Technology has had a major impact on sports. But not all advancements have been received with universal praise. Some have sparked debates about their impact on the emotional essence of the game. Have there been any sports which have successively integrated technology?

Tennis

Tennis has seen overwhelmingly positive feedback for its integration of Hawk-Eye technology. The system uses multiple cameras to track the ball’s trajectory and determine whether it is in or out. Before Hawk-Eye, disputes over line calls often led to heated arguments between players and officials (which, admittedly, some fans enjoyed, and some pundits have missed – including John McEnroe, responsible for his fair share of those arguments in his time as a player). 

Nowadays, players can challenge a call and within seconds, the system provides a definitive answer. Hawk-Eye has a margin of error of just a few millimetres, which is far more reliable than the human eye, especially in high-speed scenarios (first serves often top 200 km/h and even groundstrokes can hit 140-150 km/h). 

More recently, more tournaments have used Hawk-Eye for every shot, with an automated voice immediately calling “Out” when needed. Players can request a digital replay of the ball bouncing, but there’s no need for challenges – every decision is automatic. 

Cricket

Cricket has embraced technology in various forms, with the Decision Review System (DRS) being one of its most important innovations. DRS allows players to contest umpire decisions using tools like Hawk-Eye for ball tracking, UltraEdge for detecting faint edges, and Hot Spot for thermal imaging. DRS has significantly improved the accuracy of decisions, with calls that were subjective now assessed using ball-tracking data. The system has also empowered players, giving them a voice in the process.

However, DRS is not without its challenges. One criticism is the inconsistency in its application across different formats and tournaments. Some leagues opt not to use all the technologies due to cost constraints. DRS can disrupt the flow of the game with lengthy reviews, especially during crucial moments, sometimes testing the patience of players and spectators. 

Football

Football is another sport that has heavily integrated technology, particularly through instant replay. NFL coaches can challenge decisions, prompting the referee to review footage from multiple camera angles. With so many intricate rules and fast-paced plays, referees can miss details in real time. The ability to review these moments ensures that decisions are as fair as possible. Some fans argue that instant replay adds a layer of drama to the game, with the suspense of waiting for a final ruling heightening the excitement. Critics, meanwhile, argue that instant replay slows down the game and makes it less engaging for viewers. Unlike tennis or cricket, where reviews are resolved relatively quickly, football often involves long pauses that can disrupt the momentum of both teams. 

What about soccer?

Soccer has seen one of the most contentious technological integrations with the introduction of VAR (Video Assistant Referee). In some games, VAR is used seemingly non-stop. In a 2018 game between Bayern Munich and Bayer Leverkusen in Germany’s Bundesliga, the VAR was consulted 12 times. Most leagues have sought to reduce VAR calls since then, but its prevalence has meant more fans have started using their cell phones during games, whether scrolling X or Instagram, or finding a game to play at casinos.com. 

What most have deemed a failure – so far at least – means the likes of Lionel Messi, Jude Bellingham, and Marco Fabian have had more reason to complain than stars in other sports. The goal of VAR is to assist on-field referees in making accurate decisions during critical moments: goals, penalties, red cards, and mistaken identity.

The main advantage of VAR is the ability to rectify clear and obvious errors. A missed offside call or unspotted fouls can now be reviewed. Fans, coaches, and players have often lamented how a single incorrect decision can change the outcome of a game or tournament. VAR aims to mitigate such injustices. Unfortunately, there seems to be as much contention as ever, with the use of VAR inconsistent. When it is used, VAR doesn’t always satisfy: rarely is a decision unanimously agreed upon, whether by a referee or VAR, and everyone’s definition of “clear and obvious” is different.

 

More importantly, in many fans’ views, is that VAR has robbed them of the spontaneity of celebrating a goal. In many cases, the default now is to wait for confirmation that there won’t be a VAR review before celebrating – by which time the spontaneous joy is diminished. In a low-scoring sport such as soccer, any goal scored is much more meaningful. Soccer was also previously a free-flowing sport with far fewer interruptions than sports such as tennis and football, which have a stop-start nature. VAR has had a major impact here too, with stoppages meaning games now often exceed 100 minutes.

In England, almost two thirds of fans voted against VAR in a 2023 survey by the Football Supporters Association. Club officials don’t feel the same way, though: in June 2024, Premier League clubs voted for VAR to stay. 

A case of success: athletics and timing

Athletics stands out as a discipline where technology has been almost universally successful. Timing systems using photo-finish cameras and electronic sensors have improved the accuracy and reliability of race results. In track and field events, fractions of a second can decide the winner, and modern systems can measure times to the thousandth of a second. This level of accuracy has eliminated much of the controversy that once surrounded race outcomes.