The case for AI officiating

I was recently disheartened to watch a PBS show about eye perception. The profound information presented was that the eye sees a narrow band of clear information and that the entire periphery of our vision is mostly occluded and not saved correctly in our brains until such eye movement with its narrow bandwidth allowed us to fill in the otherwise not fully processed peripheral data. When I am in a conversation with a man we both see eye to eye. When I speak with a woman her eyes dart left and right and up and down as if she is still searching for information that my speech has not revealed. That may be the so called intuitive aspect of women--their rapid eye movement. As far as I know there is only 1 woman officiating in the NFL. All others are men with lesser peripheral eye verification and therefore lesser ability to make the correct call that occurred in such a brief instance.

On the other hand the visual acuity of AI software is beyond human capabilities. The speed and accuracy of AI pattern recognition makes me wonder why such AI software requires humans to prove they are human by asking them to solve inordinately mundane visual puzzles in order to gain access to restricted cyber sites. An AI would solve in nanoseconds and therefore the key for human access is their inability to gain access that soon.

Immediate AI calls on the field backed up by human slow motion review would vastly improve my NFL game day experience.

This is a Fan-Created Comment on The opinion here is not necessarily shared by the editorial staff of MHR.