This analysis proposes a criterion to evaluate how technology impacts internal goods in sport, emphasizing their rules and practices.
This paper explores the role of technology in sports development. Based on three examples – artificial surfaces in field hockey and football (including the Jabulani football); javelins and vault-poles; and running shoes and swimsuits – a criterion is proposed to help decide whether or not (and why) to welcome new technologies into sport. This criterion relies firstly on an analysis of the role of the rule in sport; secondly on the identification and understanding of the constitutive rules of sport; and thirdly on our identification and acknowledgement of the ‘internal goods’ of sport as a social practice. The idea is that the internal goods of sport (which are what we seek) are created by the constitutive rules; and so proposed new technologies, and associated rule changes, should be assessed according to their ability to promote the relevant internal goods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parry et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: