"You could certainly make the case that everything in the recap is accurate from a factual perspective. However, the fact that it doesn’t include any information about Morgan and how important this night was for her, the NWSL, and U.S. women’s soccer speaks to how these kinds of services can’t replicate human writers who can see an event from a 360-degree perspective."
The reviews that come after are typically the ones that cover broader impact. Reviews also include third party commentary and more insights from specialists.
The benefit of having a factual recap generated minutes after the game far supersede the value added by a few words from a low paid recap writer hours after the game.
I guess thats subjective and depends on what the individual finds interesting/important in sport. However including something potentially unecessary is far easier to do and covers more bases than leaving something potentially necessary out.
But there are many different types of people who might disagree with you or prefer something different. You seem to be just stating that what you want is what everyone should think is best.
No one, including you, is interested in every single detail. And no one, including you, will read a novel for every single game.(and every single soccer game can easily become a novel)
And I've made a lot of money on disregarding maximalist user requests, thank you very much.
It isn't computers and digits and statistics. It's people and personalities and how they interact. There's a reason sports is called a reflection of "the human drama."
Except for the Olympics, I don't watch or follow any sports. But I know enough to know that sports is about people.
The only people who think it's nothing more than numbers are people with gambling addictions.
But to answer the OP's original question: no, she didn't do anything worth mentioning in the game per the newly updated ESPN article. Her team was dominated, losing by 3.
"It was the final game in the nearly 14-year career of USWNT star Alex Morgan. The two-time World Cup winner and Olympic gold medalist played 15 minutes, exiting in the first half. Her shot on goal in the 10th minute was saved by Courage goalie Casey Murphy."
So should she have been mentioned in the article? Yes, but not for her performance and not in the context of her play in the match.
The commenter, intentionally or not, is suggesting that nothing is relevant about any particular game except the statistics of the match and the outcome.
So yes, they were suggesting the game is only about numbers.
Specifically to this game: it also literally affected the game (maybe not in points, but it did have an impact), and that it wasn't mentioned means the information provided for the game was inaccurate.
If AI is going to summarize a game, it should do so accurately. It did not do that in this case, and that's not debatable. It was wrong. It did not accurately report the game.
From the article. Or is the claim that the AI model should expect there's nothing noteworthy about this series of events?
I mean, hell, even if it were just another game I’d probably find it relevant to include that Alex subbed off in the 14th, because that’s really eye-raising. This is a total miss by AI that would have never gotten past a real editor.