‘Howzat’—how do artefacts without matter, matter? The case of decision review systems in professional cricket

Abstract

It has been argued that the social and material worlds are increasingly entangled as they become mediated by and experienced through virtual representations of live events. Virtual decision review systems in professional sport provide an albeit unusual case study example of such developments where virtual (re‐)representations of events are increasingly used in match play to inform adjudicator decisions concerning ‘what really happened’. This has prompted an ongoing debate in many sports over both the accuracy and appropriateness of these technologies for representing events which are often fast moving and difficult to judge with the human eye. We explore these issues using a sociomaterial practice lens and indicate the broader relevance of the case for basing judgements and decisions on virtual views of reality.

“Are Fans in the Stands an Afterthought?”: Sports Events, Decision-Aid Technologies, and the Television Match Official in Rugby Union

“…Each of these decision-aid systems were introduced in order to reduce the number of incorrect decisions made during a match. McLoughlin and Dawson (2017) provide a detailed and robust examination of DRS use in cricket, in particular, how it is employed and how players have had to learn how to use the technology to their advantage. Despite DRS leading to a reduction in incorrect decisions, critics of the technology, including those in the media, argue DRS undermines the authority of the on-field umpires (Haigh, 2017;McLoughlin & Dawson, 2017).…”

“…McLoughlin and Dawson (2017) provide a detailed and robust examination of DRS use in cricket, in particular, how it is employed and how players have had to learn how to use the technology to their advantage. Despite DRS leading to a reduction in incorrect decisions, critics of the technology, including those in the media, argue DRS undermines the authority of the on-field umpires (Haigh, 2017;McLoughlin & Dawson, 2017). But Steen (2011) found that DRS data from the 2011 Cricket World Cup showed right decisions were being made more often and that the umpires at the top of their game did not have their original decisions reversed when DRS was used.…”

“…Compared to the mediatisation of sport, there is a much smaller body of academic research on decision-aid technologies in sport. That which does exist has largely focused on how the technologies are used (Leveaux, 2010), the necessity or otherwise of the systems, and the consequences of their (non)use (Collins, 2010;Collins & Evans, 2008, 2011McLoughlin & Dawson, 2017;Nlandu, 2012;Ryall, 2012;Steen, 2011;Svantesson, 2014). The most well-known of these decision-aid systems is used in cricket (DRS), rugby union (TMO), rugby league (Video Referee), association football (VAR), and tennis (Hawk-Eye).…”

“…McLoughlin and Dawson (2017), Collins (2010), and Collins andEvans (2008, 2011) also explore the controversy surrounding Hawk-Eye's ball tracking in cricket, which critics argue is not 100% accurate due to its virtual estimation of the ball's trajectory. Collins (2010) and Collins andEvans (2008, 2011), however, assert that cricket at least allows for a zone of uncertainty which acknowledges Hawk-Eye's limitations and favours the on-field umpire's original decision (known as "umpire's call"), which is important for the credibility of the umpire and the sport.…”

“…As the improvement in technology continued this scrutiny from fans and media, sports teams concerned about protecting their livelihoods, and their own sport's governing bodies greatly increased, as did the intolerance towards incorrect decisions. The governing bodies of sports such as cricket (Decision Review System, DRS), rugby union (Television Match Official, TMO), rugby league (Video Referee), association football (Video Assistant Referee, VAR), and tennis (Hawk-Eye) were persuaded to introduce technology to assist referees and umpires' decision-making (Leveaux, 2010;McLoughlin & Dawson, 2017;Steen, 2011). However, while the benefit of these technologies to each sport in terms of justice over decision-making (see Collins, 2010) is undeniable, little is known about their impact on the live event experience from the perspective of fans.…”