Writing Task 2: Discussion (Both Views) Essay: Question 10
Syllabus W.task2
In many sports, important decisions are increasingly made using video-replay technology rather than by on-field referees alone. Some welcome this, while others think decisions should stay with human officials.
Discuss both these views and give your own opinion.
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience. Write at least 250 words.
Show worked solution Hide worked solution
Worked solution
Examiner notes: why this is a band 9 response
Task Response
The introduction paraphrases both positions and states a clear, qualified position (“video review only for a narrow set of clear, factual decisions”) that is sustained and reinforced through to the conclusion. Both views are developed with comparable depth and dedicated evidence, the goal-line technology example and the disputed rugby tackle, and the essay explicitly weighs one against the other rather than presenting them as isolated, unconnected paragraphs.
Coherence & Cohesion
Topic sentences make the two-sided structure immediately visible (“Supporters of expanded video review argue that…”, “Critics counter that…”), and the participle clause “illustrating that some calls involve judgement no camera angle can resolve” explicitly ties the rugby example back to the paragraph’s claim. The conclusion’s “since this preserves both…” echoes and justifies the position stated in the introduction, giving the essay a clear, unified structure.
Lexical Resource
Vocabulary is sophisticated yet natural for the topic (“marginally offside”, “correctable error”, “strips referees of the authority and rhythm”). The essay varies its reference to the two approaches without repeating “video review” or “human officials” mechanically in every sentence, and collocations such as “protects the integrity of a result” and “reach different conclusions” are used with complete accuracy.
Grammatical Range & Accuracy
A wide range of complex grammar is controlled accurately, including a defining relative clause (“margins of only a few centimetres that no assistant referee could plausibly have judged…”), a modal-perfect construction, and a concessive opening clause in the final paragraph balancing what technology offers against what human officiating still provides. There are no errors of tense, agreement or article use anywhere in the response.
Common pitfalls specific to this task
See commonMistakes above: on this higher-difficulty prompt, the most damaging failure is developing the pro-technology view fully while giving the human-officiating view only a token mention, which fails to discuss both views with comparable depth as the task requires.