Image via www.priv.gc.ca
Franz Beckenbaur, the President of the German football team FC Bayern Munich, recently expressed his belief that the increase in technology usage throughout football will eventually result in referees being replaced by drones. Bundesliga, the German league in which Bayern plays, recently approved using goal-line technology after observing its success in the World Cup and Premier League. While this is only Beckenbaur’s personal opinion rather than an action item at FIFA, it is his belief that the expansive use of technology throughout the game indicates this will be the future.
The International Football Association Board (IFAB) was persuaded to introduce goal-line technology after clear refereeing errors during the last World Cup. It is the IFAB that determines the laws of the games. The IFAB is composed of FIFA and other U.K. based associations—English, Scottish, Welsh, and Irish Football Associations. FIFA holds four votes, while each of the U.K.-based associations hold one vote each. Since the IFAB has finally accepted technology to assist referees, they may request more extensive technology eventually—potentially opening the door to Beckenbauer’s idea.
On the other hand, FIFA, the international governing body of football, generally opposes technological aids. Instead, FIFA will only allow the technology to assist in special cases. Their opposition has been based on the thought that the flow of matches would be broken by the technology.
Just implementing goal-line technology has been an arduous process, despite the requests for referees to have instant video replay access. In making this decision, the leagues must determine which is more important: the mitigation of refereeing errors or match flow. Although football has generally been hesitant to implement new technology, its expansion is inevitable.
But will that technology end up replacing referees altogether one day with drones?
In order for football to transition from referees to drones, leagues would have to further expand technology usage over time so it would not be a drastic change. Referees have always been a critical part of football, so their replacement with drones perhaps would have to be gradual—otherwise it will not be happily accepted by leagues, players, or fans with stout traditions.
[fanmob id=”5d27c97c-051c-4d9a-8125-cd1707714c92″]
While goal-line technology allows a reconsideration of all potential scoring, officials do not have any technology to refer to when there are penalty disputes. If an official misses the action on field due to their first-hand perspective, the game could become slanted. Changing the perspective could result in absolutely no human error throughout games, since the multiple vantage points of drones would provide such a wide perspective.
But that perspective may be a double-edged sword: referees would not have any excuse to miss calls. However, some officials choose not to make certain calls during particular parts of games—overtime, elimination games, or championship games, for example. Rather, the officials would prefer to let the match be played because any call could seriously alter the end result. Therefore, these drones may provide a view that calls for players facing consequences for actions of all magnitudes, regardless of its impact on the match.
The most important result of this change would be taking bias out of the game. Studies have shown that there is a referee bias towards teams based on their direction of movement. Other studies have shown that there is an evident bias for home teams. Having technology referee instead would relinquish those biases from the sport.
Additionally, drones can be seen as beneficial to the sport because of their perspective of the action. Any sport, especially those of a faster pace, can be difficult to seamlessly follow. Rather than being right in the middle of the action, with the potential to either get in the way of the play or get injured, drones simply observe from above without interrupting the action below.
Despite the above benefits, there will be objections to drones replacing referees. Perhaps drones would slow the pace of the game, which could result in fans losing interest. Or the flow of the game could be impacted for the players. Even the variable of having a human make the calls during a game would be missed. And worst of all, technical difficulties would always be a threat (Look out below! Drone needs new batteries!) So, it must be asked: will the game be disrupted if the speed and flow change due to drones taking over?
Accuracy is critical in any sport, and it could become a demand in football. Although football expects fair officiating, no one has ever disputed the fallibility of a human referee. However, there has not been any necessity to replace humans just yet. Nevertheless, it has been recognized that there is technology to assist human referees, and many believe that if it is available it should be utilized.
For now, it is unlikely that referees will be replaced by drones. But as technology in sports inevitably expands, fans should prepare for the reality of at least having drones assist in the refereeing of games.
Beckenbaur’s statement may have inspired many to start considering drones in soccer. But the decision ultimately comes down to whether to replace human aspect—which has been a major feature in sports since their inception—or explore all future technological options. Replacing all referees with drones may seem too drastic. The best option for football and all sports is to have human referees utilize the available technology. Both options are efficient, but by combining the two, the sport will have the absolute best officiating possible.