6 ms·

As an AI enthusiast, this is exciting. As a Football fan, this is a concerning trend. Usage of technology has ruined several aspects of traditional associatio

As an AI enthusiast, this is exciting. As a Football fan, this is a concerning trend. Usage of technology has ruined several aspects of traditional association football. The VAR for example, is ruining the serendipitous nature of football. Fans in general dislike the VAR because it removes this extra element of drama that the sport has. I’m supportive of technology in sports though. I just think there should be a limit, otherwise they become a very boring and cold activity. I’m not necessarily against the suggested approach here. Having analytics of how a game is going or went seems useful and a net positive. It’s just hard to tell if that could keep eroding those entertainment elements that make Football fun to watch.

jgalt212 5y ago
Baseball has been grievously harmed by the numbers. Too many strike outs and home runs, and the shift has just become infuriating. Reading a 6-3 in the scorebook, one has no idea what actually happened.
daveevad 5y ago
As a basketball fan, my only gripe with VAR is how much time it takes to complete. Advanced AI would presumably extend into those systems and make the review near instantaneous.
rjtavares 5y ago
I wouldn't really be concerned. This new element basically changes coaching and recruitment, not so much the actual play. Unlike basketball, football is open enough to not have an easy to prove maximizing strategy (unlike basketball, with the emphasis on 3 pts shooting).
- clairity 5y ago
  the 3-pointer by itself isn’t point-maximizing, and surely doesn’t assure victory. the point-maximization is only valid in the context of the current game aesthetics. if a team tried to shoot only 3-pointers, they’d almost certainly lose because the counter-defense becomes simple. only by mixing shot selection does the 3-pointer’s slight advantage matter, and it’s not enough of an advantage to trivialize the game. it does what it was meant to do, which is inject unpredictability/variety into both offense and defense, especially at the end of close games, for more interesting and exciting gameplay.
  - rjtavares 5y ago
    Of course I simplified the issue, but my main point is that in football there isn't an equivalent to the 3 pts advantage in basketball (however slight it may be).
    - kenjackson 5y ago
      In football it is the forward pass.
      - jghn 5y ago
        football in this context means association football, aka soccer
  - bart_spoon 5y ago
    > the 3-pointer by itself isn’t point-maximizing Of course, but the reality is that analytics have proven that there are only really two shots worth taking in modern basketball: the 3 pointer and a shot near the rim. For anything in between the expected points for the shot is simply not worth it. Even an uncontested midrange shot is going to have similar or fewer expected points per shot than a contested 3-pointer or shot beneath the rim. And these two kinds of shots are spatially far from each other, so even if the opposing team knows this is your strategy, its still difficult to defend against. Teams and players that have tried to exploit the fact that modern basketball is fairly homogenous by taking relatively less defended midrange shots occasionally find streaks of success, but it hasn't proven sustainable, and certainly not enough to win a championship. Basketball would probably benefit from either eliminating the 3 point shot, or, perhaps preferably, pushing the line back a few feet to even it out in terms of point expectations with midrange shots. Shots under the rim will still remain the most reliable point source, but teams won't have to divide as much attention on getting steam-rolled by three pointers. It will bring back scoring big men like a prime Shaq who have mostly disappeared from the game, still allow phenoms like Steph Curry to thrive (fewer players can match his ability to hit 3-pointers from further distance), and will make the midrange focused strategies more viable again.
LetThereBeLight 5y ago
I think the main complaints about VAR in football have been the amount of time these decisions take and the inconsistency of the rulings. Instead of the constant play we used to have, now we see players stand around as the screen shows lines drawn in seemingly arbitrary locations to decide whether or not an attacking player was onside before a goal. In contrast, fans have been fine with the goal-line technology, which gives decisive (usually) and quick results. The use of AI in this paper seems more relevant for setting team strategies and picking players rather than enforcing rulings.
- kenjackson 5y ago
  VAR could be used in situations where it is quicker. For example, in basketball, it should be able to do goal-tending in near real time. Also 3s in the key. The holy grail though is if it can help charge/block calls. Or we should consider changing the rule so that it can be consistently called, but that's a topic for a basketball forum.

jgalt212 5y ago

Baseball has been grievously harmed by the numbers. Too many strike outs and home runs, and the shift has just become infuriating. Reading a 6-3 in the scorebook, one has no idea what actually happened.

daveevad 5y ago

As a basketball fan, my only gripe with VAR is how much time it takes to complete. Advanced AI would presumably extend into those systems and make the review near instantaneous.

rjtavares 5y ago

I wouldn't really be concerned. This new element basically changes coaching and recruitment, not so much the actual play. Unlike basketball, football is open enough to not have an easy to prove maximizing strategy (unlike basketball, with the emphasis on 3 pts shooting).

clairity 5y ago
the 3-pointer by itself isn’t point-maximizing, and surely doesn’t assure victory. the point-maximization is only valid in the context of the current game aesthetics. if a team tried to shoot only 3-pointers, they’d almost certainly lose because the counter-defense becomes simple. only by mixing shot selection does the 3-pointer’s slight advantage matter, and it’s not enough of an advantage to trivialize the game. it does what it was meant to do, which is inject unpredictability/variety into both offense and defense, especially at the end of close games, for more interesting and exciting gameplay.
- rjtavares 5y ago
  Of course I simplified the issue, but my main point is that in football there isn't an equivalent to the 3 pts advantage in basketball (however slight it may be).
  - kenjackson 5y ago
    In football it is the forward pass.
    - jghn 5y ago
      football in this context means association football, aka soccer
- bart_spoon 5y ago
  > the 3-pointer by itself isn’t point-maximizing Of course, but the reality is that analytics have proven that there are only really two shots worth taking in modern basketball: the 3 pointer and a shot near the rim. For anything in between the expected points for the shot is simply not worth it. Even an uncontested midrange shot is going to have similar or fewer expected points per shot than a contested 3-pointer or shot beneath the rim. And these two kinds of shots are spatially far from each other, so even if the opposing team knows this is your strategy, its still difficult to defend against. Teams and players that have tried to exploit the fact that modern basketball is fairly homogenous by taking relatively less defended midrange shots occasionally find streaks of success, but it hasn't proven sustainable, and certainly not enough to win a championship. Basketball would probably benefit from either eliminating the 3 point shot, or, perhaps preferably, pushing the line back a few feet to even it out in terms of point expectations with midrange shots. Shots under the rim will still remain the most reliable point source, but teams won't have to divide as much attention on getting steam-rolled by three pointers. It will bring back scoring big men like a prime Shaq who have mostly disappeared from the game, still allow phenoms like Steph Curry to thrive (fewer players can match his ability to hit 3-pointers from further distance), and will make the midrange focused strategies more viable again.

LetThereBeLight 5y ago

I think the main complaints about VAR in football have been the amount of time these decisions take and the inconsistency of the rulings. Instead of the constant play we used to have, now we see players stand around as the screen shows lines drawn in seemingly arbitrary locations to decide whether or not an attacking player was onside before a goal. In contrast, fans have been fine with the goal-line technology, which gives decisive (usually) and quick results. The use of AI in this paper seems more relevant for setting team strategies and picking players rather than enforcing rulings.

kenjackson 5y ago
VAR could be used in situations where it is quicker. For example, in basketball, it should be able to do goal-tending in near real time. Also 3s in the key. The holy grail though is if it can help charge/block calls. Or we should consider changing the rule so that it can be consistently called, but that's a topic for a basketball forum.