The claim 'The less subjective judgment is involved in a sport, the more likely that conflict will exist' is true.

• A. True
• B. False
• C. It depends
• D. Not enough information

Answer: (B)

Objectivity in judging and its relation to conflict in sport is being tested. In ethics of sport, calls that are based on clear, objective criteria limit personal interpretation, which reduces room for disagreement among athletes, coaches, and spectators. When a decision rests on measurable facts or published rules, people can reference the same standard, making disputes less likely. The idea that reducing subjectivity would somehow increase conflict runs counter to this logic: more subjective judgments open the door to bias, differing opinions about fairness, and appeals, all of which tend to raise controversy. That said, no system is perfectly conflict-free—conflicts can still arise from how rules are written or applied, or from disagreements about fairness beyond the moment of a single call. Overall, greater objectivity in judging generally diminishes conflict, even if it cannot eliminate every dispute.