whereby the Aston Villa goalkeeper made an error and after the ball clearly crossed the line, the goal was ruled out and wasn't intervened by the VAR as the goal line technology couldn't detect it was a goal granting Aston Villa a point that eventually rescued them from relegation by a point ahead of Bournemouth who were relegated at the expense of Aston Villa at the end of the season.
The overall effect of this was an overall perception of biasness by fans and also the tarnishment of the leagues reputation, making viewers lose the excitement and joy of the game as their team was treated unfairly.
I agree because...if a team won unfaily it would be frustrating
I strongly agree with you based on the fact that sports should be fair without any form of partiality. According to my research I figured out that the accuracy of VAR in modern days ranges from about 98.3%-99.3%. Now, there is a reason it is not 100% accurate for a reason, AI tends to make mistake sometimes. Yes, the percentage rate is really high, but let us all think about what happened to that last 0.7%? We should all take this into consideration 100% is being complete certain about something, and something being completely certain about something is very rare especially due to the fact that VAR is AI. So, in my opinion VAR has its advantage and disadvantages, but it also plays a huge part in the game of Football.
Thanks for your comment. Can you tell us more about your research? How did you come up with those percentages?
Hello lovely_fruit,
I strongly agree with your opinion because fairness is the true foundation of sport. When decisions are correct, players feel respected and fans feel confident that the result is honest. Technology that helps referees review important moments and track the ball’s position can reduce human mistakes and make competitions more trustworthy. According to reports from BBC Sport, decision-review systems have improved accuracy in several major tournaments, which shows that technology can support justice in sport.
However, this topic also creates a serious problem. When games are stopped too often for checks, the rhythm of the match can be broken. Fans may feel less excited, and players can lose focus or momentum. Over time, this could make sport feel more like a technical process than a natural and emotional competition. That may reduce enjoyment, especially for young fans who watch for fun and energy.
So, while fairness should come first, technology must be used carefully and efficiently. If it becomes too slow or too frequent, it could harm the experience it is meant to protect. The real goal should be balance ; using technology to keep sport fair while still protecting the excitement and spirit that make people love it.
What do you think?
I agree with you, technology must be managed properly and safely while the spirit of the game is still strong.
I strongly agree with you and you are a very amazing writer
I agree, when your team wins because of a biased referee you don’t feel as proud or happy — you feel ashamed.
Although fan experience is important and crucial for sport, it should not take priority over refereeing accuracy. Fan enjoyment should never outweigh fairness, because prioritising it could lead to bending the rules and unfair outcomes. Accurate refereeing, on the other hand, ensures fairness and integrity in the game, and ironically, fans tend to enjoy a match even more when they know the decisions were correct.
Very good point, accurate refereeing is crucial for sports to ensure fairness and good sportsmanship.
By doing this, it keeps the game organized and fun
I definitely agree with you. Fan enjoyment is majorly based on being enticed by the fact you don't know who is going to win. If refs were purposefully rigged, people would quickly lose interest in the sport, as it loses the air of uncertainty.
For example, if you were playing a game on your phone, such as block blast, and every time you made a mistake you could tweak the rules to continue playing, there would be no fun in it.
In short, people rely on the unpredictability of sports to keep them interested, and that's exactly what we do by keeping the games fair.
Solid point.
I fully agree with this statement. Sport is built on a foundation of fairness and to see who performs better under equal conditions. The whole point of taking part in a competition is do it ethically and equally.
nice!
Hello lovely fruit! I just read your comment and i wanted to say that I absolutely agree with everything you say. Your opinion is really accurate , I also think accurancy is much more important than fans pleasure since a game without rules cannot be called a game. Also , the fans satisfaction will be a lot more intense when the win is fair and square so i cannot agree more with what you are saying . But i have to ask you something , do you think unfairness and playing with no set rules are the same? And why?
I absolutly agree beacause without following rules how can you be happy winning unfairly?
I agree with you 💯 it is the most important topics
I highly believe that fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take a priority over referring accuracy because every millisecond and nanometer matters. If there aren’t any accuracy, mistakes would occur, which could upset fans of one team by causing them to lose a point that was rightfully theirs; meanwhile, the other team would celebrate a point that they didn’t actually deserve. That’s the importance of accuracy.
On the other hand, many would feel that the fans’ experience is much more vital because where will be the fun when everything is already really accurate in a way that just makes it really annoying to the fans.
To sum up everything, although the fans’ experience matters, it’s really important to the accuracy to take a priority, which would lead to a fair game for both teams.
I agree with you and your opinion because accuracy is very important in sports and it also helps to make sure the game/match is fair for both teams. When referees get decisions wrong, like make a mistake like you said, it can completely change the outcome of a match and upset players and fans. Like you said then in that case a team would lose a point that they rightfully earned and then the other team would celebrate a point they didn't actually earn. However, some people believe that too much technology can slow down the game and make it less exciting to watch, especially when there are lots of stops. Even though this is a fair concern that some people have, I also still think that accuracy should come first because fairness matters more than excitement in the final result
I think that the fan's experience of sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because the Var is extremely significant in any match. It guarantees the accuracy of judgments in matches. The Var can reduce the mistakes of the referee, and it helps to correct the crucial decisions. The Var makes the match fair, and this will satisfy all audience and fans. As a football fan, I would not accept that my team loses because of a referee inaccuracy.
For example, in 2018 World cup, there was a match between France and Australia. France was in an attack and an Australian defender tackled in the penalty box. The referee was confused and completed the match then after 30 seconds, the var called the referee to see if it was penalty or not. Moreover, the var was right and a penalty was scored to France. Then Australia had a penalty and it was scored after that Paul Pogba scored for France a palinka, yet the ball landed on the goal line. The referee was confused again consequently he went to the Var furthermore the Var used the goal line technology, and it was a goal. The match ended 2-1 to France. If there was not a Var, there would not be fairness in that match. However, others might feel that the fan's entertainment is more important, but they are wrong since if there is no Var, there will be no justice or equity.
To conclude, I believe that the referee and the Var complete each other in arbitration also I believe that the Var is the referee's third eye.
I agree to that but to make it more fun for fans, i think the referees could use the VAR in less time because if they of course don’t want to check more than 5 minutes if there is a penalty or not or check the VAR many more times.
I strongly agree, and I like how you used the 2018 World Cup with the match between Australia and France as an example, VAR should definitely be put into use and not be removed just because of fans' point of view and their satisfaction with the game, VAR is a technology to help referees with the judgment of players and math fairplay
I think the way we watch sport should take over the major reason why sport was created because it is a recreational activity whereby everything that is done should be at the same time safe and enjoyable. People say that halo is ugly but that halo is been created to ensure safety of racers. If people think that enjoying sports is better than it being safe yes it is their own point of view but for me this is my own perspective. Let me give another scenario, in football we know that players wear boots to ensure safety, but now if to say that boots are not supposed to be there and they are playing football, during the game, one of the best player in the club gets injured on his leg or to say two or three more people get injured it will destroy the mood of the person watching it because he or she was about to score a goal and gets injured, the hopes of the person watching it will just die. Even after all this people might still think enjoying the sport is better, it is fine because when these games were brought up it was just for fun and enjoyment at that time. but I still think that safety is more important.
I think being fair is better than making it fun, because to me if the game or sport is fair it can not be fun. for instance, you are playing for Liverpool football club and the opponent keeps fouling the fans consider the played unfair which makes it not interesting for them to watch. And it can be possible for someone to know that games must and be played fairly to make a peace and conduicive environment.
I agree because... if a referee for instance decides to favour a team over another, the viewers obviously will not enjoy the game. When the game is fair, the right judgements will be made. Yes there might be some things people won't be comfortable with but it is all still part of life.
In the end only one team can win and it will push the opponents to become better in the future, and viewers would also have a nice time. So it's a win-win for everyone!!
Yes, the game should be fair and impartial, but I feel like there are just some things that can't be avoided e.g foul play. Yes, there has to be a solution to that problem, considering the fact that we young minds are using our initiative here on Topical Talk to find solutions to problems. To me I feel like one way to avoid this is by employing transparent and independent-minded referees. Referees who can stand their own ground and withstand pressure of the players and fans. Lemme talk about one referee who was one of a kind and stood out among many. Ever heard of Peirluigi Collina? He was one of a kind when he was appointed to ref a match fans could be assured that the game would be a fair one. His reputation got him appointed in many great features such as: Germany vs Brazil 2002 World Cup final(2-0) and the legendary fixture between Manchester United vs Bayern Munich in the 1999 UEFA Champions league final. What I am trying to say is we need more refs like him who are transparent, consistent, independent-minded and have good communication skills. Thank You.
I think that technology like VAR and Hawk Eye helps player make more accurate decisions, which is important because games should be fair. A small decisions can make big mistake that can change the result of a match and that can feel unfair to players and fans. However sports are meant to be exciting. Long VAR checks can slow the game and take away the exciting part, especially when fans are celebrating a goal. Some mistakes and human decisions are part of what makes sport dramatic and memorable. Instead of choosing between accuracy and fan experience, technology should be used in a balanced way. It helps players fix mistakes without stopping the game to often, so sport stays both fair and enjoyable to watch.
Thanks for reading :3
Hello, amiable_walrus. Your point is valid, but I disagree. Though you do make some good points, with VAR and Hawk-Eye technology, it dehumanises the game for the players and the audience. AI is already taking over everyone's lives and affecting our day-to-day routines. Since AI is already everywhere, we should not let it take over sports, too. Players and audiences should be able to watch a game to get away from technology and AI, not to be surrounded by it.
Hi placid grapefruit, yes AI might be taking our daily life's and affecting our day to day routines but, not using technology in sports? It's a big problem. Sports also needs to develop to keep up with the times. Technology like VAR or Hawk-eye helps player make more accurate decision, instead of repeating the same mistake. Technologies are developing we need to take the advantage of that in sports too, but don't let it take over everything, technology still needs to be supervised throughout the game.
Amiable_walrus, I agree that we should not let technology take over everything. I believe you have some of your facts mixed up. You say that VAR or Hawk-eye helps players make accurate decisions, but it was created to help the referees, if I am correct. Also, AI is not always 100% accurate, so what happens if it makes a bad call when the stakes are high? The actual referee would not be able to help that call because of all the other 'good' calls the AI has made, so if they change the call because the technology was faulty, it would not necessarily be fair. If the stakes are high and the AI does not catch something that a normal referee would have caught, that would skew the entire game, and possibly change who wins, affecting the players and the audience, no matter what team you are on or who you are cheering for.
Amiable_walrus, I agree that we should not let technology take over everything. I believe you have some of your facts mixed up. You say that VAR or Hawk-eye helps players make accurate decisions, but it was created to help the referees, if I am correct. Also, AI is not always 100% accurate, so what happens if it makes a bad call when the stakes are high? The actual referee would not be able to help that call because of all the other 'good' calls the AI has made, so if they change the call because the technology was faulty, it would not necessarily be fair. If the stakes are high and the AI does not catch something that a normal referee would have caught, that would skew the entire game, and possibly change who wins, affecting the players and the audience, no matter what team you are on or who you are cheering for.
hi
I think that fans experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because this games has being in existence for a very long time and has always been maintained because of this rules, when accuracy is neglected it brings about cheating, disorderliness in sport, violence and fosters hate among opponents.
for example master A pushed master B during a football game and the field referee did not see, with the help of the VAR this mistake could be spotted, and immediate readjustment can be made. This act can help promote fairness, justice and peace.
Fans might also be concerned about a particular team winning probably because they love that team more, can be handled by always providing fair and accurate result without cheating.
Furthermore every body has their own perspective and might think that fans interest should always be considered .
Agree with you, "motivated grapefruit". A good point! Correct refereeing & accurate scoring have a big role to play in avoiding potential confrontations amongst fans, so would also vote in favour of tech tools promoting accuracy, fairness & peace.
Hi motivated_grapefruit, I agree with you that refereeing accuracy should be put above fan experience. Good refereeing and accurate scoring play a major role in sports. Without the proper refereeing accuracy, there wouldn't be any audience excitement.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because if the referee were to make a mistake, it will be very unfair to the fans. Even though a referee's mistake can be exciting for some people, the fans whose team loses because of that mistake can feel very frustrated. Fans feel this way because some of them place bets on these matches, and others spend their own hard-earned money and time to travel and watch their team. Ultimately, the feeling of frustration from losing a match due to a referee's mistake is a much worse experience rather than just having less fun.
I think the fans experience of a sport should be a priority over refereeing accuracy because, the game was made for entertainment. I am not saying that the scores should be inaccurate but, the games were made for leisure after all. To add everything up, sports were made for fans, they are the ones that buy the tickets and support the teams so if the audience is displeased, everything would literally collapse.
For example, we are watching the football game and the referees keep pausing the game to check for VAR reviews. It kills the rush you might be feeling. Now lets put our selves in the players shoes, with the rush and the cheering from the audience, they will be encouraged and motivated to do better and maybe even take risks.
However, others might feel that sports have to be fair but the thing is that it does not have to be perfect, it just has to be watchable and enjoyable, because the game is partially run by the fans.
I strongly disagree to this because these games are played as competitions and not just as any random activity that is supposed to make the audience feel comfortable in the arena. If games are played not to be accurate, it makes the rules of that game to be irrelevant, and the main component that qualifies a game are the rules. I am pretty sure you wouldn't like a scenario when you contended in a competition and was supposed to win, but the win was given to your opponent because there were illegal things that he/she did to win that wasn't looked into. So I strongly disagree that fans experience should be taken prior than refereeing accuracy.
I'm not sure about this because the fans are also the heart of any sport if there were no football fans for example then I think we could all agree that there won't be a sport like football anymore. Fans most likely would become the next players and if no one is interested then the sport isn't even worth watching in the first place.
On the other hand risking accuracy would cause unfairness .And people would be able to go to any length to win, even if it includes cheating .But the topic did not say the officials are totally inaccurate, it just says that they make minor mistakes which are not accurate when judging a player or a whole teams actions.
Hi, proactive_swan, you have a good point there; but I feel prioritizing fans entertainment over fair decisions is necessary, as sports is a source of entertainment to fans. It shouldn't go unnoticed that fans also contribute to the funding of sports by personal donations, memberships, and other means. Sports made fun to watch may also be considered unpredictable, which could keep viewers more engaged and interested. Unlike games which play by all the rules which in the long run, tend to bore fans which could make them lose interest in such a sport; especially those kind of sports which already seem slow paced and unengaging especially to casual viewers; like golf, bowling, etc. People may also lose interest as tiny fouls tend to stir up their emotions and such fouls could decide big moments in a game. We can also see that sports games are not totally fair in cases like "advantage" in football or "play-on" in hockey. It this case we can agree that leagues tolerate some form of unfairness to keep the game watchable for fans. In conclusion, while fairness is important, keeping fans engaged and entertained is crucial for sustaining their support.
I strongly disagree with your statement that making fans happy is more important than making right decisions.\When unfairness is allowed because of the happiness of fans, it destroys sports, as sport is based on rules and regulation. When VAR is used it shows accurate footage of the game and helps the referee to make rightful decisions. It protects players and teams from what they have rightfully earned by their dedication . Imagine your a player and you worked so hard to win and then the referee gives an unfair decicsion for the sake of the enjoyment of the fans if that was you how would you feel.
I disagree because I do not think fans should have priority over the referee reasons being
1. if the referee do not check the VAR and he end up taking a wrong decision surely the fans will get angry and a large numbers of fans will lose interest in football or table tennis
2. if the correct decision not taken there is a higher possibilities of the footballers to start fighting
3. there is a higher possibilities of cheating especially when the referee is bribed by a particular country
FAIR PLAY IS BETTER THAN FOUL PLAY
I don't agree with that. I believe suspense is a part of the game. The same way you watch a movie or seasonal that ends at a major cliffhanger, sports can also be like that sometimes. It won't be pleasant if your team wins or loses if there was a coaching error. Then you would feel like your team doesn't deserve the win/loss. Victory is always sweeter when you work for it.
Also, players can take advantage of the lack of technology. For example, on the 20th of January 2024, Ivan Toney changed the ball placement and referee's marking foam right before taking a free kick which he scored from(the ref didn't see this happen). If the VAR could check that movement the game would have been played fairly and Brentford would not have won that match and Toney could have even been suspended.
I disagree because sports are not just for entertainment, but also a person's career. It's someone's passion and dream. What would you feel if you know that your family or your closest ones that are athletes lost for the sake of "entertainment"? What would you feel if you saw how much that person worked to achieve victory, but was taken away just for the "audience"? I also disagree with your statement; "If the audience is displeased, everything would literally collapse." Do you think the supporters of the rightfully winning team would be pleased if the results were rigged? They would also be displeased, don't you think?
I also strongly believe that sports have to be fair. Sure, sports involve factors like adrenaline, cheering from fans, and motivation. Still, for example, in a soccer game, if you know that you didn't do a foul but was still given a red card, all that motivation and adrenaline would slowly disappear and be replaced with frustration. These could make your performance worse, because you'll feel like you're not going to win anyways.
I support your views as well. The audience make up the sport but fairness is essential, prioritizing fan's views isn't proper because sports is built on competitiveness and integrity rather than public opinion. Of course sports is a source of entertainment to the audience, but some sport participants partake in the game because it is their passion. If sports focused solely on fan enjoyment rather than honoring athletes or teams, there will be no value. To me, sport will still be exciting and enjoyable when there is honesty and fairness.
I agree with you because sports is not just for entertainment, it is somebody's career and life, it is the reason that they play. For instance, how would you feel when your team loses and the other team wins due to a rig in the game, you would obviously feel bad about it, but the referee has the last and the final say of the game. The referee can not see everything with just the eye, that is why there is the use of the VIDEO ASSISTANT REFEREE, it aids the referee when he is not sure of what happened exactly. Most times, when the referees choose something that the fans think wrong, they will think they are cheating, but when that same thing is chosen with the use of the VAR, they will complain but still think that the judgement of the VAR is superior. Personally, if I was in that ball game, I would make things fair by bringing in the VAR technology.
In conclusion, I think that the VAR should be the most trusted technology that can be used in the game of football because the fans might not like it but they can not say or do anything about it. They will probably go to social media and rant all they want, after all, the game has ended and the winners have been selected.
I completely disagree. Sport is a form of art and should not be ruled by observers. Referees know what they doing and have a more objective outlook than someone who’s passionate about a team and might nit be thinking clearly
But remember the comments posted earlier. What would be the use of playing a sport when you realise that fans opinions influence you winning or losing, especially when you on the field or court knows what happened when these fans don`t? It would always be a case of 'the i`s have it', neglecting the truth of the matter. If that was the case, it would be better to play the sport for leisure, knowing that you don`t have someone yelling behind you because they have no idea what exactly is happening when they are not the ones on the pitch.
I think the fan's experience should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because when the game is free and fair it makes the rules relevant. What is the point of setting up games with rules when in the end the rules would be compromised for the fun of the fan's. If they are real fans they would stay even when their team in losing. Refereeing accuracy also gives everyone a chance to win through their skills and the effort they make. Without fairness, players stop caring and they just play for the sake of playing because they know that in the end the referees will give what the fans want which is not fair. For example, in a game of basketball, the referee calls a three-pointer for the home team but when the video is replayed it is shown that the player's foot was on the three-point line but the referee refuses to cancel the field goal because of the fans which is utterly wrong and is compromising the rules and would drive them to do more things that are not right just because they know that in the end the points would be added to them because of the fans and it is also wrong because it is not fair to the opposing team. However, others might disagree because it may make the game less interesting for fans but I say we choose fairness over fun.
Hi Amusing Grape, thanks for your comment! My name is Radhika and I work at KPMG. I spend a lot of my day analysing rules that companies should comply with, so understand your point of view about fairness and following the rules! I wanted to pick up on your point about how people will "just play for the sake of playing". What is your view on the value that sport can bring to human social interaction, building relationships, and bringing joy to people both as players and as observers? Is there an argument that the joy, entertainment and sense of 'community' that we get from sports should be more important than fairness and accuracy from video footage? It would be good to know what you think!
I would start by explaining the meaning of technology and also share What I think concerning the topic.
Technology can be defined as the knowledge and specialized machine used to solve problems and make them easier. However technology has helped us a lot in our daily life. under the question is it better for a game to be fair or fun? what I think is despite the use of technology, a game should be fair first and the least of them should be fun. Reason being that technology and human beings may spoil the fun of the game and so the players may feel cheated and the fun will not last. Again players may probably end up fighting or loose control. To back up everything, technology in football has improved sport( football) by letting players play at night and also coming to the Video assistant referee popularly known as V.A.R can help the referee detect a penalty or free kick. but to conclude it can also ruin sport football precisely because some video assistant referee's may collect bribe and give a penalty when is not meant to be given or a referee declaring an offside goal or supporting the other team. This is what I think about the topic.
you raise good points, precious_parrot -- that sometimes even with technological improvements, cheating can still take place. But the question here is about when the technology might take away from the fun of being a spectator. So, should the fans' experience be prioritised over the accuracy of referees?
Normally sport is meant to be fair. but outside that, a game should also be fun to watch for the following reasons of mine.
1. It maximizes engagement
2. Subjectivity
3. players may feel emotionally high or low
great job in creating a list to help put forward your ideas in a structured way. can you elaborate more on your second and third reason please?
I think the fans' experience of a sport should not be taken prior over refereeing accuracy. Games are fun activities or competitions that allows two or more parties compete against each other in order to get a winner. And in these games, there are officials that has been fixed in various parts in order to ensure an organised and smooth process and also to ensure that the winner(s) of the game earns their win. Most times after these games are played, records are taken. And these records last for generations. So if it turns out to be that the results that were taken were falsified just to meet up with the specifications of how the fans wanted the game to be, that wouldn't be fair. However, others might feel that how much they enjoyed the game is what matters most, but on the side of the true winning participants, they would feel hurt and sad for putting in their best to win but the win was given to another team because the crowd enjoyed their play more than the other. So this is why I strongly disagree that the refereeing accuracy of a game should be compromised for the fans experience or excitement towards a game.
I agree with your opinion, proactive_swan. I would like to add one more point to your statement. These athletes have trained their entire lives for these competitions. If they were to change the results of these competitions, that would take away the opportunity to win from a determined athlete. Also, this would upset a lot of people like me. Not everyone is rooting for the same person, so in the end, you cannot please anyone anyway, so making it fair would be the most favorable outlook. Changing the winner(s) just for the audience could start the downfall of these competitions because of how many people would be upset about them changing the scores, and how many athletes would quit. These people may not want to participate in these big games anymore because what is the point when you know you will not win, and it will not be fair?
Overall, sports were made to have fun, exercise, and be fair, so changing the scores for the audience would be changing the meaning of the game altogether. Keeping it fair for everyone is beneficial not only to the athletes but also to the continuation of the games. That is why I believe that they should not change the scores for the audiences preferences.
I honestly think that VAR is quite accurate according to my studies it shows that about 98.3%-99.3% is the rang of accuracy of the VAR and to me I honestly think that a human touch makes everything exciting that is why I am dumb founded on which on to pick because most memorable moments in football have been reefed by humans not the VAR like for example Maradona's hand of God against Barcelona that changed the score board was reefed by a human and it brought both pain and now we go to the VAR side the VAR allows free and fair matches against two opponents which give both equal chances of winning if you read my work well you will see that both have advantages and disadvantages, thank you.
Thanks for your comment. I see that both you and versatile_morning are citing 98.3%-99.3% from your studies. Did you work together? Or did you take these percentages from somewhere? Remember that copying from other sources isn't allowed.
Hello Kevin @ the economist I actually did do my research with versatile_morning, because we hail from the same school the
same school Rhemaville Christian Academy and we are set mates. THANK YOU
I STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT REFEREE ACCURACY AND FAIR DECISION IN SPORTS SHOULD TAKE PRIORITY OVER FAN'S EXPERIENCE. What is sports without fair play. Would You rather enjoy an unfair game which may eventually lead to injuries or enjoy a fair game. Sports is all about fair play and without fair play sports is useless and aimless. many accounts of unfair play in sports has lead to conflict and violence. One thing is that you must not please everyone. Rules cannot just be changed because of a fans opinion because it must surely end bad.
What I am just trying to say is that Fair play and referee accuracy should be number one priority.
THANK YOU AND HAVE A NICE DAY.
I agree, especially with what you said about the safety of the athletes and the conflict that might happen because of bias, and I have something to add. I believe that athletes careers are based on the outcome of competitions and their performances in game, and while each unfair call may seem insignificant, sometimes even just small judging errors can affect the outcome of the match. If judging is based off of the entertainment and opinion of the fans, the effort that athletes put in to get to where they are is disregarded in favor of what people want to see. Rules are set in place to not just make things fair, but also to keep athletes safe, just like you said, and in my opinion its completely immoral to overlook that and bend the rules for good television. Preventing injury and fairness should come before entertainment, however I understand that many, many fans watch sports purely for the entertainment, and to some of them, watching games that aren't filled with suspense or drama may be off putting and may discourage them from watching more, but I strongly believe that these athletes and their careers take priority over the entertainment of fans . Thank you.
What value is there when rules are perfectly followed but the sports itself becomes dull, slow and disconnected from the fans.
I believe that fans' experience should take priority over referring accuracy. This is because while, fairness and accuracy is deliberated on, the fans which are the main reasons sports exist should also be put into consideration.
Sports rely on emotion and dramatic moments to keep fans engaged but when games are interrupted to often by reviews or a lot of technical decisions the natural flow and vibe of the game is broken and fans are kept more on suspense and uncertainty.
Without refereeing mistakes, there are fewer debates and arguments which make the sports memorable.
In conclusion fans value fairness but value excitement more.
Thank you.
Hi openminded journalist. I see our point but i don'tagree with you. Sometimes the rules are not followed by the referees . Fairness and excitment have to go together .I agree that sports rely on emotions . But let me ask you a question : how would you feel if another team won the one that you support with an unfair way?
Hi open-minded journalist, I understand your point, but I would like to share a few things that you didn't take into account.
Even though these games are super exciting when the fans are having a good time and the fans do pay to be there, think of these players who train and give so many hours to this sport in so many days, just to be robbed by something you worked for and something that should be fair, but instead is given to the bystanders who have put zero work into this book.
People might argue that these players make more money when the fans have a good time and when more fans come, but this is not what a sport is all about. A sport is about integrity and honesty. Having something that you earned taken away from you is not right, no matter the circumstances. Imagine if you trained your whole life and, in the biggest moment of your career, the thing you worked day and night for is taken because people think bystanders should enjoy the game instead of having a fair game.
Because of these points, I am proud to say that what somebody earned should not be taken away and should not be given to bystanders. Because it makes their time more enjoyable
Hello topical talkers, hope you are doing great. I think it’s a really tough choice. Obviously, we want the game to be fair, because it’s annoying when a referee makes a huge mistake that changes the whole score. Using technology like VAR or replays helps make sure the right team wins, which is important.
But at the same time, if the game keeps stopping every five minutes to check a screen, it gets kind of boring to watch. Part of the fun of sports is the fast pace and the excitement of celebrating a goal right when it happens. If you have to wait ages to find out if it counts, it ruins the "buzz" of the crowd. I think I’d prefer it to be a bit more fun and fast, even if the refs make a few mistakes, because that’s just part of the game!
Good day everyone my name is appreciative_expression.
The topic is a very interesting topic that a a lot of us who are in interested in sports will like to debate on. So let me start by saying that sports is an activity to prove ones talent , get fame , a recreational activity or something one does during leisure. Now there are sports which are shown globally to the world such as football , boxing , wrestling , Entertainment and Sports Programming Language[ ESPN ]. These are sporting activities that require the support of individuals which are classified as fans.
I personally don"t watch games or sport as the thing may be just for fun , I watch games because it is also a source of learning and who would like to learn how to cheat to get fame or be successful, no one. Permit me but for some people fair decisions can change their lives forever , take it from this scenario that people who place bets on there various clubs or teams are meant to win, but them being in a situation of an unfair decisions made by the officials of the game will loose there money. I do not personally agree with the decision of some individuals in the VAR team because it very rare now to find to find people who have integrity in a country because of lack of contentment . Sometimes we might have individuals to take bribes to enable a team get favour.
So I would to conclude by saying that I prefer fair decisions made than for me to watch a game just to fun.
Thank You.
I personally believe that sports can only be enjoyed when it is accurate. Based on the web, sports technology can be referred to as the application of advanced tools, systems and digital solutions to enhance athletic performance, training, analysis and overall sports experience for athletes, coaches and fans. The creation of technologies in sports help a lot in resolving arguments. These argument affect the fans causing emotional highs and lows, increasing anxiety and even creating a hostile environment for everyone, so how then can one enjoy the sport as a fan. These technologies where put in place for games to be free and square and even more enjoyable. Many internationally recognised games make use of technologies so that they can be more enjoyable and accurate (The main essence of games).
I think that fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because every sport has rules. Even though the sport should be an entertainment to the fans, it shouldn't be the top priority of the game. The top priority should be the fairness of the game. Even if a team wins a match by cheating, they wouldn't really enjoy it because it was not by their own effort. It's better to lose honourably than win shamefully.
In my opinion I think fair because say the teams are unfair like 3v2 it wouldn't be fair because there is one person missing on that team so the bigger amount on the team will most likely win. But say it was an equal amount like 3v3 it's a fair game and you won't know who will win. Bye everyone!
I think that sports like football without the VAR, will make the opposite being cheerful. Because referees use the VAR to check if the gameplay has a problem or not. Without it, how could the referees check if there is a problem or not and make the match fair? Imagine if your opponent team wins by cheating without the referees noticing that, how would you feel? Sad and angry right? To make things fair, they created this VAR to make the gameplay fair and bring back the excitement for the fans. If you were in this situation of a match not having the VAR, what would you do?
I think the fans’ experience should not be more important that refereeing accuracy because sports needs to be fair. I mean they can’t make mistakes to make the match more exciting, teams can lose without deserving it, and it’s not fair. For example they can stop the game to correct some decisions. However many people think that stop the match many times make it boring.
Hi cheerful topical talkers! I am independent _ tiger and I think that the fans' experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy. However, others might say that they SHOULDN'T, and I am not saying that I disagree but I am not saying that I agree either. Cause some might feel really confident to take priority over refereeing of a sport that they feel really confident in.
Thank you everybody!
Can you share why you think fans' experience should take priority?
I believe that the fan's enjoyment should take top priority over the rules and regulations of a sport. The fan is the paying customer, as well as the sole reason sports still exist. Simply put, there is no way that professional sports will still be a thing in 20 years if no one wants to watch them. The companies wouldn't get funding from tickets and ads, so the athletes wouldn't get paid, and eventually, they would leave. The fans keep the spirit of the game, and if no one is enjoying the game, there is simply no point of continuing to professionalize the sport.
Do you think that sports do enough to keep the fans engaged and entertained?
I disagree because sports aren't JUST entertainment they are careers,lives imagine how a person who trained their entire lives lost their match because the audience didn't want them to.
Additionally, although fans opinions ARE important not all of them just want a specific team to win, some want a fair match and wouldn't buy a ticket if they knew it was always rigged to a specific team and that opposes your idea.
Good comment, especially around sports being careers to many players.
Then what about the efforts and hard work the athletes make in order to improve and win? Wouldn't it be unfair if everything went to waste only because of the "fans"? If they are true fans they should support making the sport fair for everyone.
I strongly believe that accuracy in professional sports games is the most important and the fan's experience shouldn't take priority. It isn't fair to the athletes who trained their entire lives to lose a championship just because there was a bad call. In tight games where the score is tied, ref calls determine the player's future career. We are taking away opportunities from deserving players. Not only this, I believe that it is worse for fans to watch if there are bad calls. They will no longer want to go to games if its unfair. Why would they pay to watch a game thats imprecise? By focusing more on accuracy, we give wins to the team that actually deserves it and improve the viewing quality for fans.
Hey, @outgoing_king!
I completely agree with your statement, that precision should be of more importance because of fairness when looking at the players in a game. It is a much more neutral and fair for all, approach.
I have a question though, you mentioned the question, why people would watch an imprecise game. Lots of fans actually like the fact that a game is exciting and can sometimes even be unfair (they usually are particularly excited if it is in their supporting’s teams favour ,which is not to rare). So my question is: do you think that all fans prefer precision over excitement (and maybe even inaccuracy, at some points)?
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because fair decisions are essential to the integrity of the game. What is the point of watching a match if the final result is clearly wrong? A single refereeing mistake can decide a game, so accuracy matters just as much as excitement. For example, VAR can prevent a wrongly awarded goal or penalty in football that could completely change the outcome of an important match.
However, others might feel that too much reliance on technology interrupts the flow of the game and removes the excitement of spontaneous moments, making sport feel less emotional and less enjoyable to watch. I disagree with this because accuracy protects fairness . Can fans really enjoy the drama if they know a team won because of an obvious error? In the end, short delays are a small price to pay for results that everyone can trust.
Good point! And when you ask "Can fans really enjoy the drama if they know a team won because of an error?" you point out that controversy can seriously damage trust in sport. I wonder if you could provide any example of moments where a wrong decision led to widespread anger or even unrest in recent memory?
That's a great question! Well there are many well-known examples were wrong decisions caused huge anger and damaged trust in sport. For instance, Frank Lampard's disallowed goal for England against Germany in the 2010 World Cup was clearly over the line, yet it wasn't given, and it led to massive criticism of refereeing worldwide. Another example is Diego Maradona's "Hand of God" goal in 1986, which is still debated decades later and left many fans feeling cheated. More recently, controversial VAR or non-VAR decisions in big league and Champions League matches often cause outrage on social media and among fans. These moments show how incorrect decisions can overshadow the sport itself and why accuracy is so important for maintaining trust.
I think the fans’ experience shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy, because I think fairness is what fans actually want. Some might have said that removing the human element would make the game less exciting, but in fact, it would actually improve the game and fans’ experience. I would like to use the Korean baseball league(KBO) as an example to prove that it is actually shown even in real life. In 2024, KBO started using ABS(automated ball-strike system) for the first time in the world. And more than 73% of fans actually said that they like it better with ABS than when it had a human referee according to the Korean baseball organization. Likewise, even though some people argue that human elements are better for fans’ experience, studies have shown that accuracy with technology is actually more preferred even by fans.
Hello topical talkers! In my opinion the fan experience shouldn't be prioritised over referring accuracy because sports have rules and rules are make to be respected by all of the persons who take part of the event. Can you imagine a match of football where the rules aren't respected? It will be a complete chaos.
A few minutes ago I read some comments that said "fans experience must be prioritised" and I don't really agree. Yeah, fans should have a great time while watching a football match,but the rules shouldn't be influenced by their will. Every team should be treated equal in a match and the rules should be for everyone without exceptions.
Well done for clearly articulating your point in response to the ones you have already read.
Yes, definitely, I think this is a valid point, especially because no matter what decision the referee/umpire makes, there will always be a group of people that is upset at the decision that was made, because if it positively affects one side, then automatically it will negatively affect the other side.
Therefore, my opinion is: it is better for a fair call to be made, and more people upset, than to minimise the uproar by playing unfairly.
I believe that technology like VAR shouldn't be criticize by the fans due to them helping professionals make better call outs. Without VAR goals in football would be questioned and many fans would be complaining on what the refs are doing. Hand balls can occur in matches. Back in 2007, Messi who was a young star in FC Barcelona used his hand to "header'' a ball in the goal. Back then VAR wasn't implemented into the sport yet so the goal was allowed causing many of the opposing team side to become very angry at the refs for not catching Messi's action.
To many, VAR is a more reliable technology than using humans to conclude them. Even though, the final verdict isn't from the VAR its from the refs who call it meaning if the ref gets a large sum of money from a team the ref would be more biased to the team that didn't pay them a large sum of money.
However, some may feel VAR is bad and can lead to misunderstanding like the offside rule. The offside rule is when the player who is not on their team is nearer to the opponents goal than the defenders when the ball is passed to them. With that refs call offside even if their are only a few pixels pass the defenders. Making fans outraged due to it only being a few centimeters further away.
I think that fans' experience of a sport shouldn't come before refereeing accuracy. Sports are competitions where players or teams compete to see who performs best, and fair rules are what make the competition meaningful. In every game, referees or officials are there to make sure that the rules are followed and that the results are fair. Without there decisions for being accurate, the effort players put into the training and competing might go to waste.
Technology like VAR in football and Hawk-EYE in tennis helps referees make the right decision. These tools can correct mistakes that might change the outcome of a match. Even the game stops for a short time, it helps make sure the results is fair. If mistakes were ignored just to make the game more exciting for fans, it would be unfair to the players who worked hard to achieve victory.
However, some people might think that the fans' enjoyment should come first. They might feel that long pauses make the game slower and less entertaining.
I think that the experience of sports fans should not come before the accuracy of refereeing decisions because it is only fairness that makes any competition valid. Without accurate decisions, the excitement of sports fans can easily turn into anger and disappointment. An exciting experience can only be right when all sports fans are assured that the decisions were correct. For example, in football, if a handball or offside goal is not deemed right simply because sports fans want to have fun, then the team that has been denied the goal will feel cheated, and the debate will go on long after the final whistle has blown. Technology like VAR may slow down the game slightly, but it will make sure that the outcome is deserved and not demanded.
I have been reading the views of other Topical Talkers, and some individuals believe that the frequent checks make the game boring and the highs that sports fans feel. They believe that sports are all about passion, excitement, and shared experiences in the stadium. I understand the point, but I don’t agree with it. I believe that sports fans feel more excited when they know that the outcome is right.
I think it should be fair because if a team has actually won a fair game and the var has said otherwise just because it wants the crowd to like the decision then the team that actually won I deprived of their glory 😠.
I agree with that statement. If the team won but a last minute VAR check said that there was an offside or tackle (that didn't seem like a good tackle) I would be outraged as well. The thing about VAR is that it catches the smallest detail that shouldn't make a big impact on the game. Fans get mad and start to riot on the internet and making the decision look like it was paid off by the opposing team.
I do not get how looking for the smallest detail in the VAR necessary to the game since it wouldn't matter. Some plays do look for the smallest foul or rule breaking action even though it would be hard to find but somehow they still do.
That's a very interesting point. How do you think referees can determine whether it is actually a small foul not worth breaking the action?
Your right I should've broken it down better. There are different types of tackles. Foul tackle and clean tackle. People would think a small contact would count as a foul but no. A foul tackle is when a players feet aren't both on the ground and makes contact to a players leg or part of the body that could seriously injure the player not just kicking but hitting or pocking the eye. A clean tackle is when both feet are placed on the ground and aiming for the ball. The player slide tackling isn't going for the player they are going for the ball. They couldn't get a yellow or red since VAR would make it more clear if it was a foul or not. Example, in 2016 euros Ronaldo had the ball and a defender came in and slammed in his knee causing him to not play for the remaining matches in 2016 that was a bad tackle. Good tackle was done by Serigo Ramos , many of his tackles were clean.
A foul is bad contact and bad intentions whilst clean tackle is ball contact and good intentions. So refs determine the foul or clean tackle by using VAR to watch the action of the defenders if the action is to deliberate to another its a foul if not and the player is just pretending to get fouled they get the call not the defender who made it clean.
I think var is the worst tech in football because the ref shouldnt be checking his tiny moniter every 5 seconds they should make the desision straight away it destroys the sport out of possible red card or possible hanball the ref should just always have his eye on the game and never turn back they shouldnt need VAR
I think a fair game is more important because if your playing football and you don't play by the rules its just not enjoyable and the people who are playing will get angry. Also if you don't play by the rules people will get hurt and not want to play anymore.
Hi protective_jackfruit! I really like what you're saying and I just wanted to expand on your point on safety. I think that technology is very important to protect athletes from getting injured. VAR can help properly identify whether a player's actions can warrant a red card, such as dangerous or reckless plays. This ensures that any players who pose as a danger are removed or punished. This makes it much easier for people to see if players are being safe or being rash. Having VAR also holds players accountable because athletes now know that if they do something dangerous, VAR and referees can see it. They can no longer deny it because there is video evidence from high tech cameras. Players are more likely to think twice about what they do, reducing the number of fouls and prevents injury. Athletes won't be as scared of getting a career threatening accident if all players think before they act. This just shows how important technology is when it comes to safety.
Fan's have become a big part of the sport community now, without them and their interest in sports, athletes won't feel as motivated to perform without a crowd. With that being said, refereeing accuracy still has to take priority than the fans experiences. As a fan, I understand their complaints about having to wait for a VAR result or other technologys that are used for scoring, but as fans, we are here to cheer the players we support, to build a healthy community that empowers eachother. We should accept any outcome that comes from the refereeing because sports haven't been as fair as it is now---technology leveled up how we do scoring, it's much more reliable to judge a scoring based on a playback video and algorhythms that has been trained, than humans that could only do much. A split second difference can change the entire outcome of a game, and with technology, I think its only fair to use and rely on it to take as many meassures as we can, to keep sports as fair as possible.
I fully disagree that the fans experience should be prioritized over refereeing accuracy. First of all, referees are a formal profession. They are given the job to enforce rules, maintain safety, and most importantly, ensure fair play. If referees purposefully make mistakes to keep the game entertaining, they will become an unreliable source. Unfair referees could even end up losing their job, or worse—face penalty. Back in 2007, Referee Tom Donaghy was sentenced to federal prison for betting on games he officiated and manipulating the point spread. He had notably betted on a certain team for his own benefit and to entertain the fans. That’s why I think it’s necessary to use technology like VAR to improve accuracy and help referees create clear and more logical decisions. Other than that, teams would lose to injustice rather than performance. This can discourage them significantly. The main purpose of a competition is to determine the better performing team, including this competition we’re all participating in. If the admins gave a better rating to their favorite school, whether it made sense or not, other teams would feel discouraged. (Just an example, not a real situation.) While fan entertainment is important, excitement should come from the genuine competition, not the incorrect decisions. Fans should learn that the team they support would have to face winning or losing. In conclusion, I believe that fairness is the best way to start and end anything, even when it could be disappointing. Therefore, accurate refereeing should be prioritized more than fan entertainment.
Yes, the fans experience should not be prioritized over accurate refereeing. You see there are many referees out there that can't withstand the pressure of the crowd, therefore more independent-minded refs who can stand their ground should be employed. I feel like this would be a great decision. Thank You.
I believe that fan's experience should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because, imagine how fans of the opposite team feels when they know that their favorite team did not won just to prioritize fan's experience. All of the athlete(s) hard work will go down the drain if that happen. Imagine being the athlete that lost because people think that it's more important to prioritize fans more than fairness, more than the rules. Imagine working so hard just to win, but your victory was snatched by unfair means. You would be very devastated, right? So now, for all those people who thinks that fan's experience should be prioritize, imagine yourself in those athlete shoes. And how would the winning team feels, if they know that their victory was not hard-earned, but earned through unfair methods? For me, i would feel guilty. How about you?
I think that the fans' experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because the fans may be biased to the team or person they are supporting, it is human to want to succeed no matter the consequences so I feel that if fans were allowed to determine the referees decision it will cause chaos. But with a neutral VAR which also has an accuracy of 92 to 97 percent, the conclusion will be easier to achieve because no one can say that there was a biased judgement. For example lets say that there is a Football match between Arsenal and Manchester City in the Etihad Stadium and the referee calls an offside against Arsenal, now since this is Manchester City's home the number of fans supporting City will be more than that of Arsenal and the referee will decide the offside is against Arsenal, but what if it actually wasn't? What if Arsenal did not commit the offence? Let us look at it from VAR's assistance the referee calls the offside and the fans start complaining then the referee proceeds to check the VAR and finds that it was not an offside, so he calls it off. This proves that if the game was left in the hands of the fans it would even greatly reduce the experience more than the VAR.
To round it up I think that the truth and accuracy is much better and important than the experience of the fans because if the fans are wrong the games could become unnecessarily bad and the main experience of healthy competition and fun will be taken due to the fan's misjudgement
For this aspect, I have to say that accuracy should be prioritized more, especially in sports, rules are there to be followed and even if it may ruin fan experience, it only does make better decisions, not like they are completely accurate though.
Fan experience includes excitement an hype for the game, and I do not see how accuracy ruins fan experience, we are privileged to have prominent equipment and we should use it to make our game better, not to necessarily ruin fan experience somehow.👌
I think that fair and accurate refereeing should be the priority. Sports have rules and regulations and poor refereeing means those rules are being broken. Some people may think that the advanced technology makes sports less competitive and less exciting but sports is meant to be fair, and just because it makes the fan experience less exciting it should not make sports an unfair event.
Using technology to have more accurate decisions can also protect the referees and the players. Many fans can react extremely if a referee gave an unfair call towards their team or poor refereeing can lead to players getting injured during a match or competition. For example a referee can use VAR to revaluate a reckless tackle made by a football player so that they can give the appropriate decision for the risky action. Safety and security always comes before entertainment.
Does accurate referee calls really make the fan experience that bad? As someone who plays and watches a lot of sports I get to experience firsthand how fans feel when they watch sports games. I actually think more accurate refereeing makes the sports game more fun and entertaining. Imagine the referee giving bad calls against the team you support, How would you feel?
When the referee makes the fair call, that makes me more relieved and happy. And in a safe and fair environment players can be more competitive making the experience more enjoyable and exiting.
More fans should understand that referee accuracy is important to keep the sports culture more safe and entertaining.
In my opinion, people shouldn't play sports purely for other's entertainment. If sports were to be rigged or biased, not only would it invalidate the skill of the players and athletes, many fans, while entertained, would be furious. Personally, if I were to play sports on the world stage, I would want to leave a lasting impact, and if the results of high-stake games were skewed and unfair, than wouldn't that affect how I was perceived by the world? An athletes career depends on the outcome of games and their performance, and if we were to allow entertainment in sports to come first, not only would my hard work simply feel useless, the morals and idea of it is just wrong. I understand that most people do watch sports for entertainment, but I doubt any of them would be angry for the ref calling more exact calls. Not only would the team who's win would be 'more' exciting' feel enabled to do whatever as they know when it comes to ref calls the calls will be in their favor, the rules of the game would collapse and, personally I wouldn't even be entertained at that point. Overall, fair play should take priority over the experience of the fans.
Yes, I agree with you, but an athletes career doesn't necessarily depend on the outcome of games. You see there are millions of athletes in the world trying to make a name for themselves. Believe me they are incredibly good at their sports, but like you said their career depends on the outcome of game. There are many undiscovered talents out there in the world of sports, and judging if the match was fair and impartial that doesn't mean they will be discovered, does it ? Trust me just by having a fair match doesn't mean they will be discovered it depends on their talent that will help them be discovered, and help the make a lasting impact. Now, there are many athletes who had talent but never truly left a lasting impact. Lemme use the game of football as an example, have you ever heard of Mario Balotelli ? He was a really good solid striker played for top tier teams like Liverpool, Man City, AC Milan and Inter Milan and believe me the list goes on and on. He was full of talent and potential, but never lived up to it due to disciplinary issues. Only if he had a really good mindset he actually could have left a long lasting impact. He eventually fell of and his name was eventually dying out, of course you might still hear his name in a few places, but he didn't really leave a long lasting impact.
So, in essence what I am trying to say is if you really want to leave a long lasting impact and be remembered as an icon. It doesn't actually depend on whether the game was fair, but instead your mindset that you put into the game. Thank You.
I'm really into sports so I'm quite excited in giving my opinion about this topic. I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because of various reasons.
Firstly, I believe that the rules have to be followed. Sports are mainly characterized by talent and discipline. If the referee starts to make unfair decissions, the match would depend on these decisions, not on the players.
However, fans are the ones responsible of the popularity of sports. If people didn't went to watch a football game, the players wouldn't play.
In conclusion, I think that following the rules and the fans enjoying can work together to achieve a perfect game.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy. Growing up surrounded by my male cousins, uncles and dads, having to watch football games over barbie unboxings, always listening to them whine and scream furiously over a referee being unfair to the team they are supporting. I used to think that they were just overreacting until i realize how hard athletes train to compete on a match. The time and energy they (athletes) have to give in just to lose over an unfair game. All the hardwork just for nothing. I think that it is a must for equalty. I think fans would be more satisfied with an accurate answer rather than potential human errors especially during crtuial moments in a game. Although technology is helpful for matches like football or tennis, I think it is still important for us to not only rely on AI and technology but we should still consider the use of human work.
I strongly believe that different types of technologies are invented and developed to make the game fairer, but if the specific technology for every single sport hasn't been invented it could help in making the game depend on human skills, something that isn't that accurate always.
However,some people might have other thoughts over this topic like that sports have rules, for example in basketball and football, referees use VAR to make more accurate decisions according to the video, which makes the game more entertaining for the children and adults that are watching. So here comes another question: does technology actually help make the game fairer and more fun, or is it just because human skills are not enough to express different types of situations. The answer to that probably is that sometimes we have to depend on technology to decide for a random situation. So the final anwer is that fans should not take priority over reffering accuracy over sports because fairness is something that depends on the career of the fan or the watcher, not the quick decisions that are made within the match.
Hi @composed_expression
I really like your point about different types of technologies being developed for sports to make it better. I totally agree with you and I think your point on how technology is actually not that widespread. However, I would like to offer a different point of view on the harms. I think that it is key to have technology at big games like the Olympics or FIFA but I was want to acknowledge how expensive this technology is. I strongly think that when we implement these machines it makes all games much less accessible hindering in excitement of fans but also of the youth. As a swimmer I knew before the swim association in British Columbia had very loose rules around how the water had to be. However after the controversy in the Paris Olympics many perfectly good pools were deemed unusable because it was "unfair" Even though all athletes would have been swimming in the same water, all that was different was that it was a salt water pool. This lead to a lot of clubs not being able to run anymore and tons of kids losing their interest in swim due to just how unaccessible it was. So while I understand your perspective and the need for fairness I think that if we use the same rule and the same referee the sport is generally very fair. The people we should care most about are the young kids. For them to be able to play these sports without having to worry about hitting the ball 1mm out or the depth and temperature of the pool. In conclusion, I believe that fairness is important however not more important than allowing everyone access to a sports!
I think the sport shouldn’t prioritise the fans’ viewing experience just to make the sport more appealing to the viewers, but it should have standards that are recognised worldwide so everyone is treated fairly and the same regardless of the viewers’ response to the outcome.
I disagree , fan experience and excitement while watching a match shouldn't be prioritized over having justice. Matches allow for sets of teams to be able to face each other in a way, where no one has an advantage. We must remember that when the match is finished it is not just over it will be recorded and remembered in either a book or a video of some sorts especially since if they stop hosting this event and it dies out in a couple hundred years it will be probably be studied as history for example the famously unfair match of 2002 salt lake city Olympics where a Canadian pair(Jamie Salè and David Pelletier)were refused to be given the gold medal even though they had exemplary performance superior to the Russian duo they later found out that the judge was biased.
It is very important that referees shouldn't be pressured to please the audience they should think about how the match goes and if a desicion is fair, plus a normal match for someone, could be the most important one in a person's entire life and could possibly decide their future and reputation.
Rules should stay as rules. And evidence should be prioritized over opinions. fair matches keep different sports alive.
I think referee accuracy is very important but also fan experience isn't something we should ignore! The experience is what matters most, because it's about the emotions, the excitement and the unforgettable moments when your favorite team wins! I would never forget the pure joy on my grandpa's face when Real Madrid scores a goal! But when VAR is used and the referee stops the game for a long time, the excitement disappears. Now if the VAR referee says it's a goal, it's never the same.
Technologies like VAR can help make the decisions fairer and believe me i know that no one likes to lose a match over a wrong call. But it also affects the experience. Matches with too many VAR calls are boring and emotionless.
I think VAR and similar technologies should only be used in important situations when the point decides points in big tournaments or for example in the world cup.
I know the what I'm saying would make me sound like I am with unfairness, but this is not the case. All I am saying is that this way of stopping a match and taking that much time isn't the ideal solution for fans, players, or the game itself that is supposed to be fast paced.
I think people should work on another technology that is more fit to football. I don't mind using VAR in tennis because matches are usually 3 to 6 hours long! I would have to disagree with most of you and say that no, this kills the experience. It's the fans who make this sport thrive that much not the other way around.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because the captain or the leader of the group knows best than anyone else because there can be different opinions that the fans think unlike the Captain's opinion, and this can also lead from fans fight each other in games, which cal also lead to several injuries and harsh attitude. For example, in football, when something happens that leads for the captain to see the VAR, he is the only one who should decide whether it's something or something, because basically, this captain was trained A LOT for using this VAR and know EXACTLY how to use it with every single detail in it, but, if you involve the fans, it's going to get complicated, because fans obviously didn't study how to use a VAR or other stuff so they won't judge wisely, plus that each team would make the other wrong because they want their team to win, so it will be a total disaster. However, others might feel that sport channels should afford lessons on how to use these stuff so you can use them wisely while being in a game, and also consider the fans' opinion so the fan will feel included and not her for useless use. But, I personally think that only the captain should be considered and judging not the fans, because I think it would be more wise and fair for everyone because he studied it more than anyone.
That's it, bye.👋🏻💞
Hi, I think that VAR is not a good addition at football because the fans dont want to see the ''perfect'' football but the one that is more physical and more natural.In addition the game might be stopped for a VAR check and this is ruining te game in my opinion because the players get cold easily.For now this is what I have to say. Pls tell me what your thoughts are!
Hello Energetic_guineapig, I completely agree that frequent stoppages can make a game way less entertaining and disrupt the game's flow and slow down the player's momentum, and I can also see how football would feel more natural and physical without VAR. In my opinion, I believe that VAR can still be crucial in certain situations where an important error could alter the outcome of a game. It can also help prevent unfair choices that the referee may make, which could cost a side a goal or even a win, even though occasionally it could slow the game down a bit. Even though it may be frustrating at some points, I believe that correct and fair decisions should matter more than the rapidness and entertainment, as they can completely change the match. (I'd love to know more about your opinion as well !!)
Hello! I think the referee's goes first than the fan's experience, because the referee is the one in charge of making sure that everything is fair and nobody is doing something that shouldn't be doing. It's totally okay if the referee make a mistake or take a wrong decision, I mean, we are humans, it is completely normal for us to go wrong. Also, sports like football or tennis have existed for many years because of their rules, so I don't think that these should be changed now.
I think that the fans experience of a sport should not impact or influence the referees decision, because it isn’t fair for the competitors who have worked hard to get to this level of the particular sport. For example if a tennis ball went millimetres over the line ,it would not be fair for the referee to say that it wasn’t over just for the fans enjoyment . However, others may disagree , because they may feel differently about this topic and they feel it is completely fine for the fans to get more enjoyment over the game actually being fair.
I think both referee accuracy and fan experience are important, but accuracy should come first, as long as technology does not slow the game down too much. Tools like VAR and Hawk Eye help make fair decisions, which is important because one wrong call can change the outcome of a match. If players feel cheated, the games stop being fair, even if it's exciting. I do fencing, and we also use video replay to check close touches/points. Sometimes it pauses the match, but it makes sure the point is given to the right person. As a fencer, I would rather wait a few seconds and know the decision is fair than win or lose because of a mistake. The fairness makes the sport more respectful and competitive, and it also helps athletes trust the refs or officials. However, agree that too many stoppages can hurt the excitement of fans. Long VAR checks can break the flow of the match and also make it frustrating to watch, especially during important moments. Fans enjoy fast action and emotional reactions, and a long delay can take that away. So I think what's best is balance. Technology should be used for big or really unclear decisions, and it should be quick and simple. That way, sports can stay exciting for the fans but also fair for the players, which really makes the competition or match meaningful and fun. But also refs have to make decisions in seconds while fans and players are screaming at them so technology help reduce pressure and make their job more fair. In professional sports, one wrong decision can affect championships, rankings, and the players careers.
I think that real referees are important for the game of football. I am a massive Man United fan and even though sometimes the refs make the bad calls that fans disagree with, or miss a massive call that could better direct the course of the game. They still are human and I don't know about others but I Love yelling at the ref. I think it brings crowd interaction to the game and Is a good way for fans to express their intrests about the game even if it is by yelling at the officials. Even if refs aren't always accurate in their calls they are a big part of the live action and are a crucial part if the game. However if refs weren't in the game and there were drones hovering above the pitch, I don't know about you but it is not pretty. I strongly believe that refs should stay in the game even if they are not perfect. So yes fan experience should be prioritized over accuracy in the game.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy.
When evaluating an athlete's scoring, some aficionados highly value what deductions are given out. In some instances, referees are scrutinized when they rely solely on their eyes and experience when awarding points, with many deeming bias or discrimination, which, in some cases, can be true, though not always. An example of technology that helps decide a close call is Goal Line Technology (GLT), a camera or sensor sending a signal to the referee's watch to assist in verifying the validity of a goal. In the match between France and Honduras, it was confirmed that Karim Benzema's goal was valid as it hit the inside of the bar and bounced down, despite the goalkeeper's attempt to claw the ball. Although this form of technology is only enhancing a human's potential and not removing the human element completely, its usage in the FIFA World Cup starting in 2014 and its presence across many world stages have minimized the amount of controversies.
However, others might feel that fans are what make the sport more valuable. While a fandom is important in building morale and overall enthusiasm, athletes train to win and excel in their sport. Validation is one of the most crucial aspects of competing professionally and pursuing sports as a career.
Thus, refereeing accuracy should be more valued than the fans' experience in watching sports.
Good comment.
I think that the experience of fans at a sporting event should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is very important for the teams and their players. Technology like VAR in football and Hawk-Eye in tennis helps referees make better decisions in games/matches, especially in important moments. For example, Hawk-Eye can show whether or not a tennis ball is in or out during a match point, which can not only completely change who wins the game, but then also alter the outcome of the game after. This is important because athletes dedicate so much time into the sport, train for years, and one wrong decision could ruin all their hard work, put the training to waste. It also helps to minimize and reduce arguments between players and referees, since with the technology there will be clear evidence/proof to support the decision that was made. However, others might feel that using technology slows the game down and takes away the excitement because some fans enjoy fast decisions and a fast moving game. Even though it can interrupt the flow of the game, I still think making sure the result is fair is more important than keeping the game fast and interesting to people watching and engaging with it.
I agree that using technology to make better judgement in sports games may benefit for the athletes as they receive accurate results. Technologies mentioned above are capable to erase mistakes that humans may do, which is critical in significant events. If sport games are too reliant on the enjoyment of the audience, players may face unfair treatment. Athletes perceive sports far more than just a simple hobby or entertainment; it represents their ambitions, dedication, and ethics in life.
However there are also concern where a growing reliance on technology would cause audience to loose interest. The human element, imperfections of the judgements from the referee, has became a big part of the fun of these games. When technology takes over and critics every move, the flow of the game might be disorganized, resulting matches to be boring and uninteresting to watch.
In addition, sports are heavily reliant on ran interaction. Without the screams, dramatic reactions, and discussions, it wouldn't be the same anymore.
Therefore, the balance between the two major points which are fairness and entertainment is important. Technology should be used to enhance, not replace.
In my opinion the fan experience is clue but you need to prioritise the players to authomatically raise up the content of the sport
I think fairness is the most important thing in sports and everyone should start at the same level and to respect the rules. if something helps everyone in a balanced way i agree
this topic is one of the most discussed and debated ones in modern sports so I think that everybody should express their honest opinions.
I strongly believe that the fan’s experience of a sport should not be prioritized over referring accuracy because fairness is fundamental.
I mean, the most important part of a sport is to play with competition along some agreed rules.
Fairness and accuracy make the game organized and right, which is one of the most important things related to sports.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because the truthfulness of a competition is what makes that competition have significance and value. For example, in the 1986 World Cup, Diego Maradona (regarded as one of the best football players in history) scored a legendary goal known as the 'Hand of God'. From the name, you can probably infer that Maradona scored a goal with his hand BUT the referees could not see it which meant they only saw the goal, not his hand. This goal is forever remembered as a goal which while legendary, decided a match incorrectly. If the 'Hand of God' happened today, it would not fly. The game would be accurately continued using technology. This is a foundational issue which should be treated fairly. The fans' emotional enjoyment will lose its impact if anything just 'flies' if it's entertaining.
However, others might feel that the raw drama is in essence, sports itself. You could argue that stopping a game for a VAR check disrupts the flow of the game. After the greatest goal of all time, you have to wait 40 minutes for the VAR to verify it.
In conclusion, while entertainment is essential for the longevity and popularity of any sport. This entertainment must be built upon a belief that a contest should be fair. However, technology must be implemented in a non-invasive way to preserve the original core which fans so dearly enjoyed.
I agree with some of your points, however I have some points to add to deepen the conversation!
Contrary to one of your counter-arguments, the VAR doesn’t take very long. The max it has ever taken in game is 8 minutes in a Bournemouth v Wolves match according to the premier league itself, and the average time of decision is 50 seconds. If anything, I think the short wait time would deepen suspense and elevate the experience due to the engagement fans likely have from the uncertainty.
Your points mainly focus on the drama and flow of the game, but have you considered the outcomes like riots due to fair calls fans feel are unjust? As an example, I live in Vancouver, and around 15 years ago a massive riot emerged from a completely fair game. Our team, the Canucks made it all the way to the finals to be crushed by 7 points. Quoting SportsNet: “15 years ago, a crushing Game 7 loss for the Canucks turned into a terrifying night of chaos and destruction.” This riot ended in huge amounts of property damage, some physically harmed people, and lots of psychological trauma. All out of anger for a simple sports game. While I agree with you, you haven’t considered negative outcomes such as these riots based upon fair decisions, that fans didn’t like.
Sports should be fair, but sports are tailored to fans entertainment and quite literally depend on fans. When there are stakes and negative outcomes, sometimes sacrifices must be made to quell harm and maintain the actual industry of sports to keep it from destruction.
Personally i think that VAR is not consistent. Sometimes , for example, they will give a penalty. Then maybe a few a games later there will be the same type of foul in the penalty box and the decision is no penalty. Also, in different competitions I dont understand why the rules and types of fouls. For example in the premier league they wont give an accidental handball most of the time but in UEFA competitions they will. UEFA needs to change that
In my opinion, it is okay having the fan time moment of the game in line with the said point on discussion. rather, it is very compromising to side on the fans side in order to compromise the accuracy of the game. There is always a lot of misunderstanding and shouting whenever the referee makes a mistake. Therefor that meant the fans are not satsified. For any game to be interesting, laws governing nit should be followed. it would be okay taking into consideration the accuracy without undermining the role of the human element in stabilizing the game.
Although I am not an avid sport watcher, I still think that fan experience should take priority over refereering accuracy as fan engagement can be very important to the popularity of the team/ person which may further generate revenue for them by attracting more fans. On the other hand, others may feel that refereeing accuracy should take priority as it ensures that everyone is playing fairly and the rules of the game are being actively upheld.
I understand why you think fan experience and revenue matter, but I disagree that they should come before accurate refereeing. If games are decided by wrong calls, then the results don't truly reflect the players skills and efforts. That can make the athlete and the fans lose trust in the sport, even if the game is exciting to watch. Referee accuracy also protects fairness . Sports are built on rules, and if those rules are not correctly enforced, then the competition is not equal, which can affect a player even if it's just one game. In the long run. Fairness also helps in the long run by keeping sports popular and fun. Fans may enjoy fast and dramatic moments, but they also want to believe that their team lost or won for a real reason, like skill. So while fan experience is important, accurate refereeing is what makes the sport meaningful and fun.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because the main purpose of sport is fair competition and achieving the best performance. People go to matches to feel excitement and tension, too much reliance on technology can slow the game down. If decisions are consistently wrong, fans may lose trust and interest in the sport itself. For example, in football, long VAR checks can leave fans confused and frustrated while waiting for a decision.
However, others might feel that refereeing accuracy is more important because technology helps prevent unfair results. They may argue that fans would prefer their team to lose in a fair way rather than win because of an ovbious refereeing mistake.
Is there a side to this debate you feel more in favour of?
These points of yours are quite accurate and valid. I agree with you that the main purpose of sports is fair competition and without technology such as instant replay technology, sports would not be fair. It is true that in sports such as football long VAR checks may take awhile and make fans lose interest in the game but I believe that it is important to look towards technology for help with making the best refereeing decisions. So even if fans’ get bored, I believe that these refereeing decisions take priority over a fan’s experience at a game. You have weighed both points very well but what is your opinion on this topic?
I think the audience's experience will be unaffected with this because personally I don't think using technology to help referees improve the game would matter that much. With todays technology, it would be more effective using innovations like VAR and Hawk-Eye because these technologies are almost fully accurate. Despite referees already having expertise in their fields, they're bound to make mistakes because of human factors.
Since both options can make mistakes, why not use both so instead of only picking one side, it is better for us to accept and use both accommodatingly to help one another because of their individual weaknesses and increase the accuracy of the games. The technology or referee might see weaknesses in each other's judgement and correct it for the audience's satisfaction towards the game results. Hence it would be a win-win situation.
Although some fans might get upset because no human referee = no mistakes made so less drama to be thrilled for. I'm not too sure why people get excited for drama because personally sports competitions would be better if it's more accurate so we can get the truest form of one's skills.
Let me know if you have an explanation on why other feel this way, thank you for your time.
'SHOULD FAN EXPERIENCE TAKE PRIORITY OVER REFERRING ACCURACY', many have their opinions but I say no, reason being that sport is to test the special skills of different individuals and fan experience should not be the ultimate beneficiary. We need not put the effort of the players down in the trash, their effort and progress will definitely be hindered if referring accuracy is brought down for any reason. I understand that referees get a lot of dislike and sometimes even threats for events that transpired against the favoured team (e.g. a cancelled goal, or an offside), but these referees should be able to stand their ground against this and put the players on field above everything else.
Thank you.
I feel strongly that in sport the integrity of refereeing must always trump the "fan experience." (Since I’m South African at heart, I’ll be using rugby as my primary example. For us, the game is basically a religion)
1. Sport is designed to be fun, sure, but its primary purpose is to be fair. We want outcomes that reflect a team’s talent, hard work, and discipline-not who has the loudest cheerleaders. If we prioritize fan reactions over correct calls, the scoreboard becomes unreliable.
2. If fans dictated the game, smaller teams would never stand a chance. It shouldn’t matter if you have five fans or 50,000. If a referee favors the big name teams just to keep the stadium happy, a rising team would find it impossible to climb the logs.
3.Part of sportsmanship is learning that "fair" isn't always "fun." Rugby teaches us life lessons, and the most important one is that sometimes the right call hurts. We have to learn to respect the whistle, even when it’s not the result we wanted. I want you to imagine it’s the 79th minute of a Springbok vs. All Blacks test. The atmosphere is tense and the homecrowd wants a penalty. If the ref makes a decision based on the 60,000 people booing instead of the actual breakdown, the win is hollow. We want to win because we were better on the grass, not because the ref was scared of the fans in the parking lot! My last point is that ultimately prioritizing fan experience over fair refereeing would cause more people to stop supporting and watching the sport than anything else which would completely destroy the goal of this idea.
Hello there witty_chocolate! I completely agree with you on this , it is only fair refereeing that makes playing and watching sport actually worth it. Your example from rugby is a perfect illustration of how winning is irrelevant if it is not the result of the team’s own merit but rather the pressure from the fans on the ref. I also completely agree with you on your observation about smaller teams ,if refs were to please fans, larger teams would always have an edge over smaller ones, and new teams would never have a chance to win.
It is actually your observation about how prioritizing fans could lead to people no longer watching the sport that really made me think. True Fans want to see action, of course, but they also want to see results that are genuine. IF there is no fairness, even the most devoted fans would begin to lose faith in the sport. It makes me understand that it is not just about the players when it comes to preserving the accuracy of refereeing but also about keeping the sport itself real. Thank you for highlighting the significance of sportsmanship.
I'm not sure about this because... some times it is help full and other times it is not. 👍👎
I think the fans' experience shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because all sports are rooted in abiding by regulations/guidelines. If that changes, then the spirit of sports-and sportsmanship if referring to an antagonistic activity-itself is lost. For example, if you were watching a tennis match, where Hawk-eye technology is used to achieve hawk-like precision and accuracy, that competition would be just. However, many fans might have been irritated that the match isn't as thrilling as they would have expected it to be. Be that as it may, i believe that the fairness of it all suffices to satisfy the athletes and offer an unbiased point of view to the match.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because the true credibility of sports depend more on accurate referencing and fair decisions than on the emotions of fans.
From my view point, I believe that sports aren't merely a display physical ability, it is a reflection of a just social order. When the sweat that an athlete shades year by year,, can't be held hostage to a single second of a referee's wrong decision. To indulge in mistakes in the name of entertaining the fans means to insult and humiliate that labor.
For example,,, in the famous France VS Ireland match the referee failed to notice Thierry Henry's handball, which resulted in Ireland being knocked out of the world cup. This tragedy in Irish Football history proved how dangerous and cruel it can be to reject modern technology in the name of fan excitement. This is why I believe accurate refereeing is the only true safeguard of an athlete's hard-earned effort..
However,, some argue that technological intervention slows down the game which is entirely incorrect. The clarity and truth that emerge from a correct decision for more satisfying and reassuring than any momentary excitement.
Therefore,, ensuring refereeing accuracy is not a mechanical intrusion; rather it is a profound commitment to protecting the very soul of sport that I believe...
Thank you💕
This question is discussed at every reunion that have ever discussed sports.
Why don't the players think what we think? Well, if you put yourself in their shoe you would see a different vision. All the opposite team's fans think you are wrong but you think you made the best decision.
That brings us to our topic, should the game be judged by our view or the fair view that isn't by anyone's side. I think this topic is debatable so bear with me.
If it was judged by the view of it's audience, the worse team would obviously lose due to their lack of fans, even if they won fair and square. But if it was from the other side, the option divides into two branches: one with a cheating referee/judge, and the other one isn't promising at all having to fun which would lead to fairness but reduction of the fans of the specific sports.
Overall, many would think that fairness is the way to go and letting the experienced referee be the judge of the situation. Other referees are aware of a sided referee and can get them fired and having the right road chosen even if the fans disagree.
Something both sides agree on, fairness is the path to go.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because you may not enjoy the rules but you shouldn't take over it , but today with the aeroplane it was fun and I enjoyed the lesson even with the rules. They also help you better understand the game. My group used all the products and did not cheat.
I personally don't think that fan experience should be prioritised over referring accuracy, there could be some deviations, but in my opinion some little form on entertainment isn't equal to someone getting injured or even worse dying, because some people want to be entertained. I think there are much better forms of entertainment than that.
There are kinds of referring accuracy, the ones about getting injured or dying are a little extreme but still should be taken into account. But the ones we mainly encounter are like the one example we were given, the VAR in football. VAR is a very good example, because it's easy for fans to say that it's all bribed, but that's normal when you have your favorite team that you want to win. But I think that fans should put themselves in the opposite's fans side, for example you know your team doesn't deserve the penal that they were given so they try to prove the mistake, which is completely normal and everyone would do that because it's just simply the right thing to do. So that's why I think fan experience shouldn't be prioritised over referring accuracy, there are the big things like injuries such things like that and those more down to earth things we encounter, but can mean a lot to us, so we should really understand and except referring accuracy over the fan experience, because someone's emotions and feelings could be hurt and even we can experience that so we should have respect towards everyone. I hope you enjoyed this little discussion. See you in another one. Byeee!
I do not think fan experience should come before rules.
There’s a false dichotomy within the question. Many fans' enjoyment actually comes from competition, and the uncertainty of it all which can only happen when enforced by rules. So the question instead, is whether we should prioritize the temporary enjoyment of a fraction of fans while rules are broken.
Sports run on fan base, and the more popular a sport or team, the more money they make. While prioritizing the fans' enjoyment might generate more income through gambling, or social media revenue, it can create unfair situations like the PWL, where it isn’t actually fighting, it’s staged performances to appease fans. There’s a lot of controversy surrounding the PWL because fans feel that because it’s staged, it’s not worth watching. As Sports Illustrated mentions, wrestling has become a fake sport, and more of a show instead of a match. Imagine your favourite team scored a goal, and the referees have to check whether it is offside. They decide it’s not a goal, to drag the match on, and increase fan engagement. It’s not fair to the players who scored, and no matter what biased decision is made to increase fan enjoyment, the fans who have been wronged by the call will inevitably turn their backs on the sport.
Making biased calls isn’t good for anyone, and over time will grow to be like the PWL through staged matches. Suddenly it’s not a sport, it’s as scripted as a cartoon.
I think the fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is what makes a result meaningful. I remember watching an important football match with my dad where our team conceded a goal that was clearly offside. At the time the game felt intense and emotional, but once the match ended we were not talking about the excitement anymore. We were annoyed and kept saying how unfair the decision was. That one mistake completely overshadowed the rest of the game for us, and it still comes up in conversations years later.
However, others might feel that technology removes the human side of sport. They might argue that long pauses for VAR checks interrupt the flow of the match and make goal celebrations feel awkward and delayed. From their perspective, small refereeing errors are part of what gives sport its drama and unpredictability.
Overall, while excitement is important, I think accuracy matters more because it helps fans accept the outcome of a game and remember it for the right reasons.
In modern-day sports, I think that accurate refereeing is key for fairness, even if it may slightly disturb the actual flow of the game. The outcome of a game may not accurately represent the athletes' actual skill and effort when referees make bad calls/decisions. In order to ensure that games are determined by skill rather than chance and error, technologies like replay videos can help minimize these human errors (according to the BBC). Some fans may debate that it slows down the rapidness of the game, which is understandable as a rapid game is super entertaining. However, accuracy should remain the top priority because the honesty of the game matters more than a viewers enjoyment. Accuracy can also help contribute to the sports' credibility, so without trustworthy decisions, fans may start to doubt the games' legitimacy, which will eventually harm the sport far more than a few short pauses/replays in a game would.
I strongly believe that the experience of a fan should not take priority over refereeing accuracy.The reason for this is because in sports such as football, tennis and badminton it is often very hard for the human eye to decide if a play in is in or out, which then effects the other team and can even change the whole game. For example in football once you catch the ball you have to take at least 2 steps afterwards before going out of bounds and I watched the Buffalo Bills verse the Denver Broncos in the NFL playoff game a few weeks ago.In this game Bills player, Brandin Cooks caught a deep pass and went to the ground but lost control of the ball before he had completed the process of the catch.The referees ruled it an interception and he didn't get credit for a completed pass.But the only reason why the referees were able to make this decision was because they reviewed the play with instant replay technology and by watching the play from cameras at all angles. If the referees did not have access to this technology they probably would have called that play inbounds because the play happened too fast for the human eye to see or comprehend. This game was also a playoff game, meaning that the team that won would advance to the next round of the playoffs and the one that lost would be out. So each play and each call, made by a referee is extra important because these plays change the whole fate of the game. Even though the experience of a fan may be impacted, to be fair to the hardworking players who play the game we have to use technology to be as accurate as we can.
Since this topic is largely debated, I am here to share my opinion. Personally, I feel that the referring accuracy is the most important element in any sport. Since sports run on a set of rules, they should all be respected and prioritized- if the rules are not respected during sports, what is the purpose of having them there? Most sports carry these rules to make the game fair; if fairness doesn't take priority, then the fans may not seem interested. However, others might feel that the fan experience should be prioritized over referring accuracy, and I don't particularly agree. While it may seem like the people on the teams play on the audience's energy, we still have to remember that they are profesionals that have trained most of their lives for this sport. Of course, the audience can give them a boost of confidence by believing in them, and with or without enthusiasm. The professionals don't need it since they mainly rely on their training and preparation, not the crowd's reaction.
In conclusion, I believe that accuracy is much more important than the excitement of the fans. Accuracy helps make the game fair and organized, and if those two things were mixed into a solid, it would be a referee. I hope my points help show why I believe referring accuracy is more important.
This topic is debatable. Personally, I think the fan’s experience of sport is not more important than accuracy and fairness of games since from the old times we used to play by the rules which is the right way. The most fundamental part of playing a sport or game is actually how well they stick to the rules because sport without rules is nothing. Even if you win without rules, you won’t feel the same happiness you feel when you win fair and square! And I think as fans we wouldn’t be happy if our team won unfairly (playing without rules). However others might disagree with my opinion which is acceptable, some people might prefer fan experience over fairness.
I think that refereeing accuracy is more important than fan experience because, without fairness, there's no sport. If a decisive moment in a game is not accurate, the passion of the fans is lost in frustration. To celebrate a goal or a point only to realize that it was awarded through an inaccuracy is to be cheated and not entertained. Fans appreciate discipline, hardwork and determination of the athletes. If the outcome of a game is marred by avoidable inaccuracies, then the hard work of the players and the dedication of the fans are both lost. Technologies like VAR and Hawk-eye does not eliminate drama, it actually preserves it. The drama that the audience wants to see should result from athletes competing while under pressure, not from ambiguity in refereeing decisions.
Others may argue that technology disrupts the flow of the game, and that concern is valid. However, what fans remember most are not chaotic moments, but credible ones. So, I think that refereeing accuracy matters more than fan experience, because fairness is what makes fan experience meaningful in the first place.
In my opinion the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because it ruins the sports for the players. The players put their life's work or a great amount of effort into their sport to play at a professional level, the bias of fans will affect their gameplay both off and on the court, fields, and arenas. In a world where a fan's experience takes priority over refereeing accuracy, the players' will not only receive an large amount of hate for breaking a certain rule or "accidentally" winning, but won't receive the same recognition as another player who has a larger fan base who didn't win any of their matches fairly. In the Paris 2024 Olympics, two Chinese players, Chen Meng and Sun Yingsha, competed against each other in the women’s singles final. Chen Meng won the gold medal, and some fans reacted badly to the outcome, criticizing it, booing, or insulting Chen Meng on social media because they supported Sun Yingsha. Is the fans' experience would've been more important in this situation, Chen Meng would probably lose her well deserved gold medal and Sun Yingsha would win it with poor sportsmanship. One example, doesn't prove all sports behave this way but it shows the risk. However, others would feel differently that a fans' experience should be prioritized because they are the ones paying to see the match. In conclusion, While fans financially support sports and help keep competitions alive, prioritizing their preferences over fairness risks turning sport into entertainment rather than competition.
I believe that accuracy is most important. Yes, Fan experience and satisfaction is really important. Fans provide revenue to clubs and they are the identity of the team and what represent them. This means whatever team the fan supports they will always have some sort of bias towards their team and always be in favor of them. So if a real referee makes a call that the fans don't agree with of course the fans will be upset. If the ref makes a wrong call the fans will be happy but the opposing team's fans will also be upset as its super unfair. That's why the VAR is so great, it shows the truth and what really happened, what shows on the VAR is undeniable proof that it happened. The VAR enables the players to play fair and could unite fans as a whole to chant for their team like no tomorrow knowing that the match is fair and there is no behind the scenes cheating or violating the rules.
I personally don't like watching sports all that much, so I am not sure if I aould talk about this topic,
But i think that fairness is a top priority, the VAR system is very usefull in football, it helpa referees to make fair decisions and therefore helps the teams.
Fan expirience is subjective, some people may find it more enjoyable when a sport is as fair as possible, but there are also people that like a sport to be as bare bones as possible.
My opinion on the matter is that sports ahould aim for fairness, which in my eyes lead to an enjoyable expirience.
Ive changed my mind multiple times while planning this answer, but I think that its more important for a sport or activity to be fun to watch than for the decisions to be fair.
In order to prove my point, im gonna ask a question: why do we want things to be fair? My answer is that we do so because unfair things make us unhappy, so we try to avoid them. Therefore, the reason we want things to be fair is happiness.
But whats a way for sports to make people even happier? Making the sport fun to watch. If we do so, then we know people are going to enjoy that sport. Why? Because it adds an entirely new thing for the fans to talk about. "What if this happened instead of that?". "I really dont like this referee!". "I do!". If we have completely fair and objective decisions, theres going to be so much less for the fans to talk about. Theres going to be so much less discussion among the fans, and discussion is a very common, fun and entertaining part of sports, so we lose a large part of what makes them so interesting. If we focus only on fair decisions, theres not going to be any more discourse and conversation on this topic.
For example, in basketball and formula 1 (where technology is rarely used in important decisions) a big part of fan participation is hypothesizing and conversing on different topics. In football, though, there is so much less interaction with subjects involving VAR (video assisted referee). When VAR is used in a game, theres a lot less people talking about it. This just proves how important the human element is in decision making.
I believe that what is most important is for the game to be fair and accurate. What truly matters isn't making the fan's experience more exciting but for the athletes to be truly honored and awarded for their efforts and hard work. Thus, technology like VAR can be helpful so as not to make mistakes and wrong anyone.
While I agree with you, I also feel that over officiating will take the joy and excitement out of the game because the need to check the footage from the match before the match can continue as fans cannot celebrate immediately, though I believe accuracy ensures that the better team wins. You know the funny thing is that fans at home can immediately see a replay of the match while the referees can't, maybe very soon that might change that the referees can get an instant play back without having to wait.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because if the referee is not taking right decisions the fans won't have a good experience of this sport and they won't have fun while whatching the sport . For example, when a referee takes a false decision and i watch the game, i will get frustrated and won't want to watch the game anymore. However, others might feel that without the VAR the game will be played the traditional way and won't have all this fancy technology systems, this way it will be more entertaining.
Hello chat! In my opinion i believe fans shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because that could lead to many imbalances, a fun wants his team to win so most of the times he will say a fake call just for his team to win. However others may feel that a large number of fans can see a call better than just three refs from more angles, and that is actually true!
I think that fans shouldn't be prioritised over refereeing accuracy, because it's excistance significantly decreases the possibilities of an unfairness to happen . Sports' games would be pointless without the objectivity that VAR provides and that would make fans furious. However, others might feel that it is an unnecessary and time consuming element of the games.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because the real feeling disappears. For examble, ιt's cold-blooded to judge a football match by a few millimeters. This is not the main theme. However, others might feel that even 0,01 offside or onside matters...
I think the fan's experience of sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is above all and it definitely does not decrease fans' interest enthusiasm and agony. In addition football is a sport in which cheating is a regular situation and that should be faced.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because rules should be respected.If we don't follow the rules the game will be unfair and less enjoyable at the same time. Although the use of technology is innovative and appealing to some people it may lead to inaccurate results, which will make the experience less interesting.
I think the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because we have to follow the rules.For example i think that everyone would be frustrated if their team won with an unfair way. In my opinion refereeing accuracy is the most important thing in a sport.Also a true fan of a team will be happy if their team won with a fair way.So technology like VAR should be used for more accurate decisions.
My opinion upon the matter of setting priority the accuracy of referreeing over the fans' experience and vice versa is that undeniably the profound knowledge of the rulls and regulations of the sport as well as the expertise of a referee far outweigh the personal judgement of fans, under the spectacles of subjectivity. Refereeing should be candor and non-biased, thus umpires ought to be the ultimate regulators and claimers of a game.
Hello ! I'm miraculius world from Kastoria . I think the Fan's experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because Most important is the rythm of the game. when it stops many times it reduce the passion of players and fan's
Hi, everyone. My personal opinion is that the fans' experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because the sports exist for this exactly reason, to have fun and forget the problems of the every day life. Sometimes the perfect refereeing decisions may ruin the experience of the fun because the momentum of the match is being destroyed and the suspense is getting decreased. But, I understand that others might feel differently. They think that if there is not refereeing accuracy, there will be injustice and the interest will be lost!!!
As a football fan that has lived times where technology didn't help the referee's decision , although VAR might take away some of the fun , I firmly believe that this system mostly amplifies sportsmanship and fairness rather than striking them, as said by many people. Also I think that the referee and other factors such as match fixing are to be blamed for unfair and wrong decisions that lead to the fans' hate speech about it. It's really all a misconception so we should all just be more educated and accept that if our team get's defeated , VAR doesn't always have to be the culprit.
I agree with you,because when decision are correct players feel proud and fans feel happy.The VAR helps referees to make correct decision more often than they used to.VAR tends mistake sometimes,VAR ranger from about 98.3%-99.3%.In my opinion VAR has advantage and disadvantages.
From my prespective the fans experice of a sport should take priority The reason for why i believe this is that the game should be enjoied by the supporters and the players which is prevented by modern tec making the game boring and not entertainig. Also the human essence is lost because the use of tecnology makes the game inhumane .
I think that the fans' experience of a sport like football shouldn't take priority over Video Assistant Referee' s accuracy because one of the most important elements of sports is fairness and equality for all teams or individuals. I also believe that not only the fans are less excited about football when the technology of VAR is used, but it should make them understand better the deeper value of justice in sports and life, and accept a potential defeat or disappointment. Furthermore, I support the idea that, in a case of unfairness in a football match, most of the times the blame lies with the referee or the other staff and not the VAR, as this system only helps to ensure fairness and enhance it. Therefore I believe that we shouldn't disapprove the use of the VAR technology, but support it and, along with being excited, entertained and agonizing with football and sports in general, we should be more educated and learn to accept and support fairness.
Personally, I don't think fans are the right people to judge whether technology should take part in sports and change them for the better. Not only the referees could make more accurate decisions , but also the games are going to be more fair. Furthermore, i believe that sports fans would still enjoy sports with technology or not.
I disagree because...other fan might not like to see their team being cheated
I dont think the fans experience should be prioritised over accurate referring. Referees are sometimes biased and act unfairly towards a certain team or athlete. This means they make unaccurate and unfair decisions during the game. This makes the game unethical and defeats the point of referring during the game.
I believe fans' experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy, because doing so would completely undermine the sport's credibility and actually do a disservice to fans and teams alike.
With every sport, there are at least two sets of fans who are dedicated to the success of their team. If fan experience becomes the most important factor for sports, which set of fans do you choose and how? When you lead away from the objective facts and start working to create subjective narratives out of these games, you are essentially choosing the winners and losers, and how do you go about that? Do you choose the team that you like most, or may that pay most, to win by ruling in their favor? Do you create an underdog story by letting a team that might be more experienced lose to an inexperienced one by being more lenient to the "underdog"?
Whatever you do, it has the potential to create a huge disservice to fans and athletes who would be cheated out of satisfying wins or a motivating loss, and would change sports media to reality sports media that may feel scripted or even fake. Not valuing the objective facts provided by technology would certainly be a huge disservice to athletes and teams that truly pour their blood, sweat, and tears into their sports and could lead to the industry collapsing as more teams and athletes feeling injust about plays, stop competing all together.
I believe that the experience of sports fans shouldn’t be given more importance than the accuracy of refereeing because the accuracy of results is the backbone of every sport. If the results are not accurate, then even the most thrilling match becomes pointless, especially for the players who have been practicing for years and still don’t get the results because of one mistake.
For instance, in football, the use of VAR technology can save a disallowed goal or a penalty decision that may go against a player, which may result in the entire outcome of the match or tournament going against them. Even if the decision takes time and disrupts the flow of the match, it is important to ensure that the results of the match are accurate.
On the other hand, some people may have a different opinion about the importance of the experience of sports fans because the stoppages in the match disrupt the flow of the match and the highs and lows of sports that make watching live sports so exciting.
I think refereeing accuracy should still come first, but fan experience is very important too. If refrees keep making big mistakes on scoring, it could make fans lose trust in the game, which can actually ruin the experience. VAR and Hawk-Eye can help make decisions fairer for important moments like goals, that fairness matters both to the player and fans. I think the best solution is a balance where technology is used to fix clear errors, but refrees still have the final say, so the game will still be fun and also fair.
I believe we shouldn't have to choose between a fair game and a fun one. While refereeing accuracy is vital for the integrity of the sport-especially when careers and huge investments are on the line-the current way we use technology often ruins the fan experience by killing the game's natural flow.
The smartest solution is to prioritize 'Seamless Accuracy' We should embrace tech like semi-automated offsides that provide instant decisions, rather than long, awkward pauses that drain the stadium's energy. Ultimately, sport is entertainment, so if the quest for perfection makes the game boring to watch, everyone loses.
What matters is which one encourage cheating during sporting activity? But if non of them encourages cheating then both should be considered. So long as the athlete does not feel cheated, the excitement in game or rather sport cannot be totally wiped out.
referee plays a very important role inh the game. removing the VAR means compromising the status and quality of the game. In my own opinion, i think we should not compromise quality for fun of the game. Funs only enjoy the game when their are guidlines that ensures fair play and winning side. When we remove q1uality that means teams c an fight ruining the game.
I think that fans experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because all this games where created for a purpose and it can not be scraped out because of fans interest, if this is to be done then the goal and main aim of adopting the game is ruined because instead of the game to follow layed down rules it will follow the interest of the fans.
For example, agugu fishing festival is a game and a form of sport which let participators to fish and at the end who so ever catches the biggest fish is the winner, in such game if the fans are to come up with suggestions like the first person with a fish no matter the size should be the winner, the question should always be of what impact is that suggestion? because such ideas would definitely make the game less interesting and fun.
The same is applicable to football, when some rules are changed it affects the pattern in which the game is played and can promote enmity among player.
I disagree because... I think when the game is been played played accordingly it will be more fun for the viewers or fans who are watching the game and the (VAR) as we all know says the truth so we can know who won the game fair and square THANKS.
Interesting comment poetic_solution! I wonder if there's possibility that VAR is open to interpretation by people. Is it always "the truth"?
Interesting question [VAR] is always right except in a situation where the clip shown has been cut
I don't think that fans should take over priority over refereeing because Referees are sometimes biased and act unfair towards a team or athlete. This means they make inaccurate decisions during the games making the player mad because of a false call. This makes the game unfair and defeats the point of referring during the game.
Reply to this comment
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because
the peoples would not need a human refree if there is systems like VAR in football and hawk-eye in tennis if these are more accurate I don't think that it will make the game less excited,
For example if a football player has scored a goal not playing fair and the refree didn't notice would you accept it I don't think so, you will not have any hope in the team
So in my point of view I strongly believe that fairness is the main thing in a game i don't think that tech can make a game less interesting
I agree Because the discussion is important to be fair as much as it is fun to watch in the sense that if the discussion is fair, it is a topic, even if it is interesting and fun, this is another topic because it is impossible for anyone to say a topic in which there is injustice or something impossible to be fun . This remains fun, unlike when someone talks to someone else about a game he played or something. In this case, the topic remains fun. And this is my personal opinion
Bye bye
I think that technologies like VAR will be a good help in sport activities for example in football if there was a foul played while the referee was not looking, he might not give a fair justice because he did not know when it happened but with technologies like the VAR the referee could just easily go and replay the video and then give a fair decisions.
There was a debate about removing the human factor because of the presence of the VAR, well because of the presence of the VAR doesn't completely remove the human factor. because the tech is just a helper to the referee. well if to say that it takes out the human factor, who would be the one to make the final decision ,unless there is a VAR HUMAN ROBOT. The referees are still needed.
I think the fans' experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because when the game becomes too strict the audience\fans\viewers tend to lose interest and the game may be as fun as it used to be. however, others might feel that refereeing accuracy should take priority over fan experienced
I dont think that it would be fair if one team had an advantage as the other players would be using their true skills.I think that both teams should use their own skills
while technology like VAR and hawk-Eye can improve the accuracy of decisions, it may also detract from the excitement of the game for fans. On one hand, providing real-time data and explanations can enhance transparency and fairness, giving fans a better understanding of the decision made. On the other hand, removing the human elements from the decision-making process might reduce the enjoyment of the sport for some fans.
some fans may value the excitement and unpredictability of the game, while the other may prioritize the clarity and fairness of the officiating. it is essential for sports organizations to consider both perspectives and work toward a solution that meet the needs of a diverse fan base.
I on my own case would love to share my opinion on this topic, and expect it would be seen by many.
Firstly I would love you to know that I am not against the VAR(video assistant recorder )in football or hawk-eye in tennis, but would love or wish for you to understand the meaning of technology, technology are gadgets or electrical appliances that makes humans life, easier, faster and more reliable.
SO we all know or have a concept of technology, we can say that the VAR and Hawk-eye used in sports are used as technology in sports to make life easier and better for the referees and score keepers and to keep an eye on the players and make sure rules are keep in order for the game to be a fairly played game and to avoid cheats in the game.
The games are most times enjoyed by viewer at home and the technologies like the VAR highlights the accidents that occur during the match or games.
SO I would conclude by saying the technologies used in sports are totally supported by me, why is because they make lives easier and fair.
Thanks for reading my comment bye see you next time!.
I disagree that a fan’s experience should be prioritised over accuracy. Sports should be played with fairness and abide by the rules. Otherwise, sports wouldn’t be sports. A good sportsman is someone who can entertain and win while still playing honestly.
Yes, people watch sports for entertainment. However, fans of a team or a player who are on the receiving end of an unfair referee decision definitely would not enjoy watching.
With recent technological advances, it would be cruel not to utilise them. We shouldn’t only consider the fan experience, but also the player experience. Being a sportsman is a job, and being treated unfairly while doing your job undermines players livelihoods.
I think most modern sports should prioritize referring to the experience. The reason I think this is because the fairness of a sport is the most important thing in sports. A sport that prioritizes the experience Could lose a fanbase because of the ref not calling any calls for example, it could be a foul in basketball and the ref not call it making fans mad and making teams lose fans and even players because of the unfair and no calls. I Also think a sport that prioritizes referring over experience would make sports boring and will make fans lose interest. It could also cause fans to start breaking rules to have more fun and because of this games would be canceled slowing causes the sort to become more and more unpopular until the sport is no longer called a good sport or could be canceled. in conclusion I think a sport that prioritizes experience over referring, but I Also think sports that prioritize referring would be bad. I think it should be half and half or a Mix of both because a mix of both would ensure fairness and also a good experience for both the fan and the player
by approachable_orangutan.
How do you think sports can balance fair refereeing with an exciting experience for both fans and players?
I think the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refeering accuracy because when a person comes to watch a game, they are there for the team. If unfairness happens, player, fans, even the referee will be disadvantaged and problems will show up eventually.
The player might get a bad reputation because some people thought she/he made the team lose even though its actually not their mistake. Fans might spread hate comments or end up making chaos happen because they are just trying to stand up for their team. The referee will also get bad reputation or even get fired, because after all the referee’s human too and can make mistakes. And teams might hate each other because now they get a good reputation because of something they didnt do. Sports wouldn't be fun without sportsmanship and fairness.
Yes the referee can make the game more fun, but whats the point of a referee if unfairness keeps happening? True fans would support their team even if it has been replaced with VAR.
ABILITY TO CHOOSE BOTH AND NON.
Actually the main reasons for sports is for growth, improvement and raising high rise in adventures, you can only have fun in sports when needed and as well expect fair result when required in high games, so i would say if sport is for fun it should be based on deliberate needs and requirement from the audience but when it is for high games that requires a winner, cheating should be out of it in order to make the sports fair and fun at the same time, so i encourage all sports fans go for the best that you think is right and avoid vices ruling us.
YES IT IS BETTER YOU BE FAIR THAN TO LIKE WHAT YOU WATCH. YES SEEING YOUR OPPONENT LOS IS WHAT YOU THINK IS GOOD BUT NO IF BEING FAIR IS A WAY TO MAKE THINGS BETTER YES I AGREE TO IT BUT IF GAMES AND SPORT ARE NOT PLAYED FAIRLY I RATHER PLAY GAMES THAN TO WATCH PEOPLE CHEAT.
SO I SAY NO
This is one of the topic is usually debated by most people and I think the fans' experience shouldn't take priority over refereeing
accuracy because if a game is played without rules firstly the game will be unfair even though the game might be enjoyed by fans
the competitors might not come out the same and they will be a lot of injuries sustained by the competitors example a football match without rules so this why I say that fan experience should not be prioritised over referring accuracy
MORDERN SPORT IS SAID TO BE PLAYED WITH TECH BUT USING IT WHEN NEEDED IS BETTER SO I CAN'T AGREE TO ANY USAGE OF TECH DURING SOME SPORT.
Okay, I think that fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because of if they allow referees to keep on spectating the match they won't see some errors in the game.
And so, I think that fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over referring accuracy.
My advice for referees are to not accept bribery or corruptions from people because when they do so cheating would take place even with the help of technologies, I WOULD LOVE MY MOTION TO BE ACCROSS THE WORLD" do not accept dirty money".
However, I don’t think that the fans’ experience of a sport should be more important than refereeing accuracy. This is because refereeing accuracy is important. Big mistakes by referees will mean that a team will lose a match unfairly, and this is very frustrating. For instance, VAR technology in football ensures that a wrong offside or penalty call is corrected and that a goal is given or not given correctly. This ensures that the competition is fair. However, others may argue that the use of technology too frequently makes the game too slow and takes away the excitement of quick decisions. However, accuracy is more important because fair results matter most in a game.
In my opinion, technology in sports is used in order to make things more accurate and fair. However, many people believe that this kills the spirit of sports, because, for example, you might watch your team scoring a goal on football and a few minutes later the referee announces that the goal is offside. Many people probably describe this as annoying, but I don't agree with them. I argue that accuracy in sports is much more important than how fans feel.
I agree because if a team wines the game unfaily the other team will be angery and they can start a fight or they can even desaind to stop the game.
Why do you think unfair wins can make teams so angry that they might start a fight or stop the game?
The game will not go faire becouse ,the VAR can not say every thing true.
I believe that the audience/fans experience shouldn't overrule, or invalidate the referee's priority of the match and its accuracy, because otherwise the sport's experience wouldn't be fair, or enjoyable (for the athletes, judges, or even referees). Additionally, it could ruin, an athlete's career, passion, and dream. The reason why sports where invented, was to ; Have a source of entertainment, take part in activity that encourages activity, and while playing to have fairness. If fans perspective was idealized, a game could become unenjoyable, uninteresting, and eventually ruin the game.
Though fan experience is the best because that is what makes sports popular, having better accuracy means hitting more amazing shots that seems impossible to hit. This previous scenario brings more spectators in hopes of seeing another shot like that. Even if the whole team's accuracy is the worst, this shouldn't be used in the hopes of fairness. There are some reasons to use it. For example, a member could have a minor injury, affecting their accuracy. In that case, it could be used to make up for the lost accuracy. It should ONLY be used for that not adding more accuracy than needed to get the lead.
In my opinion fair decision's matter more than a fun game to watch because the game can be good to watch and still be a fair game because the rules matter because imagine this. Your watching your favorite game then your team is about to win a gold medal and then the other team shoves your teams player out of the way and the refs don't call a foul or anything.So your team loses and the other team wins a gold trophy.
I think the fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fair decisions are essential to the integrity of the game. For example, in football, VAR has helped correct clear mistakes such as offside goals or missed penalties, which can completely change the outcome of an important match. Even if VAR sometimes slows the game down, it prevents teams from losing because of obvious errors, which can feel even more frustrating for players and supporters.
However, others might feel that too much technology takes emotion out of sport and makes it less exciting to watch. Long stoppages and tight decisions can break the flow of the game and reduce spontaneous celebrations. While this concern is valid, accuracy should still come first, because fans ultimately want results to be fair and deserved, not decided by refereeing mistakes.
i think it will help the ref see who has got the ball
This has been widely discussed and I think that fans are one of the most important part of sport but in this specific scenario, the VAR and accuracy should be first. This because accuracy doesn't have to make the sport less exciting.
Firstly, I believe fans are important because they make affordable sport and without them the competitions wouldn't have much sense. Why to spend money on something that doesn't create benefit? For that reason I think that enjoyment of the play should be one of the priorities because that's what keeps sport being important and meaningful for our society.
However, in this specific scenario I think the VAR and accuracy should be prioritized because I don't think it makes it less exciting. Personally, I enjoy more the matches with this kind of technology because you can be sure that the result is accurate and correct, so there's no way of cheating or impartiality.
In conclusion, I think it depends on which technology we want to use and how it affects fans' experience. Besides this should be studied deeply before applying it to the actual game as I guess many institutions do.
Do you enjoy less sports when they use this kind of technology?
Fellow students, esteemed writers.
As (somewhat of) a soccer fan, I am often surrounded by dispeased fans, angry with the calls made by the referee and VAR (Video Assistant Referee), but is this angst justified? Moreso, should fan judgement replace refs?
I think that referees should stay as is.
To justify my reasoning, all sports consist of 3 things, equipment, rules, and players. If fan judgement replaces refs, training equipment will be useless, because even if a player makes a good play, it could be ruined by fans of the other team/players. Additionally, rules would be cast aside, or at least more lenient if fans made the calls, rendering rules obsolete. Lastly, players do not want to play a game that is unjust, meaning less people would want to become sports athletes. Others might argue that the sports would be more fun because it would always be what the majority wants, but I disagree because a predictable game is a boring game. Another side is that of official referees, which are important to keep games fair. Without this crucial role, thousands would be put out of jobs ranging from 30,000 to 50,000 USD. Altogether, an unfair, fan-influenced game would not be fun to watch, as teams or players with the most fans would win all of their games, making games too predictable and boring to watch.
In conclusion, a game where fans make the calls instead of refs would be unfair, boring and would not bring in much revenue.
Thank you for listening.
As a soccer fan, I am often surrounded by unhappy supporters, angry at the calls made by referees and VAR . But is this frustration justified? More importantly, should fan judgment replace referees? I agree with mesmerising_lychee that referees are essential to keeping sport fair, competitive, and meaningful. If fan judgment replaced referees, training and skill would become meaningless, because even a perfect play could be overturned by biased fans of the opposing team. Rules would also lose their importance, becoming flexeble or ignored entirely which would destroy the structure of the game. Finally, players would not want to compete in an unfair environment leading to fewer people wanting pursuing careers in sport. Some may argue that fan controlled decisions would make sports more exciting because outcomes would reflect the majoritys opinion. However, I disagree. In a game where the most popular team always wins would become boring. Referees exist to ensure fairness, and without them, thousands of people would lose their jobs, damaging the sports industry as a whole.
In conclusion, a game where fans replace referees would be unfair, boring, and damaging to the sport. Referees are esential to maintaining integrity, and competitiveness.
During these games, it is essential to keep the games fair. If we ‘rig’ the games even a little bit to improve the audience's experience, it will affect every aspect of the game.
One aspect is the audience's perspective. I remember when my cousin came to my house after a big canucks game, everyone was talking about who had won. Still, he had not watched it yet, so he stayed downstairs until everyone stopped talking about it, so he could watch the game without knowing who was going to win. My other cousin, who was about 5 at the time, told my older cousin who won, and it ruined the whole game for him. The suspense in not knowing who is going to win is a big part of watching and participating in sports. If people changed the scores based on who the audience was rooting for, everyone would eventually know who was going to win, therefore ruining the experience of watching a game altogether. This would lower the number of people who are watching the games, but also playing the games. Starting the downfall of watching sports for entertainment.
For me I am a Football fan (Soccer depending were you're from) the recent surge of the use of VAR (video assistant referee). has completely changed the sport. VAR does have its upsides and downsides. for example fans have essentially lost their minds of bad referee calls with VAR. on June 22 2024. during the Romania Belgium match up in the euros, Lukaku had been offside only marginally and the referee disallowed the goal this obviously disappointed the fans massively, some fans say "the game is gone" witch means the once beautiful game of Football is fading away. In addition La Liga (Spanish football league) they pay for VAR yet not goal line technology this mistake backfired on them massively. on April 21 2024 Barcelona faced Real Madrid the problem is that because of certain angles a ball can look like that it has not crossed the goal line when it has, at this game Barcelona was robbed of a goal because VAR officials made the what looked like the right decision yet it wasn't this shows a flaw in VAR. Yet VAR isn't completely Useless and can be useful in certain scenario's. on June 27 2010 England played Germany. frank Lampard scored a goal that would've brought them level at 2-2 yet controversially the ball bounced from the crossbar into the net and out, in this match VAR hadn't yet been implemented this had robbed England of a goal that could've have changed their history yet no call was made VAR in this match would have been useful.
In conclusion I believe that VAR should still be implemented in all matchups yet should be used less and the referee should be trusted
To be honest, from my perspective, both are important, it is difficult to choose between refeering accuracy and fans' experience becaucause both are essential for a great experience.
I't s fundamental to have fun while watching the match. For example, if the VAR takes too much time to check if everything is working correctly, people get bored and it can cause desperation. Therefore, it needs to work faster with more technology, so people won't lose interest.
However, others might feel that sport need to be perfet and very fair. For my is also important, but is better to enjoy and have fun watching it.
To sum up, sport should be something that entertain us, not only that causes problems because they are not fair. Technology should be mor efficiently to enjoy more.
I think that the fan's experience of sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy (VAR). Imagine your team losing a match because of a simple inaccuracy. Would you be happy? The Var (Video Assistant Referee) is extremely important that can give crucial decisions that are precise and accurate to make the match fair and full of equality and justice.
Did you know that the VAR was firstly used on August 10, 2026. in a friendly match between PSV Eindhoven and FC Eindhoven in Netherland? Imagine the people before the var usage. They were happy yet they were struggling from the decisions of the referee. Without the VAR, most of the matches would be unfair because of depending on the eyes of a referee only without an assistant. Alot of clubs, players and fans were oppressed because of the horrible decisions. For example, in 2009, in the champions league semifinal that was between Barcelona and Chelsea. The match was calm with a 1-0 score to Chelsea but in the last 5 minutes, there were two hand balls in the penalty box to Chelsea that were caused by Gerard Pique and another by Samue Eto'o. They were clear but the referee did not give Chelsea any penalty. Moreover, in the last minute, the Barca player Andrea Iniesta scored the equalizer, and this made Barcelona qualify to the final. This was a disastrous scandal.
Others may be opposite with me but actually if they were a Chelsea fan, would they be happy about the undeserved lose?
To conclude, the VAR has a marvelous and enormous impact in football, and it made football better.
i think that fan experience should definitely be the main focus because when the crowd is happy, the whole game feels a lot better. If the ref spend too much time trying to be perfect, it just ruins the mood for the audience and makes everyone lose their energy. It's way more important to keep the flow of the game fast, so that people stay excited and lound in the stands. We should think about how to keep the game fun instead of just focusing on little mistakes. A game that's exciting and fun is always going to be more memorable than the one that keeps stopping for replays. When people are watching are having a great time and the atmosphere is hype, that's when the game is actually at it's best!
I think fan experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy.
Players in olympic games have possibly trained their whole life for the moment they are in. They work hard to limit their errors and improve on close to daily basis for years on end. It would be unfair to say that fans excitement should take priority robbing these olympians of their moment. Especially if fans take priority when it comes to a game breaking decision.
Similarly, this technology does not really implicate anything amongst the fans. It calls for more accuracy when scores are being called but overall the game turnout is still a surprise to people. The thrill of watching the game should still remain prominent as fans watch their favorite teams face off.
While some may say that technology is ruining the game as we know it, that is not the case. Instead it is building more reliability so we can be sure the correct fouls, goals, and penalties are called allowing for the best team to win. Therefore, fans experience should not be placed above accurate refereeing.
I think that a fans experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is the foundation of any competition. Sport is based on agreed rules, and if those rules are not followed correctly, the result loses its value. Players train for years, make sacrifices, and put in huge effort to win, so one wrong decision can unfairly change the outcome of a match and erase all that hard work. For example, technologies like VAR in football or Hawk-Eye in tennis help refs and umpires correct clear mistakes, such as offside goals or whether a ball was in or out. Without these tools, teams could lose important points or titles due to human error.
However, others might feel that technology makes sport less exciting to watch because it slows the game down and interrupts emotional moments like celebrating a goal. Some fans also enjoy the unpredictablity that comes with human refereeing. While this opinion is understandable, I believe excitement without fairness does not last. Fans may enjoy a lucky win at first, but repeated unfair decisions would damage trust in the sport. In the long run, accurate refereeing actually protects fan enjoyment by ensuring that results are honest, deserved, and respected by everyone.
To conclude I think that a fans experience should not be prioritized over refereeing accuracy since fairness protects to integrity of the sport and ensures that the results are trustworthy and respected in the long term.
Well, I don't think that keeping humans as referees is what the fans like because for decades people have been insulting referees and hating because they always think there is some king of cheating. Here in Egypt and everywhere in the world we think some teams pay referees some money to make them biased and actually sometimes they are. When this happens against big popular teams the fans make a great chaos, but when it is a machine holding it, all people can't complain because simply you can't pay machines money to be hacked and if your team lost you can't say the machine was biased because it doesn't make sense anyways so for everyone's benefit if machines can be referees then remove the humans.
However, others may think that humans as referees create more drama and making people feel comfortable with a human instead of a talking machine, but I think fairness is more important and people will even be excited to see a machine judge for the first time in history.
You make an interesting observation on the way fans often react to referees. Do you think people would prefer to do away with them completely and have fully automated refereeing, or would they miss the fun of being able to complain about the human referees and their imperfect decisions?
Well from the way I see the players and fans react to a decision of a referee when they think it is not fair, I don't think they consider it as fun. Yesterday were the finals of the African Men's handball championship 2026. It was between Egypt and Tunisia and Egypt won.
Now the interesting part was when one of the Egyptian players stole the ball and tricked the goalkeeper by pretending to shoot the ball in a direction, but he shoots it to another direction then celebrates now Tunisian players consider it as an insult, so they fight and the referee gives a player from here and another from there and they both get 2 minutes suspension. Then the funny part starts everyone in the hall players and fans are insulting the referee and the referee can do nothing about it so for the good of everyone it should be machines judging instead. Once more I don't think anyone considers it as fun.
Can you explain why you don't think "anyone considers it as fun"?
Because for decades people have been treating referees badly for unfair decisions and if you looked at the look of these people's faces, you'd see they are very angry not acting happy. You'd see red faces and shouting and insulting because of unfair judging. People are also very crazy in the last Paris Olympics in football Morrocco was winning against Argentina and when Argentina scored a goal to make it draw Morocco fans said it was offside and they crazily broke into the playing field making chaos and later the goal was not accepted as it was offside.
when it comes to tech like hawk-eye in tennis, it abolishes the professionalism and equality of a human referee's choice. personally, i would rather have trust in a real human, if referees were so inaccurate then why was the spirit of fans and players so homely and inevitable? if it wasnt for the naturalism of a game, it would not be half as exciting and fair to the fans and players. by fair i mean in the sense that accuracy is not as important as the human spirit. what happened to the realism to a real sport? it has slowly disintegrated due to sometimes unfair technological systems. Hawk-eye is the worst for this, you leave by a single centimeter and it doesnt count. the referee is basically just a background scout for AI. just look at a game from 1992, the referees are lively and honest, the same with the crowd.
The use of technology in sports – especially in ones like tennis and football – is a precise way of embellishing the accuracy of a referees way of refereeing , and an audiences entertainment isn't that crucial considering that the accuracy of a referees decision is more fundamental to make the match fair for everyone. So if you rely on a human , even if they're an expert they will still somehow make a mistake as its only human nature to do so. Making referees rely on technology for assist is very vital , and a great embellisher to the performance of a referee.
However, from onther perspective some viewers might see this as taking away the spark of glint and excitement in a human referees decision , so it may be seen as unauthentic to use technology . Others may see this as a way of replacing technology with humans since they believe that the use of technology in refereeing is considered replacement, there is a possibility of this happening ,but for now this only is seen as a way of accomplishing an on-point and reliable way of refereeing.
What do you think is right?
Fan experience should support the game, not decide it, because when accuracy is sacrificed, the sport loses its meaning. The involvement of technology in making fair decisions is necessary in modern sport, but completely removing the human element is not the right approach. Sport is played by humans and should continue to be guided by human judgement. Referees are essential not only for making decisions, but also for deciding how technology is applied and how its outcomes are communicated clearly to players and fans.
Prioritising fan experience over refereeing accuracy can create unfair advantages. If decisions are influenced by crowd reaction or entertainment value, teams with larger fan bases may benefit, which damages fairness, equality, and sporting integrity.
The use of VAR has improved accuracy in decisions related to fouls, penalties, and offsides. However, the technology can sometimes be too harsh. Decisions based on millimetres, especially in offside calls, often feel excessive. Goals being ruled out for tiny, almost invisible differences can significantly affect scorelines and drain emotion from key moments meant to be celebrated. In some cases, over-analysing every action disrupts the natural flow of the game. Football thrives on rhythm, emotion, and spontaneity, and excessive technological intervention can make it feel mechanical rather than exciting.
Therefore, technology should support referees, not replace them. When used with clear limits and human judgement, it can improve fairness while preserving the emotional connection fans and players value.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because I believe accuracy will lead to a better fan experience. For example, in tennis when a player is unconvinced of a umpire's call he or she may use 1 of their 3 hawk-eyes to challenge the call. Not only does this make the sport more fair but it also creates suspense for the audience. Personally I find watching these hawk-eyes very entertaining. I agree that human umpires must be used but allowing technology in moderation to make the game more fair is something I support. However, others might feel that relying heavily on technology might make the sport feel more unnatural and the fans might feel unconnected with the game.
I think the referring accuracy should be prioritised because it could help the team improve in the game and remember their mistakes for the next competition/match.Sports should also be something enjoyable in wich a team has their fan that make the experience better.However,I will always prefer in the end the referring accuracy to be prioritised so that the game is played fairly for the two teams.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldnt take priority over refereeing accuracy because the game should be fair, but of course the fan experience matters the most, but it shouldnt be the cause of changing the game just to be more fun to watch, if someone watches a game is because the person likes the game as it is, not because it should be perfect to every single individual.
in my opinion i prefer the sport without technology that makes the play more fair and less fun, so i preferred when the play was more fun and carefree, whitout the rigidity of the rules.
I think using technology in sports ruins the experience, the spirit of putting all you're concentration on it is essencial it makes you happier once you've achieved the goal,it's sad to think how it is getting replaced with modern technology.It can also be unfair for peaple who can't achieve them,since peaple who have got them have a bigger opportunity to win.It's more fun to do it on you're on,it also helps you're body get more athletic and healthier,but with modern technology being used on sports all of this could be impossible.
I think that the var at least is good for football and its not a thing that ruins the experience, in fact, i think it enhances it and makes it more comfortably both for players and fans, because the var clarifies the arguments that could generate very fast and makes it shorter, so for players who don't have to wait very long to watch the match advance, saving time instead of squander time and energies, expanding my argument to other sport is the same as helpful, in old boxing, in former times, boxers used to fight whitout gloves, its obvious this is very risky for both fighters, and usually this made the percentages of chronic encefalopathy rise up like a champagne cork exploding, gloves helped a lot to decrease this, though there's still a common side effect of practising that sport. So i think technology is used properly is very useful, i'm sure that it haves a bad side also, but in the end technology is a tool, and all tools are neutral, his effects depends on we humans that use it both good or bad ways.
I think the fans' experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because so nobody is disadvantage. For example, if the referee sees badly he can check again. Accuracy is important to don't do mistakes whit point or if the referee is biased he can't assign the point to the team that hasn't do the point. However, others might feel that we must trust to the referee because is his work and if he cheat he can be fired.
I think the fans experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because the game isn't really "fun" if its not fair. Yes, fans are the whole reason the sport exists but refereeing accuracy is very important in the winning of the game. The fairness of the game is more important than what the fans' think. If the game wasn't fair for everyone, then it shouldn't be played at all.
In my opinion referring is more important than fan experience because if the ref doesn't make the right call then the people rooting for that person or team will be upset and overall lower the total fan experience,also wouldn't you be upset if your team lost to an unfair call from the ref, where's the fairness in that? In conclusion I think that referring is way more important than the excitement of fans.
Well I think we shouldn't really choose between refereeing accuracy and fan's entertainment. The fans are a very vital point of any sports. Without the fans, the sports would not really be well-known or even exciting. Also, if the fans are not entertained, the sport would not be able to continue or last long because nobody would be watching the sports again.
Despite the fan's importance to the game, I think that the refereeing accuracy is also very essential in sports to ensure fairness. Without the referring accuracy, one team may feel cheated if they lose. We shouldn't really prioritise one over another because both are very vital in sports.
Therefore, without one of them, the sports wouldn't be complete. I think both of these things are of equal importance and we should learn to balance both of them in sports.
I love all your views and opinions here, fans are the heart of a sport, but in my opinion being fair through referrieng accuracy might be above the view of fans. Of course this can have its disadvantage like the referee being bribed by the coach, manager, players or even the fans, but there are some fans that would do anything for their team to win like making very irrashional descisions.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because when they do the game becomes so common, and not fun to watch. We all know that sometimes in refereeing they make mistakes, but that's the reason why its fun too watch. For example In books the main character makes mistakes that builds to the climax and that's why it is fun to read. So is watching the referee call out dumb call. However, others might feel in the opposite view, so I think they just have a different point of view, Or they think a different way.
Hey there topical talkers. I personally feel that AI assistance in determination helps alot because of the fact that it has been made to show what really happened and at the same time stay nuetral. I personally feel that if decisions were made by fans then games could get really intense and not positively intense I mean negative, for instance lets say that there is a match happening between two teams, one from home and one from away and they start playing, obviously the fans from home will want to see their team win and if the decision was left in their hand they would try to twist it in their favour. AI on the other hand has made making choices easier as it is easier and more accurate and most of all unbiased. With technology the games are more honest but left to the fans they are more of an obvious win because any home team has the higher percentage, and I feel that this will even more reduce the experience. Studies furthermore show that before the introduction of tech in sports, sports were very unnecessarily violent, physically and verbally. So my final verdict is that sports and technology should go hand in hand.
the VAR in a football is good but also bad because its good to track how fast people kick the ball and it can tell ur the air pressure in the football but the bad part some fans might like it or some fans might not like it,and what if the ball stops working.
Can you share some other examples of why you say it is bad?
Hello Topical Talk,
As the whistle blows, the competition begins,
the two sides work hard, but still fairness wins.
Fun alone isn't enough,
without an honest referee, the game is tough.
Ask yourselves, which one is important?
without any of them, sports are dormant.
Respect is gained when fairness is present,
So, sports will make everyone pleasant.
While fans enjoy their happiness,
they prefer their team to lose with fairness.
I think the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over referring accuracy, because athletes train years for competitions and losing while they know they should have won could have such an impact on them that they give up their career. For fans it's only one more game in their lives. Once they get home, it's not long until they don't even think about it anymore. Athletes, on the other hand, have a much harder time getting over being cheated. For example, there was a dancing competition in which my friend happily participated, but when she found out that the winners had paid money to reach first place, her attitude changed completely. She hadn't been mad for losing, but the cheating bit really upset her. It is clear to me that she'll be a lot more skeptical during the talk of joining a new competition from now on. She may not even put in the necessary effort to win, because of the possibility that it's not going to be a fair contest anyway. This made me angry. Hard workers should be rewarded, not pushed away.
On a larger scale, this could mean entire teams being ruined, just for the fan's appeal. I think it may result in athletes not training as much, caring or even showing up, if they know it won't be a fair game.
However, others might feel that a controversial win means fans going home and talking about the game for a bit longer. After all, people love to argue, to get angry or happy depending on the outcome. Still, I don't believe the rules should be bent over for the audience's sake. People can enjoy a game that doesn't have any rule breaking involved.
I think that fans should experience a sport that priorities accuracy than the fun .Sport is not just a show created to amuse the audience but, it is the result of years of hard work, talent, sacrifice, and unbreakable determination. Any sport that lacks accuracy is like a Badminton match without a shuttle in which players may move due to unfair decisions but the purpose is lost. Accuracy is what gives a sportsperson true satisfaction. It assures them that their effort was judged fairly, not casually. Technologies like VAR, DRS, Hawk-Eye, and other decision-review systems do not kill the spirit of the game instead, they protect it. They act as the invisible referee of justice, ensuring that the right performance receives the right reward.
Cricket, especially, stands at the crossroads of emotion and accuracy. And one of the finest examples of respecting accuracy is the great MS Dhoni, the only captain to win all the three ICC trophies.MS Dhoni, known as Captain Cool, never chased controversy or chaos. Whether it was accepting a DRS decision calmly, trusting technology, or waiting patiently for the third umpire’s verdict, Dhoni showed the world that fair play is greater than momentary excitement. Even in high-pressure matches, he believed that the game must be decided by truth, not noise.His lightning-fast stumpings and sharp judgment as a wicketkeeper were all about precision and accuracy, not fan thrill!
I believe that sports should be as fair as possible, and that the use of technology helps reduce refereeing errors. However, others might feel that by eliminating the human factor, sport can lose some of its excitement, since the flow of the game is often interrupted. Even so, I consider it more important for decisions to be correct. We are used to immediacy and have little patience; perhaps during these interruptions, spectators can share their opinions about how they think the game will end or who they believe will be the winner, thus sharing the excitement and uncertainty of these moments with others.
I think fans’ experience should always come before refereeing accuracy, because watching Messi do something insane and then having VAR kill the moment is soul-crushing. I’ve screamed for goals he scored, felt the hype, and then… nothing. Just a beep and a “nope, offside by a millimeter.” That’s watching life through a calculator.
Messi isn’t perfect—he trips, he misses, he rages, and he laughs, and that’s why we love him. Sport is messy, human, and emotional, and trying to make it 100% accurate kills the thing that makes people care. Some might say mistakes ruin careers or are unfair, but honestly, I’d rather watch Messi’s genius exist in real time, even if a call is “wrong,” than have the game sanitized to death. Perfect fairness is actually boring. Human chaos is whats legendary.
I believe the fans experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because why players should cost their lives for fan experience, because a human can live only one time and when a player's final score depends on accurate results, it may be a turning point for their career. For example, in the 2010 FIFA World Cup match between Germany and England, a clear goal was not given, which later showed how unfair decisions can change a game. Accuracy and fairness in sports for a team/player is like a body without a soul. However, others might feel that fan enjoyment is more important than accuracy, but without fairness, the sport loses its meaning.
I believe the fan's experience shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because, there are some fan's that would get mad if the opposing team scores a cheating point, and the same thing with the other teams fan's. If the fan's experience was prioritized the fairness of the game would be non existence, so there should be a mixture of both on the fan's experience and prioritizing the accuracy. A way to do this is by making it fun by having the athletes could engage with the fan's.
I think the fans exprience the sport that should take a priority over refereeing accurancy because it will not be fun for the audience and the VAR
I think that every game in a sport should be fair, and that fan experience should NOT be prioritised over referring accuracy as long as it has been approved of, because if we're going to be honest, some fans would make up excuses for anything if something isn't in their favor. So by using technology, there isn't any excuse for the fans to use. Plus, the people doing the sport would feel like they actually earned their wins. This can make the sport more lively, and with fair technology, sportsmanship continues, which is a important topic in competitions. Also, many people/groups that were looking forward to the competition would understandibly be frustrated, possibly knowing that their team could have won if the whole thing was far, making it even worse.
I think the fan's experience of a sport should take priority over referring accuracy, because they pay to watch a show and in doing so, they provide the necessary funds for the athletes. If the public's money wasn't present, no one would support the game or the competitors. I know a lot of the time, different companies provide the necessary tech, equipment and experts for the teams, but they wouldn't do so without earning anything in return. While sports for the sake of sport would be nice, nobody does free labor. To give an example, a brand could be sponsoring athletes in hope that they win. This acts like publicity for what they wish to sell. Let's say it's some sort of juice. Fans will buy their product, because they backed up their favorite team. Of course, there will be some people, that might not purchase anything, just because they like another team. But they are most likely going to buy another product from the brand that supports their preferred competitors, which means that they are still contributing to the game. I think contests that are held high by the public should definitely lean towards making the fans happy.
However, others might feel like removing the human referee is the only way to achieve fairness during competitions. I believe that rules can be respected without changing the sport's traditions. If an error does occur, it is all part of the process and it makes the show more intriguing. Fans will go home ready to defend their team and fix the issue. From my point of view, sport means athletes, dedicated fans and a great story.
Yes,,i realy appriciat to that,,to say that it is better to cheer for the true and honest score than the unfair one👍👍👍
I think the fan's experience of sport shouldn't take priority over accuracy because fans do not cease leaning forward because of the presence of VAR or any other technology. Fans cease leaning forward because of the absence of genuine uncertainty in competition.
Consider penalty shootouts. Even with goal line technology, hearts still beat fast. Why? Because, technology does not decide the courage in players. Technology does not pick the corner to shoot. Technology does not steady shaking legs. It merely verifies reality after the legs have taken the risk.
Another example would be cricket's DRS system. The moment of silence before the decison. The tension. That is drama... The cheer after 'out' is not less loud. It is more distinct because it is definitive. The truth is, fans doesn't love chaos due to inaccuracies, they love stakes with proper results.
When the refree makes a mistake, the narrative is about the officials. When it's right, the narrative remains with the athletes. Technology does not rob any emotions, but simply directs it to where it should be. Sports is always about pressure, precision and moments that will live past replay. That's what fans enjoy the most about sports. So, in my opinion, accuracy is more important than fan's experience.
Alright, so I feel like these two factors are equitable and non should be prioritized over the other. Referring accuracy towards a match should be taken with all seriousness in order to ensure that records that are kept are genuine. And on the other hand, the fans experience is also important because fans pay to come watch some of these games, and paying to watch a game that isn't engaging would make the fan have a bad idea towards that sport.
So I feel like these two factors should both be prioritized because they are equally important.
As much as refereeing accuracy is important in sport (like footy), I think that it just basically ruin the fun of the game. In my opinion, it just wastes a lot of time. For example, in one AFCON match I watched (DR Congo-Botswana), I think most goals DR Congo scores, it was checked by VAR. Me and my family found it very frustrating. Besides, back when football started, they didn't have those tech in those days.
I think the fans experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because how can you say that the fans experience should take priority over the referees accuracy because a team can pour their hearts out and actually win against a class A team but because the fans prefer the class A team they will alter the scores and make the class A team win and that is not fair. For example Real Madrid are playing against San Marino and San Marion win 1-0 the Ref will make Real Madrid win like 2-0.
Thank you.
Hello, this is philosophical_fox and I think that the fans' experience of a sport should not take priority over refereeing accuracy because the human eye can not always be relied on. In most games, when there is a human referee, some points are most times denied and that can lead to one team losing a game that were meant to win. For example, I am a fan of football and my favourite footballers are Christiano Ronaldo and Neymar Junior and there was this match that happened in 2010 world cup that England played against Germany then Uruguayan referee Mauricio Espinosa failed to award a clear goal which was scored by Frank Lampard and this led to a denied equaliser for England, causing major psychological damage for England players which they eventually lost the game and this was noted as a massive error in the whole of football history. This also shows that human eyes can disappoint sometimes. There are so many advantages of VARs over human referees like; higher accuracy in critical decisions, correcting 'clear and obvious' errors, overcoming human physical limitations (which means that there are some things that can happen in the blink of an eye and human eyes may not be able to see it. And yes, I know that so many people have different opinions but for example if recording of points are given to a human referee alone, and they don't capture or record the moment they will not know if it is truly a point and fan can start to protest and there will be a lot of chaos like the evidence I gave above. Others may see a different opinion but this is mine. thank you.
think the fans' experience of a sport should or shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because feels more balanced than we first see it,because I think a sport cannot last long if it loses its fans. For example, amateur boxing used a very strict computerized scoring system in the late 1990s–2000s, which made fights confusing and boring. Many fans stopped watching, and the system was removed by the 2016 Olympics.
On the other hand, focusing too much on fans can also cause problems. In the NBA (2004–05), rules were changed to make games faster, more exciting and thrilling. At first, new fans really liked it, but many long-time supporters felt the matches became too easy as there no serious tension and hard work among players. The league had to change the rules again to make it fair.
Finally, even with rules and fans, accuracy is very important. In the 2004 US Open quarterfinal, Serena Williams lost partly because of wrong line calls. This shows us that human mistakes can change results.
Overall, I feel that sports only work well when fun, rules, and fairness are balanced. If not too much or too little of one can ruin the game.
To a tech-less champion
Technology and sport, do they really match?
The relation between them is easy to catch
Get the technology and you are more likely to win
Get medals and first palace, feel no sin
No technology, work hard and train like a machine
Quit your life and only on winning be so keen
However, regardless of what you do, win is not guaranteed
Practice and do your best, and you may succeed
Life is not fair, challenge all these hardships
Be brave enough and Listen to my tips
Knowledge is power, stay updated to know your enemy
Technology is there so take it as a your frenemy
Challenge yourself every day to be a better you
Patience, persistence and practice can beat your tech-foe.
( this was my teacher's opinion/ poem)
Tech equipped athletes under disguise
Technology in sports is coming to rise
Technology equals victory
But is it just trickery?
Athletes in suits of fame
Success put inside a frame
Is that what people want?
Is that what people aim?
To lose the sports field with no beneficial gain
World records broken every minute
Are fans impressed or are people just timid
However, some fans may not want to change this
Watching their teams winning just effortless
Be fair and don't let anyone change that
Not for the sake of an equal match
But for humanity
( this one's mine)
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because the fans watching and the audience,most of them are not referees and may not know the proper rules and regulations. The fairness of a game matters more than what the audience thinks of the opposing team and how the game is played because the fans are not the ones playing and to the players,their opinion about them and the game does not matter. The players care about winning especially in the Olympics and this new technology now helps players to do so. The latest technological advances give players more accurate stats that can help them improve their game and it makes the sport more fair. This kind of technology might help a team that is losing to win. For example a camera that is monitoring a volley ball game might catch a moment when the ball just touched a inch of the line causing a losing team to get a point and win even though the audience might have not seen that ,but is cheering because they think it is out.
This technology and the rules provide players also with safety and the players playing the game are the ones who really matter and so is their safety. Evidence shows that soccer balls used to be made from pig bladders and were very heavy which caused bruising and lots of head injuries that affected players later in their life with sicknesses such as Dementia and Alzheimer's. Nowadays soccer balls are made out of synthetic leather that is significantly lighter and does not affect the players health. New tech makes games fairer and safer for the players.
I
Listen, I get it-the camera don't lie,
It sport every foul that passes us by.
But who wants a game that's run by a chip?
It's like eating a burger without any flip.
We're out here for drama, the "No way!" and "How?"
Not a robot in silicon taking a bow.
If every last call is perfect and clean,
We're just watching a movie on a giant screen.
Yeah, accuracy's cool, but let's keep it real,
The magic is found in the way that we feel.
So keep your computers and fancy-tech lens,
Give me back the raw game with my family and friends!
I think the fan's experience shouldn't take priority over referring accuracy, because sport is about showcasing who has the best skills, after years of training. Rules are put in place to ensure everybody has equal chances of winning and that no one gives bribes in order to get the prize.
During the lesson, i noticed I had two different reactions to two opposing questions. Between fairness in sport and the fan's enjoyment I chose fairness, but when it came to deciding if technology could be better than a human referee, I opted for keeping the human element, because sport should be about people. So, I would like to keep competitions centered around people, but make it fair, because I believe it is possible to participate in a game and lose with dignity, rather than win knowing you didn't actually deserve it. Most athletes want to win first place, because they wish to show the world just how talented they are. The fear of being judged gets so high, some competitors decide to cheat, but that only puts on a show for the fans. Some might feel like the public's reaction is all that matters, but I think that the audience will orient itself around the game, whichever way it may go. For every fan that leaves, there will be a new person to join. For example, let's say some people could get bored of a sport that lacks the drama that comes from an inaccurate referee, but others will appreciate the fairness and wish to watch.
In conclusion, I believe making the sport as fair as possible should be a priority, because if it is a good game, there are always going to be fans eager to watch.
Fan experience is very important as sport is meant to be exciting and enjoyable. Moments of controversy and human error have always been part of the drama that keeps fans talking. However, refereeing accuracy should still be prioritised. Fair and correct decisions protect the integrity of the game and ensure that teams win or lose based on skill, not mistakes by officials. While technology like VAR may slow the game at times, it helps create a more just outcome, which is essential for the long-term credibility of sport.
I think the fans' experience and opinions shouldn't have the priority when referees make their decisions because while it might be devastating to lose, it's also important to take in to account that fairness is what keeps the game fun. If the fans' preferences were prioritised for refereeing, it can be unfair for the players. For example, if a goal in football is offside, but the fans argue it to be onside and the referee agrees because that team has more fans than the opposing team, it can be unfair for the losing team because the goal shouldn't have counted, but it was the fans' arguing that made it count. Fans should understand that their favourite athlete(s) don't always have to win and the importance of the game is how well the players played rather than the outcome.
I think the fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is what gives sport its real value and credibility. While excitement and emotion are important for fans, they become meaningless if the final result is clearly wrong. For example, technologies like VAR in football or Hawk-Eye in tennis help correct obvious mistakes, such as offside goals or line calls, that could otherwise unfairly change the outcome of a match. When titles, rankings, and players’ careers are decided by small margins, accuracy matters more than momentary excitement. Even if technology slightly slows the game, it ensures that teams are rewarded for performance rather than referee error. Fans may complain in the moment, but many appreciate knowing the correct decision was made.
However, others might feel that fan experience should come first because sport is also entertainment. They may argue that constant stoppages break the rhythm of the game and reduce spontaneous celebrations, making matches feel less emotional. Human mistakes, they might say, create drama, debate, and memorable moments that keep fans talking long after the match ends. Some also believe that relying too much on technology removes the human element that makes sport relatable.
Despite this, I believe refereeing accuracy should still be prioritised. Without fairness and trust in decisions, fans may eventually lose confidence in the sport itself. Excitement is important, but it should be built on justice, not obvious errors.
I think the fans experience should take priority over the accuracy of the game, because the actual match means nothing without the fans. If the fans did not support the game or lost interest in the game because it became boring, that means many teams would become less popular losing its fandom and the teams likeliness to gain sponsors. For example let’s say the Springboks are playing a match at the stadium and some play set are sitting on the bench waiting to play next. And these players are in springbok embroidered adidas hoodies. The people from the crowd might be more inclined to buy Adidas clothing for their children, friends or themselves. If fans stopped going to watch the teams play or lost interest in the particular sport a brand like Adidas could lose a lot of money. However I do understand how many people could see that and engagement isn’t fully necessary and that having a fair game means more. Taking away the human element of referring can also prevent bribes and miscalculations.
To conclude I still firmly stand with my point of how the fans experience should be made a priority over the accuracy of the sport. Remember fans sell out stadiums and live stream or watch from home. If the sport became less engaging many companies and businesses would lose money. As well as the players.
Refereeing accuracy is important in order for a fair game to take place. Fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy as I believe a sport should be played while ensuring good sportsmanship and fairness. Additionally, accuracy should not be overlooked in a sport because inaccuracy may lead to hesitation and distrust amongst the fans, which could affect fan experience of the sport.
However, advancement in technology has led to many changes in various sports, as mentioned with VAR in football and Hawk-Eye in tennis. I think that sometimes this technology may lead to constant stoppages in games, which in some situations can annoy and frustrate fans. But if this technology is improved for fast and clear interventions, it would be more convenient for fans, therefore improving accuracy and protecting fan experience at the same time.
I think sports like Ice Hockey are just the best (As far as I know anyway) in terms of relaxed rules. I only went to 2 of them, and what I seen is that they were actually allowed to fight safely which was REALL GREAT entertainment, compared to sports like football where you could get a red card for that.
I believe that fun in sport should be more important than the strict enforcement of rules. Sometimes, when rules are applied too rigidly , the sport loses its flow and can become boring. In addition, strictly following the rules is not always free from controversy, and in some cases decisions may be unfair during the development of the sport.
On the other hand, I understand the importance of following the rules, but this should not take away from the essence of the sport. Respect for the rules should also depend on the behaviour and sportsmanship of the athletes themselves.
A great question! I'm going to reply in a peom:
I think fans' feelings should come first
Because sport is about passion, not just the thirst
VAR can stop the game and pause the cheer
We wait for a call instead of feeling near
Some say getting calls right is very fair
It keeps the game clear and avoids despair
But I still think the heart of sport is fun
The crowds, the cheer, the goals under the sun
Let cameras help, but don't take control
Fans wants excitement, it fills their soul.
"For me, fans' experience should matter more than perfect decisions.
Hope you enjoyed!
Bye-bye ♥
Thanks for sharing - it's nice to read a poem but please express your thoughts as a comment in future. We'd like to see fully-developed thinking and reasons with examples on the Student Hub!
I think the fans experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because sports are already very fair. While Hawk-eye in tennis helps referees make "better calls" there are already rules in place to keep things fair. In Tennis and Badminton the players switch sides of the court to make sure the referee has the same view of both players. Additionally I believe that when there are only rules and refereeing it is able to hold the principle of sport better and is more fun to watch! In basketball famously there was an interview with Kobe Bryant where he read the referee handbook to see where the Refs would be. If he wanted to commit a foul then he would know where and when he could. While some may think this is unfair I believe this is what brings excitement to the sport! This is what allows athletes to push the limits, to find loopholes and even for fans to participate. If all we cared about was fairness then according this logic fans shouldn't even be allowed to watch. Someone could yell while a player is going to shoot. In hockey games fans could taunt players which could change the outcome of a game. We should let players try different things which could evolve the sport as a whole. In conclusion, there are so many different aspects that can change the outcome of a game however, the energy and the passion you are able to feel when you walk into an arena is irreplaceable and we ought to value the people who give athletes a chance to compete by giving them the environment they deserve.
Fans deserve excitement, but it can't come at the expense of accurate refereeing. Officiating decisions shape athletes' careers in college and their futures. For professional athletes, one match can determine whether they remain under contract, sponsorship, or even remain in the league at all. Treating accuracy as less important than excitement ignores the reality that real people's livelihoods are at stake every time a call is made.
In team sports and individual sports, a single wrong call can erase years of work. In football, a mistaken VAR decision can knock a team out of a tournament, transfers, and scouting exposure. For example, in tennis, one incorrect line call can eliminate a player from a Grand Slam tournament, costing prize money and ranking points. One error can change an entry, sponsorship, and an athlete's entire season
Some argue that technology and reviews reduce the emotion of the game. As an athlete, I understand that concern. The energy of a sport matters. However, excitement should never outweigh fairness. No moment of drama is worth sacrificing competitive integrity, and no athlete should lose their future simply to preserve a fan or audiences hapiness.
Ultimately, a few seconds of excitement for fans should never be worth taking away years of education, income, and dreams from someone whose entire future depends on a single call. Sports are powerful because they are earned, not because they are chaotic. Without fairness, the results mean nothing.
I think it's a fair decision to keep the VAR because referees need it to make their job easier and make their judgements more accurate. The fan's decisioins should not be able to affect the usage of VAR or not because the VAR is supposed to keep the game fair for every player and for each team. VAR in football helps refs check for offsides, and if the ball goes out of the field line which would make the referee's job more easier and it would help enforce the rules more so players and play fairly on the pitch.
fans not enjoying the game just because of refs using VAR is wrong in my opinion because people and real fans would enjoy football because of the game, the play, the tactics, the stretegies and the competition, not because of rule enforcement and because of adding technology to help enforce the rules
Personally, I believe that sports were originally made to be enjoyed by the players and the audience, as sports was created to find fairness and forget differences, and just to play only for the sake of enjoyment. But now that sports have been modernized, many individuals determine that sport results should be monitored to find the proper winner and achieve a satisfactory result.
Some people won't be happy with the final result of a game even if it was determined fairly, but it's not as bad compared to a game being rigged to please the crowd! Would you rather have a fair game with a proper result, or an extremely rigged match?
So no, a fan's enjoyment of a game shouldn't be prioritized over the refereeing accuracy of a match, because there are many people watching, and you cannot please a whole crowd, so just be fair!
That's what I think, please feel free to reply to my comment!
I think that to fans is just normal for them to have var, because it doesn´t make them feel less excited. Any one would like that his tem lose unfairly, so for that is really important to have this kinds of technology so anyone will feel so bad when they think something was not like they said it was. I think it is really important because sometimes things happen so fast that maybe a human couldn´t appreciate. Everyone could finally see what they decided on those bigs screens on every modern stadium where yo go. Maybe for some people makes the game a little bit boring, but just because they must no think on how they will feel if something that was not legal on the game happened, and because of that the rival team win the match.
It is really important to follow the rules, and if this doesn´t happens they will need to check it and change it because if they established some rules they need to be followed by both sides not only by one team and the other could make what they want, that will not be fair.
As a conclusion, I think that all these technologies were invented with the purpose of make the games more fair for everyone and no for making anyone feel bored.
I think that to fans is just normal for them to have var, because it doesn´t make them feel less excited. Any one would like that his tem lose unfairly, so for that is really important to have this kinds of technology so anyone will feel so bad when they think something was not like they said it was. I think it is really important because sometimes things happen so fast that maybe a human couldn´t appreciate. Everyone could finally see what they decided on those bigs screens on every modern stadium where yo go. Maybe for some people makes the game a little bit boring, but just because they must no think on how they will feel if something that was not legal on the game happened, and because of that the rival team win the match.
It is really important to follow the rules, and if this doesn´t happens they will need to check it and change it because if they established some rules they need to be followed by both sides not only by one team and the other could make what they want, that will not be fair.
As a conclusion, I think that all these technologies were invented with the purpose of make the games more fair for everyone and no for making anyone feel bored.
I think that to fans is just normal for them to have var, because it doesn´t make them feel less excited. Any one would like that his tem lose unfairly, so for that is really important to have this kinds of technology so anyone will feel so bad when they think something was not like they said it was. I think it is really important because sometimes things happen so fast that maybe a human couldn´t appreciate. Everyone could finally see what they decided on those bigs screens on every modern stadium where yo go. Maybe for some people makes the game a little bit boring, but just because they must no think on how they will feel if something that was not legal on the game happened, and because of that the rival team win the match.
It is really important to follow the rules, and if this doesn´t happens they will need to check it and change it because if they established some rules they need to be followed by both sides not only by one team and the other could make what they want, that will not be fair.
As a conclusion, I think that all these technologies were invented with the purpose of make the games more fair for everyone and no for making anyone feel bored.
I think the fans´ experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuarcy becuase in sports many times the referee whistle some things that they dont have sense or they wisthle only the slips of one team or they dosent whistle correctly or they dosent whistle the slip because the do not see them and this happened to me an im sure that to many people more and I think that like this is not way to have a fair play I think that many boys and girls will agree with me and I also think for example that if we protest to the UEFA ( Union of European Football Assotiation) because all this happened many times in football this may change the rules and they improve the referieeng accuaracy.
Hi Topical Talkers, I'm inquisitive newspaper and I'm greeting you from Spain, specifically the highschool of Javier García Téllez from Cáceres, Extremadura.
This topic is very interesting from the point of view of sports that in our nowadays days technology is affecting it, but in a good way or in a bad way?
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because these systems of advanced technology can give an opportunity to the referee to see the previous moves of the game and ensure his or her decision. The group of fans of each team have to wait for the most perfect decision that is giving in a match and respect it.
For example, in football matches we have the VAR (Video Assistant Refeere) that helps refeeres choose the best option for a football play. Without these technology systems, the refereeing team of sport matches would have to make vague decisions because they wouldn't see detailed images of football plays. However, others might feel that this system is a waste of time in football matches because they only want to see a ''good'' match and don't waste time. The referee doesn't have a vision of an eagle so, please fans, I know that you want to see football but the refeeres should take their time reviewing the plays!
I honestly don’t think we should put "fan vibes" above getting the calls right. At the end of the day, sport is about who actually earned the win, not just who the crowd cheered for. If a ref misses a huge call, the whole result feels like a lie, right?
Take Hawk-Eye in tennis—it’s crazy accurate, down to like 3.6mm. It totally killed those massive McEnroe-style meltdowns, and even though it takes ten seconds for the animation to play, that actually builds up a cool bit of tension for the fans. On the flip side, I get why people hate VAR in football. Sitting in a stadium for three minutes waiting for a screen to tell you if you're allowed to celebrate a goal is a total mood-killer.
The Reality Check Look, we can't pretend we haven't seen the replay once it's on the big screen. Most fans (around 90%) say they want the right call, but 60% hate how the tech is handled. It shouldn't feel like a tech glitch; it should be part of the show.
For me, I’m all about the truth of the game. I’d much rather deal with a one-minute delay than spend the next forty years bitter about an unfair "Hand of God" goal. Technology should be there to help us get it right, not just to be annoying. If the win is earned, the celebration feels better anyway.
Would you rather a game that's 100% fair but has some stops, or a fast-paced game where your team loses because of a dumb mistake?
Hi I am Empowered Nectarine.
It is hard to say what you think about this topic because most of the people think it is better to follow the rules and be conscious of which one have play better. On the other hand it is really important the experiences of all the fans because if not, who is going to see the game ?. It will be a mess if they don`t have fun watching it and they will try to search for other things if they lose the interess on it.
I am not really sure which one is more relevant, because at first I thought that following the rules will be the best option and it will make the game more fair. However I know that if the people that are watching the game get mad because they don`t like the game anymore, the careers of all these athletes won`t be able to continue, so they will lose their jobs and this is a huge problem.
To sum up, it is very difficult to have a middle point between these two ideas, but I think it is the best option to mantain a fair game with it rules and help to improve the enjoyment of the fans.
I think that the fan's experience of a sport shouldn't take much of a priority over refereeing accuracy because the sport was made to be played and to be enjoyed by not only the fans but also the players, it was made with rules exactly to make the game fair and for it to be played fairly. If there is just someone who breaks the rule and injures another player on the opposite team, the fans that are cheering and rooting for the other team will be angered and upset, even further more when the person who broke the rule easily gets a pass. The rules were mainly made to keep the game fair and also to keep the players safe from crucial injuries that could end their life, for example boxing. One of their rules include no illegal hitting such as hitting the opposing player on the head or the back of their neck. This was made to protect the player from getting a serious injury which could cost them their life, if they were going against someone who just happened to have much more strength than them and the person had chosen to hit them in the head, it could lead to a concussion, which is clearly bad for the brain. Another example is Muay Thai. One of their rules include no eye gouging, just by reading it, you can already tell that it is something that you would not wish to happen, it could instantly end a player's career if another player decides to gouge their eye out, it is disgusting and causes severe harm to the player's future. Plus, there are also fans who wish for the downfall of other players, and that also needs to be avoided if it includes them being seriously hurt.
I think that fairness is the true foundation of a sport. When the decisions are correct, players feel more respected and the fans feel satisfied and confident in the results. Technology can help referees by tracking the ball movements and reviewing key moments in the game. This contributes to a more fair and trusted game where the fans and players feel trusted and respected. For example the Hawk Eye in tennis gives the referee an oversight of what's happening in the game so they can point out mistakes and key moments in the game without bothering anyone. This shows that technology can help improve sports so it can be more fair and fun at the same time.
Yet, this can also be a serious problem. When games are stopped to often to check for errors, the flow of the game will be down. Fans will feel less hyped and players will start to lose focus and spirit in the game. Overtime, the sport will start to feel more structured with technology and the spirit of the game will be lost. This will cause a lot disappointment for fans, especially young ones.
In conclusion, the point is we should be able to use technology in sports efficiently and effectively without taking away the emotional feeling of the sport. There should be a balance between technology and how the sport is being played.
I think it's a tough choice because games need to be both fair and exciting. The technology like Hawk-Eye and VAR are great because they stop players from being cheated by a bad call made by the referee but having been to many football games it gets annoying having to wait over 5 minutes for them to decide whether if it's a clean goal or if the player was offside. It completely kills the mood and the excitement for the fans. The technology is not even 100% accurate. In the 2024 premier league season 97% of the decisions made by VAR are correct, but what happened to the other 3%? It gets frustrating for the fans when the refs have the screen and the replay right in front of them and still can't make the right decision.
In conclusion, the tech is great but there are major drawbacks to it. If there was a way to make the technology faster and more accurate it would be amazing for both the fans, the players, and it would make it more fair for all sides.
Hello Topical Talkers, I'm also greeting you from Spain, it is my first time writing a comment on the Festival, so I hope I can do it well.
Honestly, I think that this refeering technologies in sports are very useful in today's world of sports, my opinion is probably focused on both things, fans deserve a good, fair and well refereed match, and I think that it does not make the match less enjoyable for the fans, even tho they could think it is not needed, since the decisions can be wrong some of the times (specially when the technologies were just being implemented) . In football, the VAR is the most useful technology in football since the early 2010s, before it was created, match were a bit more "chaotic". Some people do say VAR is ruining football (bad decisions, long delays, etc...) but in my opinion, it is needed for today's sports (such as the Hawk-Eye in Tennis).
So my answer is quite of a yes and a no at the same time, being a referee is probably a hard job, and it is obvious that the VAR team might even be wrong some times, and I understand that fans can be very mad of that once they post information about the match's details on any website like X, Facebook, Instagram (this happens mostly on football, but also on any other sport with play-review systems), but fans should only focus on the game and not on the refereeing, they do deserve having some minutes to understand and review the play to have a more accurancy choice, and even if they take longer time on decisions, that minutes are conpensated with the extra time before the match break and the end of the match.
I think technology should be used to assist referees, because it makes games more fair and fun for the players who are the ones that actually put in the effort to play their sport well, the fans just watch them play and I think hard-work should be rewarded more than just turning on the TV.
Another reason is that players actually win money from games so losing to a mistake from the referee would actually cost them money for something that is not their fault. Fans can also lose money unfairly from mistakes like this because if they bet on a team that loses unfairly they will also be affected along with that team.
The last reason I am going to give is that I do not see how this affects the viewer's experience. Why do people get less enjoyment from more accurate results? I do not watch many sports but I do not see how this affects the viewer's experience.
To conclude I want to say that technology provides more accurate results, which resolves monetary issues, and does not have any big disadvantages.
I think the fans' experience of a sport should´t take priority over refereeing accuracy because a fair game is better than a good experience. For example, when you see a football match and your favourite team is loosing you would like that the game became fair because sometimes you can think that the VAR is being payed by the other team (that happends a lot with Real Madrid) but when your team is winning or playing with a rival team that you hate you would prefer a good experience instead of a fair game
But its really worth it? I don´t think so. A fair game its much better than a good experience! Because in some games your team can lose or win. And if your team lose, you need to accept it. I understand that in some games (like I have said before) you can think that the game is being paying by the other team, but it is not the reallity
In conclusion, its better a fair game than a good experience
Hiiii, extraordinary explanation here ready to talk about whether it is good to use technology in sports for the viewer's entertainment or if it is not because of the human's natural electment and fairness for the fans or the players.
In my opinion, I think refereeing systems, like VAR, is very useful forrealy seeing what happened down there in the field, gives the viewer or fan a better watch of what just happened and makes the sport more fair to the team or player that did, or did not, scored or made a fault. It is also very useful against the usage of tricks and rule breaks.
But, on the other side, it takes away the intensity and epicity of a play.
In conclusion, new technologies used in modern sports could be useful in terms of fairness but lacks the intensity of a match.
Thank you for reading!
FirstIy, I think the fan's experience should't be more important that refeering accurancy because sports need to be fair. I think that an sport don´t need to be unfair to make the match more exciting, because if your team don't won, don't need to care, because if they don't do mistakes, the matching could be bored if your team won all the time. The teams can lose. So, I believe that sports need to follow the rules of the game. If they don't follow the rules, people won't want to watch the game, because it was unfair.
In conclusion, I think that the match need to be fair because if it is unfair, people get bored and don't watch the match.
Sport fans love watching a good game, but does that really matter over fair decision making in the game? In my opinion I think the fans experience of a sport shouldn't prioritize the rules and fairness of the game. The reason why I think this way is because rules keep the players safe and fairness keeps the game fun for the players. An example for this is the VAR replay system in soccer, it records fouls and little mistakes and keeps the game fair. The fans might see it as not fun and boring which makes it less entertaining. In conclusion referee accuracy should be prioritized over fans enjoyment.
A fan’s experience should not be prioritized over refereeing accuracy in any sport.The principles and fairness of the game rely solely on correct and impartial decisions. When crucial calls are not made or is wrong, it undermines the trust in the sport’s rules and results, thus the causes long-term frustration that outweighs any short-term entertainment from uninterrupted play. For example, a clear offside goal that stands due to a lack of review can unfairly decide a match, this devalues the players’ efforts and the competitive spirit. While refereeing accuracy takes time and can cause momentary frustration, ensuring the correct outcome upholds the value of the sport.
Hello everyone! I think the fans´ experience of a sport shouldn´t take priority over refereeing accuracy because as many people have said ,in sports, you must be fair and follow the rules, but some fans sometimes disagree with the referee due to some unfair decisions. I think that´s why they should use some systems such as VAR. Nowadays many technologies are used for many things even in sports, so I think that technologies can greatly improve some things such as making matches fairer for players and preventing unfair tricks.
In conclusion I understand people who may complain about certain things, but I am sure that with new technologies, things can be improved.
Hello Topical Talkers, I think that fan's experience should not be a priority in sports because sports should be fair and competitive and for being fair and competitive they have to respect the rules.I think the referees should take the time they need in making a good decision because if not maybe they make a decision that is not the correct and the game might be affected.
Also I think that the referees should use the more advanced technology because it would be faster and for the fan's, that have paid for seeing the match they want the referee to be the faster he or she can.
As a summary I think that making a good decision should be prioritised but also it should be the fastest they can so they don´t bore the fans.
Hello everyone! I am really excited to take part in this topic as I find it really interesting.
In my opinion sports should be equally fair for everyone, while at the same time, enjoyable for the fans.
Accurate refereeing is also a really important factor in a fair game to prevent conflicts between the players and the enthusiasts of the sport. This is where the technology comes in handy, for example, in Football there is VAR (Video Assistant Referee) or in tennis the Hawk's Eye, these are very precise cameras that help solving unclear plays or possible fouls in the game. I think that these technologies are really useful to preserve the game's fairness, however, the overuse of these can often ruin the viewers experience as the match has to be stopped to review the footage, notwithstanding the effectiveness of the new technologies, failures can also appear and somehow "rigging" the game as it gives unfair advantages for one team and disadvantages for the other one.
To conclude, VAR and similar technologies can be helpful sometimes but referees should not give full trust to these as they are not 100% accurate.
I agree because VAR can not be paid to say or give the opponent they
have mistakes and they don't have and that can cause conflict between
the two times and sometimes iven make audience fight.
I think the fans experience shouldn't take priority over refereeing accuracy because let's say a player scores a goal but while he does it he commits a foul. The referee should take a look at the VAR but he doesn't. That will lead to some fans booing, swearing or even fighting and some fans clapping. It's not fair for the other team that conceded the goal. However, others might disagree with me because they will say " the fans need to have the most beautiful and exciting experience when they go to a football match so VAR shouldn't even exist" which is not true because let's be real, football players play football because they want to and they love to, they don't play just for the fans. And players want to win fairly. In conclusion, the fans experience shouldn't take priority over accuracy because it always needs to be fair for everyone.
Hello everyone! I think this is an important topic to talk about. I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn't take priority or be more important over refereeing accuracy, for the reason that if there are no rules established, then the game wouldn't be fair, this could lead to the appearance of mistakes and also the players could be distracted due to the fans' behaviour.
For example, if the audience that is watching a match starts making noises, making ugly comments and so on, then the players could feel disrespected or could not focus as well as if the fans wouldn't do so. However, I think that fans' experience is really important too, because if they do not enjoy it, then perhaps they would lose their interest and excitement in sports.
Finally, I would like to say that I think it is important that matches or games are fair and accurate, but also that players are respectful and that viewers do not behave badly, but that everyone has a great time, fun and enjoys themselves, since sports are also about enjoyment.
I think the fans' experience of a sport shouldn´t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is essential for a game. If the match is based on bad decisions the match would not be fun. For example, the VAR sometimes change somes refereeing decisions tha ocasionate that the other team won. However, others might feel that the technology stop the flow of the match, I really think that sometimes they stop it a lot of unnecesary times to review but for me they have to seen it if they really do not know what happened.
VAR sometimes can ruin football. Before VAR there was less controversy and less added time. The more added time there is the more likely players will get injured. For example, in the first leg of the carabao cup Tottenham vs Liverpool semi-final first leg there was a VAR check which lasted around 12 minutes. The players muscles would have tightened up. I they suddenly start running straight after they are more likely to rear a muscle get injured. VAR should be quicker since they have the technology to make decisions quick and to prevent them to minimize the amount of football not played. Thanks for reading.
VAR sometimes can ruin football. Before VAR there was less controversy and less added time. The more added time there is the more likely players will get injured. For example, in the first leg of the carabao cup Tottenham vs Liverpool semi-final first leg there was a VAR check which lasted around 12 minutes. The players muscles would have tightened up. I they suddenly start running straight after they are more likely to rear a muscle get injured. VAR should be quicker since they have the technology to make decisions quick and to prevent them to minimize the amount of football not played. Thanks for reading.
As someone who goes to Wimbledon to watch tennis every year, I always enjoyed clapping to see if the ball is in or out as it hypes up the crowd and it is a lot of fun! However now when I watch tennis now that element of fun has been removed and replaced by hawk eye which makes me less interested in the game. Overall, I believe hawk eye makes the game less fun for viewers and if fans are not interested then that will effect the tournament so I think fan viewing should be prioritised
Great example, thanks for sharing. How might hawk eye improve the game for some viewers?
Hawk eye can improve the game for some viewers because it can make the game more efficient and it is more accurate for the players. Hawk eye is more accurate than the human eye and I remember seeing tennis players arguing with the umpire saying that the line callers were not accurate which did waste time from the game. Now, no time is wasted and the hawk eye accurately shows where the ball is.
Hello everyone, I'm going to talk about the experiences of fans in football and if those are affected by the decision of the VAR. Football matches should follow every rule of this sport, but also they should give a good experience for the fans that go to watch them.
These new technologies are very useful for every decision the referee takes over a football match, and help him to make every match fair. It can also affect the experiences of some fans, because it can also have some mistakes in the decisions against their football team. This type of technology is in a similar way in tennis matches, that it helps in the doubtful plays to decide if the ball went out or in of the court, and this technology is called Hawk-Eye. Anyways having the occupation of being a referee can be tough sometimes, because people from a team can criticize you about how you judge the actions of a match.
In my opinion the use of this type of technology is well done to make every match fairer, only if they don’t ruin the experiences of the fans that want a good experience of the matches.
Thank you for reading my opinion on this topic!
I think the fans' experience of a sport should take priority over refereeing accuracy because, to many fans, it's not about who wins or loses a game, but how much fun it is to watch. How involved do we get with the highs and lows and excitement of the battle? Getting drawn into the play on the court or field can be just an amazing experience. However many people probably feel that if we don't use technology then games may be won unfairly. A solution would be found in sports such as volleyball and hockey. In these types of sports you can "challenge" the play, meaning that you can call out something you feel was unfair and use technology to help support your claim. Another reason that the fans' experience should take priority is because they are the ones that are paying to be there, and if there were no fans, then professional sports would not exist. The fans definitely need to be treated like the integral part of sports that they are and their experience should be valued over refereeing accuracy.
This debate about if fairness is better than the experience of the game is one of the hardest debates that you can possibly discuss in the terms of sports. From one side everyone wants a fair game ,who doesn't want it? But it also depends if you really love the sport you are playing or watching, because, obviously, if I don't like football i won't enjoy watching or playing it ,the 2 sides have their pros and cons, because if you want a fair game, the rules must be strict but if you want to have fun playing or watching the sport probably it will be less fair and probably the players or teams could cheat or win a match by playing dirty, as well as the people watching or playing the sport could loose interest,but also if the game is constantly stopped to check fouls or unclear plays it could break the rhythm of the game and make people bored.
In this debate I am going to say that the fairness in the sport is much important than the fact that you have fun watching or playing it,because as I said before, if you really love the sport and enjoy playing or watching it ,you wouldn't care if the sport is more or less fair and still enjoy whatching the games or playing with passion
As a little summary,I think that the 2 sides are very subjetive and depends on the person but as I said if you really love the sport you wouldn't care about if it is strict or not so it is the side I am choosing.
Technology like VAR improves fairness and accuracy in sport, ensuring talent is rewarded rather than mistakes deciding outcomes.
However, it also removes the human element that makes sport exciting, slowing the game and reducing spontaneity. This shows how modern sport is longer just about talent ,but talent enhanced and controlled by technology.
I think that fans' experience of sports shouldn't take part over refereeing accuracy because that would be meddling with someone else sweat that he or she has been working for years for it and also it is right for a game to be fair in order for it to be more For example if a fan experience can be prioritised over refereeing accuracy then i strongly believe that there wouldn't be any football like this now.
However others might feel that enjoying the game is what matters most but they don't see that they are hurting the other team, that's why I disagree that fans experience should be prioritised over refereeing accuracy.
Hi everyone, I'm smart_snow from Vancouver, BC i hope all of you are having a great day. I think the fans' experience should not be prioritized over the fairness of the game. These pro athletes train their whole lives and give everything to this sport, and when things aren't fair or the right call isn't made, it ruins the game for the players by taking their hard work and integrity, and then not giving them the outcome they deserve, so bystanders are happy.
For example, imagine if you worked your whole life and gave everything to a sport just to lose because the ref wants to make the people who have put zero work into the game happy. This crushes a player's mindset and integrity and puts all their training to nothing.
the referies in these games are not supposed to pick a team and make them win; the point of the game is the challenge and competition, and a referee's job is to make this process as smooth and as fair as possible for the players who put their lives' work into this sport.
People might say that fans pay to watch these sports, but these players don't take any hours off, and cheating the players out of what they deserve to make the fans happy is unfair. Some of the fun in being a fan is watching your team lose, even when the outcome isn't perfect youre still out having fun with freinds so I think that fans don't need to win to be happy.
For these reasons i think the fans experience should not be prioritized over fairness in the game.
I prefer having a fair decision than fun to watching. Why I prefer a fair game is because when we use technology to make more fans, sometimes the use of those technologies makes people forget the rule of that particular game and because of this the game will be very boring even to some of the people watching .The and game Will no longer be fair to other teams that don't have the money 💰 to get their own technology this is why I prefer fair decision to fun to watch. It is sometimes better to play without technology even at some players may get used to those technologies
I go for fair match because sport is fun only when it is fair and this cannot happen when the sport rules are not followed and applied correctly.
I prefer having fair decision than the joy I derive from the sport . My reason is because when we use technology in competitions people may find it boring because as the opposite teams use technology instead of their talent the game becomes unfair.
For example , in a math quiz where devices are allowed to the competition and if one is given a question he could answer it in less than five second , how do you think the quiz would be? .
Hello Topical Talkers!!!
I'm a huge football fan, and in my opinion the most important thing about this sport is enjoying the game and not getting bored. When a match is intense, fastpaced, and exciting, it's incredible to watch, especially when the teams are playing well. That's why one of the things I dislike most about football is when they review VAR, because for me, it's the most boring part of the whole match.
Every time the referee goes to review VAR, the game stops for a long time. The players stand still, the crowd gets impatient, and as a spectator, you lose the excitement. Sometimes they take too long just to decide if it was a foul or not, or if the goal counts or not, and that makes the game slow. I feel like it completely disrupts the flow of the game.
I do understand that VAR is necessary sometimes because it helps ensure fairer decisions and prevents major errors. I'm not saying it's wrong, but I don't think it should be used so much or take so long. I believe that if there were more than one referee on the pitch, they could better observe the plays and make quicker decisions without having to stop the game.
In conclusion, football should be more exciting, and while VAR helps, it also makes the game less enjoyable when it's overused.
Do you think the same?
Sports are one of the best ways to ingreed wtih family or friends and the perfect chance to start a debate with people around you. I think fans experiences are important but they shouldn't take priority over fair playing, here's why.
Firstly most of the time we hear about a sport, there are two teams, two points of view that deserve to be equally treated. Also, we have to think about the people that is on the field, everyone deserves to have the same conditions, they musn't be mistreated just because of the fans preferences.
Secondly, if we have no rules or an accurate decision everything would go wild, taking football as an example, without VAR we wouldn't know what happened and we would have to rely on the referee's decition (which isn't allways true) and this can even mess with the espectator's experience.
However, others might disagree because they want their team to win not taking into account how the other would feel so, I'll give you readers a tip, everytime you feel like a team has an advantage in any kind of situation think about this, how would you feel about it?
That said, I'm singning out. Peace.
It's my belief that the experience of fans attending games should not be prioritized ahead of accurately calling the game by referees. Fairness and legitimacy are what give sport its significance and validity. If calls are unbiased, athletes will have no doubt that they are being judged based upon their actual capabilities and fans will have faith in the outcome of games rather than being entertained by brief excitement.
For instance, at the Winter Olympic Games in 2026 in Milano-Cortina, organizers and television companies will utilize sophisticated Artificial Intelligence replay technologies which produce multiple angles of each performance being viewed, offer both slow-motion and a 360-degree view for all performances. This technology will allow officials and spectators to observe precisely how an athlete accomplished their jump, landing, or other technical manoeuvres enabling them to make better determinations when judging rather than relying on the human eye.
Such technologies are similar in nature to the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) used in football (soccer) or Hawk-Eye used in tennis. These technologies eliminate some of the possibility that a medal winner is determined by an error by a referee.
On the other hand, these technologies may also eliminate drama and emotion from sport for some observers because of the extended time that technology requires to confirm or deny whether a call was made correctly, thus disrupting the rhythm of the sporting event.
Very exited to hear other's thoughts!!!
Ok hi topical talkers,and today we are going to talk about fairness.First i think that every one should be fair toward others .some people just cant be fair. and In my opinion,i think the person that is not being kind and that is not showing fairness should absoulutly STOP cause some people can be sentitive and have hurtful feelings . If i was the person that got unfairness i would absoultly TELL my trusted ADULT .So who are looking at this text and showing unfairness should take advice from this( but not in a rude way).it is not going to be good cause if any body finds out about this unfairness they are COOKED.the same as people who go sports they would mostly get kicked out of their group . the only reason that i am saying this is because i do not wish any won this at all so i hope you guys listened to this text really well no matter what the person is going through do not make it a big struggle thank you topical talkers for listening to this i hope you have an amazing time see you in the next subject and remember no matter what the person is going though do not make a big struggle and do not be UNFAIR have a lovely time bye!!!!!!!
I think both because we want every one to enjoy there time watching because we want every one to be happy about it. I think being fair is good because so that it is equal and fair between us all.
How do you think that VAR means that games are equal and fair?
Hello, I think that technology has signifficantly improved the athletes' performance. For example, the microchips embedded in jerseys. These devices aim at improving the stats accuracy and also prevent from potential injuries during a game. Unfortunately, this technology is not available among youth clubs because it is considered really expensive. My personal belief is that it should be given to anyone who is into sports,not only to discover the skills or the weaknesses while playing but also to protect the athlete's health. To explain, in case of high blood pressure or really fast heart beat this device could alert the athlete or the medical team for a quick check up.
In my opinion the decisions made by the referee should overrule the fan experience for a more fair sport, when it comes to being in the middle of an match/race as athletes can give everything they have for a championship. A clear example is in Formula in 2021 where Sir Lewis Hamilton gave everything to achieve his dream of getting his record breaking 8th title. However, there was a crash, which resulted in a safety car and a very controversial decision to be made by Michael Masi, leading to a last lap showdown between Max Verstappen and Lewis Hamilton where Max came out on top. This was a very controversial decision as multiple people argued that the decision was made in order to give the fans a better experience. However I believe that in some sports it can be better for the viewing experience when teams are allowed to bend the rules when it is over the course of a season for example. But then again if that team gains an advantage too great it should be regulated. It’s also bad for both the viewing experience and for some teams if the better teams have to adjust to the worser teams because it’s “fair”. We can again see this in Formula 1 where there is a maximum cost cap for the teams, limiting the maximum amount they can spend.
Foootball is about emotions. Have you ever experienced a whole stadium screaming to the top of their lungs because their team scored a goal, which then doesn’t get allowed by the VAR? No wonder why football fans from all
Around the world want to abolish the var. It does serve a good purpose tho. It’s basically just accurate fairness. If the var did exist in 1966, maybe englands goal in the World Cup final , from which we don’t know if it was a goal wouldn’t have counted and Germany would have 5 stars today and England zero. I’m not trying to argument for or against the VAR. There isn’t just a clear answer everything has its advantages and disadvantages. At the end of the day, football became more precise in referee decisions, but also more frustrating, because the goal that was scored, could still be disallowed. To make football fair and fun to watch, fans, players and officials have to sit discuss and find a solution, that fits everyone’s idea of football, so everyone can experience, what football has been made for: fun.
I do not think fans opinions should be prioritised, because there are always two groups of fans at one game. So if the fans of one team are favoured and decide, it would seem very unfair to the other fans routing for the team, which didn’t benefit of the decision.
Having modern technology help with the accuracy of things is a very neutral approach. People can’t be mad about the decision because it is a fact that, for example, the ball did go out of the line. So making it as accurate as possible, can also keep fans happy because the referees aren’t prone to taking one side, because they decide based on the facts, ultimately making a sport more fair.
I think it’s fans experience shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because without fairness and rules that are being followed a sport isn’t the same for everyone. If the rules aren’t being followed it doesn’t matter how good an athlete is or how much work they have put into their performance, because they might not be treated the same as other athletes or teams. So if referring accuracy isn’t prioritized not all teams have the same chances and by that not all fans from all teams can have the same experience. Which means that accuracy is also important to make sure fans can be fans of whatever team they think is performing good and not of a team that’s often winning in unfair ways.
However others might feel that a fans experience is more important, because its more exciting for the fans if the rules aren’t always getting followed. Like that sports might gain more fans and with that also earn more money.
In summary I would say accuracy is more important to make sure everyone has the same chances of winning. Which is then also more fun for the fans.
The Olympics and the Paralympic Games are coming soon. And again there is a debate going on about if the technologies used in sports are being used fairly or are they changing the sports completely making it less fun. In many sports technologies are used to examine the results and monitor the game more precisely so that there is no unfairness throughout the game but at the same time using technologies like different running shoes or use of different sport accessories can lead to unfairness. Now the main question is if the use of technology leads to fairness in sports or change the sports itself?
We can look at the use of technology in a positive way by looking at this particular example about badminton and tennis. This two games include technologies used for monitoring of the game.
If the player hits the shuttle or the ball and it lands on the line the players are allowed to do a challenge, which means that they can use this monitoring technology called the ‘Hawk eye’ and see if the ball or the shuttle landed inside the court or outside. Through this it helps the game to be played fairly and the players get no chance to cheat, also many fans don’t have to complain about their favourite players winning or losing the match in an unfairly way!
So in this way we can say that using technology helps in playing the game fairly and fulfilling the fans’ wishes.
But using it too much, like changing particular sport accessories, can lead in unfairness and may also change the game completely.
I don‘t really agree with this statement that the fans‘ experience of a sport should take priority over referring accuracy due to the fact that the fans know that their team might not have really scored a goal but the fans‘ experience ruled over that fact and it was counted. That wouldn’t be the same as actually making a point by the rules, the feeling of happiness or achievement wouldn’t be present as much with the athlete as well as for the fans.
Additionally, the rules were made for a reason. Most likely the sport wouldn’t be as safe without them, but they are also a method to gain views for the sport and to make it more exciting. If these regulations wouldn’t be as strict the athletes could probably achieve more points and it might not make it as thrilling to watch, as well as becoming more like a regular thing over and over.
If the athletes don’t have to push themselves because the fans keep agreeing on the point for their team, they might miss the actual sport, how they learned it and having to practice to get better instead of them making a point not be as exciting anymore and it being easier than before.
Moreover, it could very likely lead to discussions between the fans of the different teams, since they always want what’s best for their team and would argue against giving points to the opponent team or their own team not receiving any and will therefore say that their perspective should be prioritized due to „more experience“.
While this sometimes might be true, other times it was just very close, which also makes the sport more exciting as well.
In my opinion the fans experience shouldn`t take priority over refereeing accuracy because it wouldnt be that exciting to watch the sport they loved for years beeing destroyed by some people who cant except that they need some rules in sports. The VAR for example, if someone is just standing near the goal and someone passes the ball to him while he scores, it isn't that fun to watch the game anymore. The VAR is really important in some crucial moments, if the referee doesn`t know what to do. However, others might feel that the referee is making many mistakes including the VAR which is an disatvange for the some teams. But most of the mistakes they make are in crucial moments, in which they dont really see the moment that happened. Some referees need to study more on how to referee right. For example the 2022 Cl Liverpool vs Real Madrid, Vini Jr. shot the ball but Benzema was offside he touched the ball which led to Real the leed 1:0 bur the VAR did nothing and allowed the goal.
I think that the fans experience of a sport should not take priority over destroying accuracy because the VAR is extremely significant in every match. Fairness is the foundation of sports. When decisions are correct fans feel confident that the decision is honest and players feel respected. If the result would be unfair, fans will not feel as interested, because they also know that the decision isn’t fair, even if it were towards their team. Fans enjoy their team to lose fairly rather than to win because of an unfair decision.
However, there are people who say that the VAR slows down the game which some fans find disturbing due to the pauses that are created. If your team scores a goal in a way that is not fair and this may be repeated you, as a fan, would loose trust in the team.
In conclusion I would say that accuracy is more important than the fans excitement. A game has rules and these should fairly be followed. If a team looses they will understand that the winning team deserves to win because of these rules.
I think the fan‘s experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because fairness is the most important thing in sports and for assuring fairness accurate refereeing is important. Accurate refereeing can happen by using the modern Technology. For example in many sports like cricket the DRS (direct review system) is used to assure fair decisions. At the start of every innings every team has two unsuccessful reviews, a team can use their reviews if they are not satisfied with the referees decision. The referees can also use the reviews if they are not sure about an decision. This staggeringly improves the fairness in cricket.
However, others might feel that the fan‘s experiences are getting worse because the usage of Technology as it often takes much longer if everything has to be double checked before the result is given.
In conclusion I feel that accurate refereeing is important, as it improves fairness and gives everyone the same chance of winning.
I think the fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because if results aren’t accurate the score at the end can be unfair. And fairness is one of the most important things in sports. Athletes work really hard and deserve to be scored fairly and accurately to know what they’ve achieved. However, others might feel that a sport is supposed to be exciting and fun to watch for the fans.
There are many people who like watching sports. Whether it’s football, skying or Formula One. They like seeing what athletes have accomplished and how good they are at that sport. If rules changed in order for the game/competition to be more accurate by using technology, fans can get less interested in watching the sport because it’s not 100% “human” anymore. So, on one hand, accuracy can upset fans.
On the other hand, as I already mentioned, inaccuracy leads to unfairness. For instance, if a team shoots a basket at the very last second of a game and it doesn’t count even though it should, the team will be very disappointed and fans will get upset or mad considering that team could have won if the referee would’ve let the basket count. These inaccurate scores lead to the fans getting frustrated and the athletes hard work not being enough.
In the end, I think that accuracy is more important than fan experience because the sport is actually about the athletes and not the fans.
I think the fans’ experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because for example the VAR in football can help to make crucial decisions in important games and help the referee to make decision so that everything is fair for everyone. However the VAR sometimes makes some ridiculous decisions where every millimeter counts in my opinion especially in La Liga. This makes some fans very angry and annoyed. Also sometimes the VAR slows down the games, and the longer it takes, the more annoyed the fans get. And when the decision is against them even more. But as already said, the technology is a crucial element to make the sports fairer and to take the right decision. Especially in tennis the hawk eye is important, because for every human being it is nearly impossible to see, if a tennis ball with a speed of over 200 km/h hit the line or not.
To conclude, in one hand, the VAR and other technologies are a very important part of sports to make decisions that make the sports fairer. In the other hand the used technologies can make people angry and produce criticism.
I believe that sport should always focus first on fairness, even if it sometimes reduces the entertainment factor. Fair decisions ensure that all athletes compete under the same rules and conditions. In events like the Winter Games, where results can be decided by tiny fractions of a second, accurate judging and fair technology are extremely important.
However, sport is also about excitement and inspiration. Spectators watch competitions to feel joy, tension, and drama. If events become too technical or overly controlled, they might lose their emotional impact. Therefore, there needs to be a balance between fairness and entertainment.
In my view, fairness must come first because without fairness, the results lose their meaning. But organizers should also try to make competitions exciting and engaging for the audience. When sport is both fair and enjoyable to watch, it truly represents the best spirit of competition.
thank you topical talkers 🌹
I think the fan’s experience of a sport shouldn’t take priority over refereeing accuracy because often a lot depends on winning or losing a certain game for the athlete or team. Like in a world championship, the winner will probably get more sponsors or fans and therefore more money. If the game was unfair, maybe the wrong person or team gets those advantages for competitions in the future.
Moreover, you have to keep in mind that the competitors themselves have dreams and hopes. This sport is their passion. If you only focus on how to make the sport more exciting for the viewer, you forget about the main thing: the athletes. They want to have a career that can be destroyed by one unfair decision or treatment.
Also, if fans get the feeling that they are treated unfairly but you can’t prove the referee’s decisions, it may lead to dangerous situations, e.g., fans start being violent against other fans or the referee.
However, some might say it makes the sport boring to watch if there is always an interruption to check twice on a certain action. They might stop watching the sport, which leads to fewer fans and consequently fewer sponsors.
Fairness in sport still is one of the most important values that has to be upheld. You sometimes have to accept a little less excitement as a compromise for better togetherness.
I think sports should be kept the same since some teams will have an advantage because they have more money. I also think technology in sports could be really useful since it gives a more accurate result. For example on June 22nd 1986 Maradona who is from Argentina had a team mate cross in the ball for him. He hit the ball in the goal with his hand but since they didn't have any proof of it being a handball with no VAR the goal was counted and is now known as the hand of god. Technology can also make sports unfair for example in 1970 the spaghetti strings were released to the public it made tennis unfair since players used this racket to hit shots that were impossible to return leading to unfair advantages against people using the traditional rackets.
Can you share where you found your evidence?