As fans of sports are usually also the users of an app to live stream games and follow scores, they form an opinion about the app very quickly, even before the first whistle blows. Users can be annoyed by a delay of 18 seconds for a goal alert, by the source that is mentioned for individual statistics or by the pricing information of the subscription. Online shoppers are familiar with these “scaled down” versions of their normal checks for trust. A fan comparing a match tracker with onlinecasinoer will not read the same content, but the trust test feels familiar: who runs it, what is verified, and what happens when something breaks.
Latency has become a public score
The moment it happens is key in live sports. A fan will generally compare alerts with the TV broadcast, local stadium announcements, posts from X accounts that the fan follows, and group chats with other fans. One delayed push notification is usually forgivable, but 3-4 delayed calls in a match can lead to the app being deleted by the fan. A look at the update rate and data supplier of live sports apps helps to immediately establish whether they are reliable. The simple statement of the update rate of an app (e.g. “data updated every 5 seconds”) is far more effective than the addition of a fancy logo or badge. Fans have come to expect near-live coverage of football matches and therefore an application that provides coverage that is 45 seconds late is immediately perceived to be of very poor quality. Fans may even turn off score updates for a stream in order to avoid spoilers whilst the match is in progress. Allowing the user to switch off score updates for a stream in progress is part of respecting the user’s time.
Source labels separate facts from noise
How trustworthy is the score app’s chain of custody? Does a red card come from the official league’s official feed, or from the app’s own local stadium scouts? Or has it just been scraped from some other social media site? Sourcing information helps to reduce the arguments one can have with other users of scores. Layering up information about matches such as lineups and player statistics (e.g. SofaScore, FotMob) can help users to understand the basis upon which scores and other statistics have been calculated. To handle the complex nature of sports updates, labels should provide sufficient information to deal with equivocal or uncertain sports updates. For example, when a VAR check is in progress, an abandoned match is announced or a penalty shootout is in progress, a trustworthy app would mark the relevant events as ‘under review’ and update the app’s log accordingly, with a delay of up to 20 seconds.
Privacy screens are part of the scoreboard
Why apps ask for permission to use your data matters. Fans will understand that a football score app asking for location in order to show local kickoff times is reasonable enough, but asking for access to their contact list is not. List the possibilities: send push notifications for a team or for a competition, for upcoming matches, for matches in progress. Provide clear information regarding the yearly subscription charge, such as that it will be exactly the same as the 7-day free trial period. While payments, device IDs and viewing rights are all interrelated for sports streaming services such as DAZN, ESPN or even the apps from the football leagues themselves, there is also need for control measures to prevent account sharing. While fans are willing to accept some level of hassle here, they do not want any surprise. A prior notification in the app is therefore better than a surprise lockout during the stoppage in a match that the fan has paid for in full to watch.
Reviews beat star ratings when money is involved
A rating of 5 stars doesn’t mean much if you cannot see the latest complaints from other users (e.g. Chromecast not working, no replays available, regional matches locked for viewing). Even the highest average rating (4.7 in this case) for last year will not fill you with confidence when paying £29.99 for a one-month subscription. In the app stores we make a distinction between useful and less useful reviews. A review by an iPhone user in Ireland is of more value to you than a review by an Android TV user in Canada. How a company responds to complaints is just as important as how it sets out to solve problems. Supporting evidence for complaints lodged within the last 3 months helps to establish that someone has actually looked at the issue and sorted it out (e.g. “Napoli replays now working again – 22:10 CET”).
Interface honesty shows in tiny choices
Before you read the terms and conditions of a service provided through an app download, the design of the app itself should convey the level of trust that you will have with the service provided by that app. This includes clearly displaying the cost of the service, the billing period and the instructions on how to cancel your subscription in relation to the button to subscribe. There is a temptation to clutter the score-tracking app with other information of interest to the fan. Even when personalizing content for a user it’s important to use restraint. Keep the home page of the app simple and free from such clutter.
What the next download decision looks like
Fans look at the developer name, last update date, required permissions, average rating, number of reviews and review dates to see if they are current. They also like to see what refund process is in place in case the app does not function as advertised for them. Publish your data partners. Explain delays to updates. Show fans blackout restrictions before they pay for the service. Testing a new app for a low-stakes match, then viewing payment pages and support replies for the app, can give fans a good idea of what to expect for bigger matches.
