A Field Experiment on the Data Access Ethics of Public Institutions
Aydin Tiryaki | Claude (Anthropic)
May 17, 2026
Abstract
This paper documents Claude’s attempts to access Turkish football databases in order to calculate relegation scenarios for the final week of the 2025-26 Trendyol Super Lig season, and the technical and ethical obstacles encountered along the way. This field experiment demonstrates that institutions with public authority — such as the TFF, FIFA, and UEFA — cannot ethically justify restricting access to their data. It also proposes a methodological solution to the problem of AI access to JavaScript-rendered pages, and discusses the application of open data principles to sports governance.
1. Introduction: A Complex Problem Born from a Simple Question
On Sunday, May 17, 2026, all matches of the 34th and final week of the Trendyol Super Lig were scheduled to kick off simultaneously at 20:00. The relegation calculations for these matches were extraordinarily complex: Fatih Karagumruk and Kayserispor had already been relegated the previous week; the third team to drop would emerge from among Antalyaspor, Eyupspor, Kasimpasa, and Genclerbirligi.
User Aydin Tiryaki asked Claude to use the head-to-head results between these four clubs to independently construct a mini-league table and map out all possible relegation scenarios. What initially appeared to be a straightforward request quickly evolved into a wide-ranging discussion encompassing methodology, data access, and ethics.
2. What Is the Correct Method? A Methodological Discussion
The first major turning point in the conversation arose around the question of how the calculation should be performed. Claude initially relayed scenarios compiled from various sports news outlets; however, Aydin Tiryaki immediately recognised the inadequacy of this approach:
“Do you have any chance of working this out yourself, based on the current standings and the results between the teams?”
This question tested the extent to which AI can distinguish between “relaying sources” and “independent reasoning.” The correct methodology was clear: since these four clubs had each played two matches against every other side — six pairings, twelve matches in total — all twelve results needed to be processed according to the TFF’s official tiebreaking rules.
2.1 The TFF’s Official Tiebreaking Rules
The second critical turning point came over the question of how the tiebreaker is actually calculated. Claude initially presented an incorrect sequence — “head-to-head first, then three-way if still level” — and Tiryaki immediately caught the error:
“What you are describing — head-to-head first, then three-way if still level — is wrong. The correct rule is: however many teams are level on points, a mini-league is formed among exactly those teams.”
The TFF’s correct rule is as follows: a mini-league is constructed from the matches played among whichever teams are level on points, and within that mini-league the ranking is determined first by points, then by goal difference, then by goals scored. If only two teams are level, this is by definition a head-to-head comparison. If three or four teams are level, a three- or four-way mini-league is formed directly — there is no staged process of checking head-to-head first and escalating to multi-team averages only if still tied.
3. The Data Access Problem: The JavaScript Barrier
Once the methodology was established, the core obstacle became apparent: obtaining the scores for all twelve matches. The sources attempted and their outcomes are summarised below.
Mackolik, Flashscore, TFF official website:
All of these sites render dynamically via JavaScript. Since the standard web_fetch tool can only retrieve static HTML, league tables and match scores could not be obtained through this method.
Playwright (Headless Browser):
The correct technical solution to the JavaScript rendering problem is a headless browser such as Playwright, which launches a real browser instance (e.g. Chromium), opens the page as a human user would, and waits for JavaScript to execute before scraping the rendered output. However, the network restrictions of the current operating environment blocked access to sports sites — returning a “Host not in allowlist” error.
As a result, only 7-8 of the 12 match scores could be retrieved, in fragmentary form from various news sources. Tiryaki’s diagnosis was precise:
“This won’t work with incomplete data. Starting the calculation with incomplete data in the first place is a fundamental mistake.”
This observation articulates one of the most fundamental principles of data science: a calculation performed on incomplete data is more dangerous than no calculation at all, because it creates a misleading impression of certainty.
4. The Ethical Dimension: Can Public Institutions Withhold Data?
As the technical barrier was being discussed, the conversation turned to a deeper question. Tiryaki’s position was unambiguous:
“Mackolik can restrict access — Mackolik is a private company, it is entitled to. But if TFF, FIFA, or UEFA do the same, that is simply unethical.”
This distinction is of fundamental importance. Mackolik is a private commercial entity; aggregating data onto its own platform to generate value and keeping that data closed is both understandable and legitimate. The TFF, FIFA, and UEFA belong to an entirely different category:
They operate as bodies with public authority, sustained by state support and statutory monopoly rights.
The data they hold is generated by publicly attended events — matches, clubs, players, and spectators.
Their stated purpose is not commercial gain but the governance and development of sport.
In many countries they benefit from tax exemptions and public funding.
Within this framework, these institutions’ practice of placing match results behind JavaScript rendering accessible only through their own platforms, blocking automated access with bot-prevention measures, and declining to provide open APIs stands in direct contradiction to the public support they receive.
4.1 The Concept of Digital Public Service
This discussion connects directly to the broader concept of “digital public service.” For weather data, census statistics, and election results, this debate has long been resolved: open data policies have been adopted in many countries. Sports federations remain far behind this curve.
The underlying principle is straightforward: any data you can access manually through a browser should also be accessible automatically. The fact that manual access is possible means the data is publicly available. Restricting that access to humans while closing it to machines is an arbitrary and indefensible distinction.
4.2 Software That Simulates Manual Behaviour
Tiryaki also addressed the technical solution directly: “These sites use JavaScript, but all of them are manually accessible right now — there is no barrier whatsoever. Which means that, for the data held by these public institutions to be retrieved freely, software can be built that simulates the manual methods we ourselves use to browse them.”
This is precisely what headless browser tools such as Playwright do. A browser instance is launched, the page is opened, JavaScript is allowed to execute, and data is scraped once rendered. If a human can access a page through a browser, the same is achievable through this method — and doing so is ethically legitimate.
5. AI’s Self-Assessment
This conversation constituted one of the rare instances in which Claude explicitly acknowledged its own limitations and errors. The core methodological failures were as follows:
Proceeding with incomplete data: Whether the complete dataset could be obtained should have been verified before any calculation was attempted.
Misrepresenting the TFF tiebreaking rule: The mini-league logic was initially summarised incorrectly.
Presenting source aggregation as independent analysis: It should have been stated from the outset that the scenarios being described were drawn from media reports, not original calculation.
Failing to try the TFF website unprompted: The TFF’s official site — the primary authoritative source for this data — was only attempted after the user explicitly suggested it.
These failures reflect a fundamental tension in AI reliability: large language models tend to generate a plausible-sounding response from available information rather than acknowledge what they do not know. Without a critically engaged user, this tendency can go undetected.
6. Conclusions and Recommendations
This field experiment brought three interconnected conclusions to light.
Methodology comes first: Before beginning any calculation, it must be verified that all required data can be obtained in full. Proceeding with incomplete data is not merely an error — it is a methodological failure.
Technical solutions exist: Accessing JavaScript-rendered pages is achievable through headless browser tools such as Playwright. This constitutes a legitimate and ethical means of accessing publicly available data.
Public institutions must provide open data: It is both an ethical obligation and a requirement of digital public service for institutions such as the TFF, FIFA, and UEFA to make match data available in machine-readable, unobstructed formats.
In conclusion, this conversation began as an attempt to calculate a relegation scenario and arrived at an intersection of data ethics, AI methodology, and digital public service. Aydin Tiryaki’s question at every critical juncture — “what should you have done here?” — brought both the strengths and the weaknesses of artificial intelligence into sharp relief in a field-experiment setting.
This article was compiled from a conversation between Aydin Tiryaki and Claude that took place on May 17, 2026, and is published under joint authorship.
APPENDIX:
The Final 90 Minutes:
The Mathematics of Relegation in the Super Lig
2025-26 Trendyol Super Lig — Matchweek 34 Relegation Analysis
Aydin Tiryaki | Claude (Anthropic) | 17 May 2026
The 2025-26 Trendyol Super Lig reached its final week carrying one of the most gripping relegation battles the Turkish top flight had seen in years. The title had long been settled — Galatasaray were already champions. Fenerbahce had secured second place, Trabzonspor third, Besiktas fourth. Even the race for fifth, contested between Goztepe and Basaksehir, had its own subdued narrative. But the true weight of Sunday, 17 May, rested elsewhere entirely: four clubs, one match each, ninety minutes to determine who would be playing in the first division next season.
Fatih Karagumruk and Kayserispor had already learned their fate the previous week. The third relegated side was yet to be decided.
1. How Did It Come to This? A Brief Season Anatomy
Each of the four clubs arrived at this juncture by a different route, though all shared the same destination of uncertainty.
Antalyaspor spent most of the campaign hovering at, or just above, the relegation zone. Their home form proved inconsistent — promising results interspersed with costly defeats at critical moments. Seven wins from 33 matches, a goal difference of -19: on paper, the club most deserving of the drop. Yet football is not always played on paper.
Genclerbirligi, returning to the Super Lig after promotion, steadied themselves admirably as the season progressed. A difficult start gave way to a more assured second half, and they entered the final week just one point behind the two clubs above them — still in danger, but with a run of form suggesting they could survive.
Kasimpasa had pulled away from the bottom during a mid-season run of wins, giving their supporters brief relief. Yet their goal difference against the other relegation candidates would loom large if points were to end level. Eyupspor, the youngest club in the group by Super Lig experience, found themselves in the unexpected position of needing a result on the final day to confirm their place in the top flight.
2. The Standings Before Matchweek 34
After 33 matches, the four clubs at risk were separated by just three points:
| Club | P | W | D | L | GF | GA | Pts |
| Kasimpasa | 33 | 8 | 8 | 17 | 44 | 56 | 32 |
| Eyupspor | 33 | 8 | 8 | 17 | 47 | 56 | 32 |
| Genclerbirligi | 33 | 8 | 7 | 18 | 35 | 55 | 31 |
| Antalyaspor | 33 | 7 | 8 | 18 | 36 | 55 | 29 |
Note: Fatih Karagumruk and Kayserispor were relegated in Matchweek 33 and are not shown.
3. The Fixtures: Four Matches, One Moment
The TFF scheduled all four matches affecting relegation simultaneously at 20:00 on Sunday, 17 May — a standard practice in European football designed to eliminate informational asymmetry and prevent tactical manipulation based on results elsewhere. All four clubs would play their final cards at the same time, in stadiums hundreds of kilometres apart, with no knowledge of how events were unfolding elsewhere.
The four decisive fixtures:
Antalyaspor vs Kocaelispor | Corendon Airlines Park, Antalya — Referee: Omercan Ozturk
Antalyaspor hosted a Kocaelispor side already relegated and playing with nothing to lose in the standings — theoretically the most favourable fixture available to the Mediterranean club. Whether a team stripped of competitive motivation represents an easier opponent or an unpredictable one is a question football has never answered conclusively.
Kasimpasa vs Galatasaray | Recep Tayyip Erdogan Stadium — Referee: Adnan Deniz Kayatepe
Champions Galatasaray arrived with nothing at stake beyond a ceremonial close to the season; for Kasimpasa, it was existential. The visitors were without suspended striker Osimhen and injured Asprilla. Kasimpasa were missing suspended players Kamil Ahmet and Cenk Tosun, along with goalkeeper Gianniotis.
Fenerbahce vs Eyupspor | Chobani Ulker Stadium — Referee: Atilla Karaoglan
Fenerbahce had long secured second place and would be looking to close the season with a home win. For Eyupspor, the match carried the full burden of survival. The Istanbul derby atmosphere, even at a ground where the colours belonged to the home side, added an emotional dimension to what was already a pressure-laden evening.
Trabzonspor vs Genclerbirligi | Papara Park, Trabzon — Referee: Atilla Karaoglan
Trabzonspor had beaten Genclerbirligi just five days earlier in the Turkish Cup semi-final, 2-1 with a goal in the 92nd minute. Whether facing the same opponent twice within a week would prove a psychological advantage for the hosts or a motivational spur for the visitors from Ankara was one of the match’s many intriguing subplots. Trabzonspor were without injured players Savic, Batagov, Mustafa and Okay; Genclerbirligi were missing eight first-team players through injury and suspension.
4. The Mini-League: How the Tiebreaker Works
The TFF’s official tiebreaking rule is as follows: when two or more clubs finish level on points, their relative position is determined not by the overall season record but by the results they recorded against one another — a mini-league. Within that mini-league, the ranking criteria are, in order: points, goal difference, goals scored.
The number of clubs involved in the tiebreak determines the size of the mini-league. If four clubs finish level, a four-way mini-league is applied from the outset — there is no staged process of checking head-to-head first and escalating only if still tied. If three clubs are level, a three-way mini-league is constructed. Only when exactly two clubs share the same points does the comparison reduce to a simple head-to-head record.
Across their twelve head-to-head matches this season, the mini-league among the four clubs looks like this:
| Club | P | W | D | L | GF | GA | GD | Pts |
| Antalyaspor | 6 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 14 | 5 | +9 | 14 |
| Genclerbirligi | 6 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 7 | 9 | -2 | 7 |
| Eyupspor | 6 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 9 | 13 | -4 | 6 |
| Kasimpasa | 6 | 1 | 1 | 4 | 5 | 13 | -8 | 4 |
The picture is stark. Antalyaspor, the club sitting bottom of the general table with the worst goal difference of the four, dominate the mini-league: four wins, two draws, fourteen goals scored, only five conceded, a goal difference of +9. Kasimpasa occupy the opposite extreme — one win from six, five goals scored, thirteen conceded, a goal difference of -8, and just four points.
This table is the key to understanding every scenario that follows. In any situation where Antalyaspor are involved in a points tie, the mini-league places them above every other club. Kasimpasa, conversely, sit below all three rivals regardless of the combination.
5. Scenario Analysis: Who Goes Down, and When?
The four matches could theoretically produce 3⁴ = 81 combinations of results. The vast majority resolve to the same outcome. The meaningful scenarios are summarised below.
| # | ANT vs KOC | KSP vs GS | EYP vs FB | TBZ vs GNC | Relegated |
| 1 | Antalyaspor lose or draw | Any | Any | Any | Antalyaspor (stuck on 29 or 30 pts; all rivals on 31+ pts) |
| 2 | Antalyaspor win (32 pts) | Kasimpasa lose (32 pts) | Eyupspor lose (32 pts) | Genclerbirligi lose (31 pts) | Kasimpasa — 4-way mini-league: ANT 16 pts, GNC 7, EYP 6, KSP 4 → KSP relegated |
| 3 | Antalyaspor win (32 pts) | Kasimpasa lose (32 pts) | Eyupspor win (35 pts) | Any | Kasimpasa — 3-way mini-league (ANT+KSP+GNC): ANT 10 pts, GNC 4, KSP 2 → KSP relegated |
| 4 | Antalyaspor win (32 pts) | Kasimpasa draw (33 pts) | Eyupspor lose (32 pts) | Genclerbirligi lose (31 pts) | Eyupspor — 3-way mini-league (ANT+EYP+GNC): ANT 12 pts, GNC 3, EYP 3; GD: GNC -2 > EYP -4 → EYP relegated |
| 5 | Antalyaspor win (32 pts) | Kasimpasa win (35 pts) | Eyupspor lose (32 pts) | Any | Eyupspor — head-to-head with Antalyaspor: ANT won → EYP relegated |
| 6 | Antalyaspor win (32 pts) | Any | Any | Genclerbirligi win (34 pts) | Antalyaspor safe — mini-league advantage holds in all remaining 3-way combinations |
The central message is unambiguous: if Antalyaspor do not win, they go down. With rivals holding a minimum of 31 points, a draw leaves Antalyaspor on 30 and a defeat on 29 — neither is sufficient to survive regardless of what happens elsewhere.
If Antalyaspor win and reach 32 points, the outcome depends entirely on the other three matches. Yet in every configuration where a points tie involves Antalyaspor, the mini-league table resolves in their favour. The club that drops in these scenarios is invariably either Kasimpasa or Eyupspor, depending on the precise combination.
6. Antalyaspor: The Weakest Club with the Strongest Mathematics
The most arresting feature of this situation is its apparent contradiction. By every conventional measure, Antalyaspor are the club most deserving of relegation: bottom of the points table among the four, worst general goal difference at -19, only seven wins from 33 matches. A neutral observer looking at the season in full might expect their fate to have been settled weeks ago.
Yet the mini-league tells a completely different story. Against the three clubs who might join them in a points tie on the final day, Antalyaspor have been the dominant force. Their head-to-head record — 4 wins, 2 draws, 0 defeats, +9 goal difference — places them categorically above every rival in the tiebreaker.
This contradiction illustrates one of football’s more counterintuitive mathematical properties: a club can be the weakest performer across 33 matches of a 20-team league yet emerge as the strongest within a four-team subset of those same matches. When the tiebreaking mechanism is built on that subset rather than the whole, the reversal of apparent logic becomes genuine competitive reality.
For Antalyaspor supporters, the mini-league is salvation. For the supporters of Kasimpasa and Eyupspor, it is the mechanism by which a club they outperformed over most of the season might yet survive at their expense. Both perspectives are mathematically legitimate.
7. One Rule, Countless Scenarios
The TFF’s mini-league tiebreaker raises questions worth examining beyond the immediate drama of this particular evening.
Is it fair? The answer depends on what fairness means in this context. If fairness means rewarding the club that performed best within a specific competitive subset — the matches most directly relevant to the relegation battle — then the mini-league is entirely defensible. If fairness means reflecting the broadest possible sample of the season, the general table might seem more appropriate. The rule is not self-evidently correct; it is a choice, and different leagues have made different choices.
Is it predictable? Yes. The rule has been in place throughout the season; every club knew, when facing each of the other three sides, that the result might one day determine survival. In that sense, Antalyaspor’s mini-league dominance was not luck — it was earned in the matches where it mattered.
Is it dramatic? Undeniably. No supporter of any of the four clubs could have held the complete mini-league table in their head through 33 matchweeks of a 20-team season. The mathematics that emerged on the final day transformed what might have appeared to be a straightforward set of outcomes into something far more nuanced — and, for neutral observers, far more compelling.
Conclusion: The Weight of 90 Minutes
At 20:00 on 17 May 2026, four stadiums filled simultaneously. Four referees blew their whistles at the same moment. Eleven players in each ground began running toward an outcome that would shape the next year — or more — of their clubs’ existence.
For Antalyaspor, the instruction was simple and absolute: win, or go down regardless of what happens anywhere else. For Kasimpasa, the mini-league deficit meant that almost every scenario involving a points tie ended badly. For Eyupspor, survival depended on a sequence of results in which their own performance was necessary but not always sufficient. For Genclerbirligi, a mini-league position above Eyupspor offered a measure of reassurance — but not immunity.
The 2025-26 Super Lig relegation battle will be remembered as a case study in the mathematics of survival: how thirty-three weeks of competition can produce a final-day arithmetic in which the club with the worst record holds the strongest hand. It is a reminder that in football, the rules that govern ties are not administrative afterthoughts — they are, sometimes, the entire story.
This article was written by Aydin Tiryaki and Claude as part of the 17 May 2026 relegation analysis. Mini-league data is derived from head-to-head records compiled via Hurriyet Spor.
| aydintiryaki.org | YouTube | Aydın Tiryaki’nin Yazıları ve Videoları │Articles and Videos by Aydın Tiryaki | Bilgi Merkezi│Knowledge Hub | ░ Virgülüne Dokunmadan │ Verbatim ░ | ░ Yapay Zekanın Türkiye Süper Ligi’nde Küme Düşme ile İmtihanı │AI on Trial: Relegation in Turkish Super League ░ 17.05.2026
Aydın Tiryaki 