The use of vanishing spray reduces the extent of rule violations in soccer

BackgroundMore and more sport associations introduce innovative devices to support referees and umpires respectively, affecting a strong need for the evaluation of these devices. This study evaluates the use of the new vanishing spray for free kicks in the German Bundesliga. In more detail, the aim of the study is to investigate if the spray reduces violations of the required minimum distance and consequently the respective punishments, if it reduces errors concerning the distance set by the referee and if it leads to a higher success rate of free kicks.MethodsTherefore, 1833 free kicks of the 2013/2014 and 2014/2015 season of the German Bundesliga were screened using a self-designed observational system. For the statistical analysis two parallel samples were built of 299 free kicks each.ResultsThe results showed no decrease of free kicks with distance violations but a significantly lower extent of these violations (χ2 = 4.58; p < .05). However, none of these violations were punished appropriately. Concerning the success of free kicks, no significant impact was found neither for shots nor for crosses. In addition, no influence on the distance set by the referee could be identified.ConclusionsThe main objective of the vanishing spray was basically realized, but the use didn’t lead to any further positive (side) effects. Due to the lack of punishment, the authors raise concerns about the current application of the minimum distance rule.

[1]  S. Michael,et al.  The ISOPAR Method: A New Approach to Performance Analysis in Golf , 2011 .

[2]  Tiziana D'Orazio,et al.  A visual system for real time detection of goal events during soccer matches , 2009, Comput. Vis. Image Underst..

[3]  Chris L. S. Coryn,et al.  Evaluation Theory, Models, and Applications , 2007 .

[4]  Shimon Kolkowitz,et al.  On the Optimality of Line Call Challenges in Professional Tennis , 2012 .

[5]  Peter J. Beek,et al.  Errors in judging ‘offside’ in football , 2000, Nature.

[6]  J. L. Losada,et al.  Effectiveness of Indirect Free Kicks in Elite Soccer , 2014 .

[7]  B. Pope,et al.  Own‐Nationality Bias: Evidence from UEFA Champions League Football Referees , 2015 .

[8]  Thomas Reilly,et al.  Handbook of Soccer Match Analysis: A Systematic Approach to Improving Performance , 2006 .

[9]  M. Scriven.  Evaluation thesaurus, 4th ed. , 1991 .

[10]  George Mather,et al.  Perceptual uncertainty and line-call challenges in professional tennis , 2008, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[11]  A. Als,et al.  The 5th Umpire: Automating Cricket's Edge Detection System , 2013 .

[12]  Robert John Evans,et al.  You cannot be serious! Public understanding of technology with special reference to “Hawk-Eye” , 2008 .

[13]  Werner Helsen,et al.  Errors in judging “offside” in association football: Test of the optical error versus the perceptual flash-lag hypothesis , 2006, Journal of sports sciences.

[14]  R. Ragone,et al.  Referee bias , 1994, Nature.

[15]  Christopher A. Parsons,et al.  Strike Three: Discrimination, Incentives, and Evaluation , 2011 .

[16]  Lee J. Cronbach,et al.  Course Improvement through Evaluation , 1963, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education.

[17]  Robert Evans,et al.  Sport-decision aids and the “CSI-effect”: Why cricket uses Hawk-Eye well and tennis uses it badly , 2012, Public understanding of science.

[18]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  A power primer. , 1992, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  Martin Lames,et al.  Do We Need Goal Line Technology in Soccer or Could Video Proof Be a More Suitable Choice: A Cost-Benefit-Analysis of Goal Line Technology in Soccer and Thoughts About an Introduction of Video Proof , 2014, icsports 2014.

[20]  Thomas Seidl,et al.  Analysis of Goal Line Technology from the Perspective of an Electromagnetic Field based Approach , 2014 .

[21]  Thomas Dohmen,et al.  Referee Bias , 2016, SSRN Electronic Journal.

[22]  Michael Scriven,et al.  Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and Human Services Evaluation , 2000 .

[23]  Daniel L. Stufflebeam,et al.  The CIPP Model for Program Evaluation , 1983 .