50 sats \ 5 replies \ @Undisciplined 24 Feb \ on: Stacker Sports- Day 81 Stacker_Sports
I fundamentally agree that officiating should be done by human judgement and my preference would actually be to abolish almost all replay.
However, that opens too much scope for officials to determine outcomes, so I think coaches challenges are fine and AI should be used to get reviews correct.
What if AI worked in the background and automatically overturned officials on certain calls?
reply
There are a few cases where I was thinking about that. In cases where the call is a clear matter of fact (12 men on the field or offsides, for instance), then I like the idea of immediately reversing calls. I also like the idea of using AI when two officials disagree about what happened.
I might also be ok with using AI to only call egregious penalties that refs can't seem to see for some reason (the many sleeper holds and full nelson's used against Maxx Crosby come to mind).
reply
I like the idea of auto reviews on certain calls. Why are we waiting for a quality control coach to check if they want to challenge and then the coach trying to throw the challenge flag before the other team rushes to the line to try and get the play in before the challenge.
reply
The core problem with turning AI loose is the one you brought up: games would grind to a halt if every infraction were called. I'd be happy to see it used to reduce time spent officiating. One thing that just came to mind is spotting the ball and determining first downs and touchdowns, without making coaches challenge really bad spots.
reply
Yes definitely could be advantageous in some ways but terrible in others. If an AI was calling penalties we might still be watching the superbowl.
reply