Is technology ruining sport?

Summary

Podcast Summary: The Inquiry – Is Technology Ruining Sport?

Podcast: The Inquiry, BBC World Service
Host: Tanya Beckett
Air Date: June 23, 2026
Episode Theme:
This episode explores whether the increasing use of technology—such as VAR, goal-line tech, and digital decision-making in tennis—enhances or undermines the spirit and experience of sport. Through expert witnesses across sports science, philosophy, and management, The Inquiry investigates how tech shapes fairness, accuracy, enjoyment, and the very essence of competition.

---

Main Discussion Points

1. The Emergence of Technology in Officiating

[00:51-06:39]

• Major sporting events like Wimbledon and the Men's World Cup now rely heavily on technology for officiating.
• 2010’s infamous "Ghost Goal" in England vs. Germany (Frank Lampard's disallowed goal) prompted FIFA to adopt goal-line technology.
  • "The moment where everything became okay. Now there is a real problem was Lampard’s ghost goal against Germany in World Cup 2010." —Carlo de Marques [03:40]
• Within four years, goal-line technology and Video Assistant Referee (VAR) were introduced at the World Cup.
• VAR setup:
  • Uses broadcast and stadium cameras.
  • Decisions are checked, reviewed, and finalized by the on-pitch referee, supported by off-site officials.
• Initial resistance from referees due to feeling of dehumanization, but eventual support as accountability became distributed.
  • "If a technology can tell you it’s in or it’s out ... it basically removes some of that responsibility." —Carlo de Marques [06:39]

2. Limits of Technological "Accuracy" in Sport

[07:28-12:46]

• Other sports, like cricket and tennis, have embraced tech such as Snicometer (cricket) and Hawkeye (tennis).
• Even leading systems like Hawkeye have an admitted margin of error (average 2 millimeters).
  • "Even Hawkeye themselves, they claim they have an average error of 2 millimeters ... but there’s still an error." —Otto Kolbinger [09:22]
• In tennis, discrepancies between technology and human judgment can create conflict, e.g., players photographing clay marks to challenge tech calls (Madrid and Stuttgart Opens).
• Technology’s supremacy over officials is codified in some sports, unlike VAR's relationship with referees in football.
  • "There is a paragraph in the official rulebook ... as long as there’s an operational electronic line-calling system, the chair umpire has to stick to the outcome." —Otto Kolbinger [11:29]
• When tech is wrong, it’s less easily forgiven than a human mistake—a key psychological factor.
  • "With a human being you feel you can say ... try harder next time. But you can’t have that conversation with technology." —Tanya Beckett [12:28]

3. The Psychological and Social Impact on Sport

[14:39-19:48]

• Technology risks minimizing the spontaneous, narrative-driven nature that makes sport emotionally gripping.
  • "Sport, it’s a place for tragedy, it’s a place for uncertainty. Machine doesn’t have dreams or fantasies ... it’s a kind of final decision." —Ojilong Coble [14:39]
• The act of debate—among spectators, players, even officials—is seen as a vital part of sports culture.
  • "We have technology doing answers ... in sports, maybe we can keep this opportunity to build our own narratives." —Ojilong Coble [15:20]
• Over-reliance on tech risks "occupying the place of the subject," stifling human authority, conversation, and expression.
  • "Technology has this risk to occupy the place of the subject." —Ojilong Coble [16:43]
• VAR-induced delays break up the flow and atmosphere, reducing sport to mechanical judgments.
  • "We are spoiling this kind of flow ... I think that the magical aspect of sport is suddenly lost." —Ojilong Coble [18:52]

4. The Future: Balancing Technology, Performance, and Humanity

[19:56-24:46]

• Technology is integral for performance analysis, coaching, and injury prevention, not just officiating.
• For elite athletes, tech increases both the quality of feedback and the psychological pressure—risking information overload.
  • "If I’ve got a mechanism that can tell me where I made every one of my first serves ... it also is a lot of information to be dumped at a player." —Matt Moore [22:51]
• Spectators largely appreciate the drive for accuracy, especially in high-stakes, split-second decisions such as penalties or close calls.
  • "There are a lot of split-second decisions ... to make sure that you’re getting accurate decisions is critical." —Matt Moore [20:57]
• Despite advancements, the irreplaceable core remains: the skills, preparation, and talent of competitors.
  • "At the end of the day, it is their preparation, their training and their God-given ability that allow for them to be present and out there on a court at Wimbledon." —Matt Moore [24:25]

---

Memorable Quotes & Moments

• On the shift in football's attitude to tech:
  "From that moment they said, okay, no, this is not okay. We need to find a solution." —Carlo de Marques [03:40]

• On the trade-off with Hawkeye:
  "...with the introduction of technology, the field just became like 1 or 2 centimeters longer ... this might affect the way you’re playing." —Otto Kolbinger [10:42]

• On the loss of debate in sport:
  "When technology gives all the answers, we are giving up ... the opportunity to have a conversation, to have a debate, to have a negotiation in the field." —Ojilong Coble [15:20]

• On technology’s limitations:
  "You can have [a conversation with technology], but it will not respond." —Otto Kolbinger [12:46]

• On the core of sport:
  "At the end of the day ... it is their preparation, their training and their God given ability that allow for them to be present and out there on a court at Wimbledon." —Matt Moore [24:25]

---

Key Timestamps

• 00:51–02:45: Introduction of tech developments in football and tennis
• 02:45–06:39: Carlo de Marques on VAR’s origins and impact in football
• 07:28–12:46: Otto Kolbinger on tennis tech, Hawkeye, and the precision debate
• 14:39–19:48: Ojilong Coble on technology’s cultural and psychological effects
• 19:56–24:46: Matt Moore on benefits, risks, and the human element in sport

---

Conclusion

Is technology ruining sport?
The answer is not clear-cut. Technology significantly improves fairness and accuracy, responding to high-stakes demands from athletes and fans. However, it can erode spontaneity, the essential "magic," and communal debate that define sporting experience. The show's experts suggest the key challenge is not rejecting tech, but finding a balance—where accuracy supports, but never replaces, the uniquely human drama at the heart of sport.

Transcript

[A]

This BBC podcast is supported by ads

[B]

outside the UK

[A]

Odoo Providing tools for businesses across industries into one fully integrated platform. Whatever your business needs, Odoo is committed to providing it. Learn [e-mail] Choiceology an original podcast from Charles Schwab is a show about the psychology and economics behind our decisions. Join host Katie Milkman and an award winning behavioral scientist and author of the best selling book how to Change as she shares true stories from Nobel laureates, authors, athletes and everyday people about why we make the choices we do and how to make better ones to help avoid costly mistakes. Listen to Choiceologywab.com podcast or wherever you listen.

[B]

Welcome to the Inquiry from the BBC World Service with me, Tania Beckett. One question for exper witnesses and an answer June and July see the start of two major events in the sporting calendar. For tennis fans, it's Wimbledon and for football enthusiasts, the Men's World Cup. Both sports have in recent years undergone fundamental transformations with the help of technology. This year the International Football Association Board, the regulatory body that shapes the laws of the game, expanded the reach of video assistance refere or VAR technology in the World cup. And even the ball itself has been subject to a technological upgrade. FIFA's new ball being used in this tournament is called the Trionda. It has a sensor to paint a clearer picture of its trajectory. And there have also been big technological developments in tennis. Last year, Wimbledon's Grand Slam tournament ended a 147 year tradition by replacing the much loved line judges with advanced camera tech. Hawkeye Live that means that three of four international tennis Grand Slams now use electric line calling. Other sports are also aiming to improve accuracy. But technology is not infallible like human referees and umpires. It can also make mistakes. Perhaps, then, there is a balance to be struck between getting the right answer and preserving the essence of what sport is about. This week on the inquiry, we're asking is technology ruining sport?

[C]

The Ghost Goal I am Carlo de Marques. I spent my whole career in sport and technology for media. I'm based in Torino in Italy.

[B]

A crucial turning point at which it was considered that technology had a place in football was 16 years ago on June 27, 2010 in Bloemfontein, South Africa. England were playing Germany in the World cup and trailing 2 1. Then England midfielder Frank Lampard hit a shot that struck the underside of the crossbar but bounced back out. Both the referee and assistant referees failed to see the ball had crossed the line and allowed play to continue. The controversy caused by this so Called Ghost Goal was a turning point in the thinking of governing body FIFA and its president set Blatter.

[C]

Carlo tells the story the moment where everything became okay. Now there is a real problem was Lampard goes gold against Germany in World Cup 2010. When FIFA at the time said Blatter was always saying, okay, you know, human makes mistake and sport is human, so the referee is a human making mistake. That's okay. But from that moment they said, okay, no, this is not okay. We need to find a solution.

[B]

Within four years, goal line technology was introduced to the World cup which took place in Brazil. This uses cameras or magnetic fields to determine if the ball has fully crossed the goal line. And at this time, another layer of technology was introduced into the laws of the game. It's called Video Assistant referee or var.

[C]

The VAR is basically a system that uses the broadcast camera plus other cameras that are placed in the stadium for the officiating and tries with another set of people, referees in a different room, either in the stadium or in a production center far from the stadium, to support the referees in everything that is happening during the game.

[B]

As Carlo says, VAR assists the on pitch referee using video replays and communication to prevent clear and obvious errors. It's typically limited to four match changing goals, penalty decisions, direct red cards and mistaken identity.

[C]

VAR works on the principle of three things. They have to check, review and then take a decision. So basically, as the referee and the players are on the pitch, the referees of the VRR room, which is they're watching all these monitors are constantly checking if there is anything wrong with the decision taken from the referee. So they have a kind of reactive position there, right?

[B]

In this year's tournament, VAR has two new points of intervention involving more rigorous checking. When corners and second yellow cards are given, the VAR room can intervene over decisions made by the on pitch referee. Or equally the referee can ask to see the footage.

[C]

If the VAR room see nothing wrong, they don't even talk to the referee. But in all cases where they say okay, it's better to check. They can take themselves a decision because it's straightforward or and we have seen the referee's doing the rectangle, the screen sign, it means they will directly the referee will go and check the video that the production room has prepared for him.

[B]

So a referee can check a decision or the VAR team can recommend an overturn. Importantly, the final decision always remains with the on field referee. But in the beginning, do you think referees were supportive of this or do you think that they thought that it

[C]

undermined their role this was always seen as, okay, you're taking control of our role, you're dehumanizing, refereeing, etc. But I think after some of the first success, there was support because basically if a technology can tell you it's in or it's out, it. It basically removes some of that responsibility, which is you basically using your human side to decide if it's in or not, which is beyond what you can really do. Right? You can be the best referee, but you're in a position, even if you're in the best position that the referee should be in that very moment in the game, you don't have 100% information to take a decision. So I think as they saw that this technology was really helping, I think support grew.

[B]

This level of technology is also applied to other sports such as tennis and cricket. High level cricket matches also use the Snicometer or snico, which is an audio visual tool used to determine if the ball has made contact with the bat. Now, this is important in cases particularly where the ball goes on to hit the wicket. I'm going to avoid getting into the rules of cricket here. I mean, let's just remind ourselves we are talking about a sport in which when you're in, you and when you're out, you're in. Enough said. Let's just say that an umpire cannot easily hear the noise of the ball hitting the bat when fans are roaring in the stands. But what happens when the technology itself is wrong? Part 2 In or out we've talked about how sophisticated cameras are used to track the trajectory of a ball to help the referee or umpire make a decision. But even a seemingly more straightforward game, tennis, which I myself enjoy playing several times a week, the question of whether a ball bounced inside the line can be surprisingly fraught. Our second expert witness joins us from Bavaria in Germany. Otto Kolbinger was a sports scientist at the Technical University of Munich and is now working on the Saudi Pro League as a senior manager in data integration. One of the most prominent track tracking technologies used in sport is called Hawkeye. It's almost universally used across tennis grand slam tournaments for the purpose of judging whether a ball landed in or out of the court. Otto explains that this, like other sports technology, is not 100% accurate.

[D]

So even Hawkeye themselves, they claim they have an average error of 2 millimeters, which by the way, is probably much better than a human being. But there's still an error. And by the way, an error on average by 2 millimeters also means that there might be cases where it's much bigger. And so it can be just the case that the technology just got it wrong.

[B]

Added to that, there is the genuine difference between what technology might declare as out and what the human eye might call out. In tennis, although the ball may appear to be out, it may have just touched the outside of the line and therefore be technically in. As a tennis player myself, I've often had rather tense discussions about this on the tennis court, but that's just between players. What happens when it is between a player and the technology? This is most prone to happening on a clay court, where, unlike grass or asphalt, a bouncing ball creates an indent.

[D]

On clay, you have an imprint that you can use as a proof, and this imprint, by the way, was used as definite proof. And on grass, you don't have this imprint on the ground.

[B]

Now, that indent may be outside the line, but the ball is of course, round, so it may still have overshadowed the line and therefore be considered in.

[D]

So you very often hear the claim of providers of such technology that even if the imprint is out by a margin of like a couple of millimeters, it's still possible that the ball touched the line. But what this means is that with the introduction of the technology, the field just became like 1 or 2 centimeters longer, which may not sound much to us, but looking at tennis players and how sensitive they react to any change, no matter if it's the weather or somebody like standing up in the stands, this might affect the way you're playing.

[B]

In cases of uncertainty, the International Tennis Federation grants Hawkeye the final say above human officials. And as we've said, this is in contrast to VAR in football.

[D]

There is a paragraph in the official rulebook, for example, of the atf, which really says as long as there's working operational electronic line calling system, the chair umpire has to stick to the outcome of the system.

[B]

Two flashpoints occurred around exactly this discrepancy at the Madrid and Stuttgart Open tournaments. And in both cases, the players took photos of the indent to make their point to the umpire.

[D]

There are two incidents, one with Alexander Zverev and the other one was Sabalenka, where actually the players took a smartphone to make a picture of an imprint. To later claim that the Hawkeye system was wrong, they claimed after the games that, like, the ball was centimeters out, or in the case of sa, that this was quite thin. But the Hawkeye system decided the other way around. And I think that's probably also one of the main reasons why the French Open resist to use such technology.

[B]

The problem is if humans are wrong, we forgive them because they can improve. But if technology is wrong, then that's a whole different matter. Well, I suppose with a human being you feel that you can say to them, could you try harder next time? And it will. But you can't have that conversation with technology, can you?

[D]

Yeah, you can have it, but it will not respond

[B]

well upstream.

[E]

When you're a maintenance engineer in a beverage manufacturing plant, you keep production lines moving and quality on track because there is no room for slowdowns. With Grainger's vast selection of high quality motors, sensors, belts and hard to find parts, you can get what you need fast and all in one place. So nothing gets in the way of getting the job done. Call 1-800-granger clickranger.com or just stop by Granger for the ones who get it done.

[A]

Investing with Schwab is like spending a Saturday at a great farmer's market. You can fill your reusable tote with a bit of everything. Maybe you go for some free range self directed investing or perhaps you pick up a few farm fresh trades while you peruse. You can even get help from a dedicated advisor. That's full service, wealth management. Mix, match and change your mind whenever you want. Because at Schwab you can invest your way. No matter your goals or appetite for investing, Schwab has everything you need all in one place. Visit schwab.com to learn more.

[B]

You're listening to the Inquiry on the BBC World Service. Just before we get into a concern with this technology that has nothing to do with accuracy, you can find our past episodes including Is It Time to Scrap the Commonwealth Games? And how will countries boycotting Eurovision affect the Contest? By searching for them in the Inquiry feed or wherever you listen to your podcasts. Thank you. Now back to our third Expert Witness, Part three, the Spirit of the Game.

[F]

We are very domesticated by the technology. So sport, it's a place for tragedy, it's a place for uncertainty. Machine doesn't have dreams or fantasies or can't establish a good conversation. So it's a kind of final decision.

[B]

Ojilong Coble joins us from Sao Paulo in Brazil and the University of Campinas, where he is a philosopher and a psychoanalyst in the field of sport. He explains how he believes that the excitement of discussion surrounding the game can be diminished by the introduction of technology.

[F]

Yeah, look, we are watching a match and we have a narrative of the situation. We are experiencing this narrative, but suddenly we have a technology saying something different for us. So it's not about what I saw, but the information that technology sent to me. I think that this is very bad for sport. We have technology doing answers in many fields of our lives, but in sports, maybe we can keep this opportunity to build our own narratives. So I think that this is a psychological and philosophical issue, very important to consider when we talk about sport. Well, I'm not defending that we don't have truth in sports, that we don't have a correct answer, but I am defended the opportunity to have a conversation, to have a debate, to have a negotiation in the field. So when technology give all the answers, we are given up to debate. We are given up to have this conversation.

[B]

So it takes out the debate that happens between spectators and for that matter, players, which is actually beneficial.

[F]

Yes, very beneficial. I can imagine some debates, I can imagine even some arguments. But you know, you have the referee, you have the rules. So we have all we need to establish a good conversation, to debate, a good argumentation. So technology has this risk to occupy the place of the subject.

[B]

The risk here is that we're eliminating the valuable outlet of expression in sport that Ojalon says has been lost in other parts of society.

[F]

Look, we are living nowadays in a very polarized situation around the world, in politics, in work, in culture. So sports can keep this possibility to negotiate, to debate, even to disagree. It's a safe area to do this. When we are questioning every single play and using technology to discover exactly what happened. We are changing this scenario, we are changing this arena for other.

[B]

Technology can also undermine the role of the referee. Is the authority of the referee a really central part of football?

[F]

I think that the referee is very important. We have a person that we need to establish some authority. But technology could occupy this place of authority. So it's not working. You know, I think that we are trying to change the referee for a machine. This is not a good thing in a human behavior, in a human activity

[B]

like sports, on the occasions that the referee has to go and look at the footage that has been created, that delays everything, doesn't it? So there can be a few minutes whereby the referee is involved in something and the spectators are almost taken out of the game, they have to simply wait. They're not party to that. Does it lose the atmosphere?

[F]

If you assume that football, sports in general, but football is a kind of spectacle and this is important also. We are spoiling this kind of flow. We need to wait. Sometimes the information is different than what I am expecting for. So it's very bad for the atmosphere. When I watch Sports. When I watch football, I am experiencing a different world. It's changed in my routine, in my normal life, in my flow. So suddenly I was facing a technology against saying what is right and what is wrong. So I think that the magical aspect of sport is suddenly lost.

[B]

Time for our final expert witness. Part four is the future of sport digital.

[G]

Yeah. So we've obviously got the World cup that'll last throughout the summer months here in North America. You all are fortunate to have, in my opinion, the greatest tennis tournament in the history of the world. Wimbledon coming up.

[B]

Our fourth expert witness reminds us that there is a lot to look forward to for sports fans in the second half of 2026. And for those who are tracking the evolution of tech in sport, it's a chance to reassess what value it's adding. Matt Moore is associate dean for the University of Kentucky's College of Social Work.

[G]

Obviously, the World cup with the VAR is going to be highly watched throughout multiple World cup matches. And obviously technology in the sport of tennis continues to evolve on a regular basis. Wimbledon will give us another opportunity to test some of the tech tools that are utilized to help umpires make decisions throughout the course of matches.

[B]

But do you think spectators are receptive or do you think broadly they feel that it's detracting from their experience?

[G]

I think by and large, spectators appreciate it. Obviously, there are a lot of split second decisions and really closely contested calls within football. The difference between getting to a ball on a tackle a split second too late is the difference between drawing a penalty and not drawing a penalty. So to have that level of reassurance in technology and to be able to go back and slow things down frame by frame, to make sure that you're getting accurate decisions is critical. Same things when you think about Wimbledon. I mean, the difference between a half an inch and not a half an inch is the difference between a ball hitting a line and not hitting a line.

[B]

And it's not just the spectators. Now, obviously, when I'm playing tennis, you can forget an inch. I work more in feet. But for top level players, seconds and millimeters make the difference between a good and bad decision. And the stakes are very high.

[G]

And you're talking about millions of dollars, right? You're talking about individuals, livelihoods from playing perspectives and also from the perspective of coaches that making right decisions and ensuring that information is accurate is the difference between you demonstrating and having success versus potentially not demonstrating and having the level of success that you're capable of.

[B]

We've talked about how referees and Spectators respond to more technology in sport, but what about the players themselves? Athletes and team sport players at all levels use performance technology to train more effectively and prevent injuries. For top level sports people, it provides coaches and athletes with real time feedback. Personally, watching a video of myself serving doesn't seem to make me do it correctly when I next have a go. This may be a bit off topic, but there is a risk surely of feeling a little over scrutinized. Does technology increase psychological pressure on players because they're being more closely scrutinized?

[G]

That's the double edged sword that I think we see within sport is if I've got a mechanism that can tell me where I made every one of my first serves, where I missed every one of my first serves, the average ball speed that I'm hitting a forehand with, where I'm hitting unforced errors, at, where my footwork went wrong on a particular shot, all that's critical to be able to improve your level of play. But it also is a lot of information to be dumped at a player any given point of time. And again, if they're not taking that information and utilizing the way in which it was intended, it absolutely can get you to overcompensate or to over and put yourself in a performance hole that is difficult to get out of.

[B]

Now we return to our Is technology ruining sport? The digital age is well established in sport used to enhance performance during training, ensure fair officiating and offer fans a closer look at the game. The concern is that much like technology in other parts of our lives, it will detract from the human experience. The answer then, quite simply is that it can make sport more accurate, but at the same time it removes some of the discussion and debate, the chance to be fully in the moment. A final thought from our fourth expert witness who reminds us there is a corner of sport which remains beyond the reach of technological interference and that is the skill of the competitors.

[G]

When Wimbledon starts, you all will get to see the world's greatest tennis players and technology certainly impacts how those tennis players perform. But at the end of the day, it is their preparation, their training and their God given ability that allow for them to be present and out there on a court at Wimbledon.

[B]

This inquiry was written and presented by me, Tanya Beckett. The producer was Evie Yabsley and the researcher, Amelia Cox. The editor was Tom Bigwood and the technical producer was Nicky Edwards.

[E]

When you're a maintenance engineer in a beverage manufacturing plant, you keep production lines moving and quality on track because there is no room for slowdowns. With Grainger's vast selection of high quality motors, sensors, belts and hard to find parts, you can get what you need fast and all in one place, so nothing gets in the way of getting the job done. Call 1-800-GRAINGER clickranger.com or just stop by Grainger for the ones who get it done.

[A]

Support comes from Wise the smart way to manage the currencies you need around the globe. Fed up with losing out to hidden fees when you send money abroad with your everyday bank? Choose the smart way Wise. You can count on the exchange rate you'd usually find on Google. No unwelcome surprises. Plus, ditch that where's my money feeling. Most transfers arrive in under 20 seconds. Join millions saving billions on hidden fees. Be smart, get wise. Download the wise app today. Ts and Cs apply.