[PetraReeMona]

I thought I heard Simon Reed say that hawkeye cost the tournament £100,000 a week to have there. No many tournaments can afford that

[Melange]

Cost is obviously not important when you can install it at every tournament

[Cooper96]

Well yeah obviously, but that's why only all new tournaments should have to have it. I do think it's ridiculous that not all tournaments have it, but I understand why they don't. I'm not saying that all the current ones who can't afford it should be cancelled. That's fair, isn't it?

[Third Mall]

It's not corrupt. The officiating in Paris at least has been consistently bad.

[stromatolite]

In my experience, anybody watching a match actively looking for any kind of hometown bias is going to *find* it. There are bad (or at least contentious) calls in any match, and if you're looking for instances of such calls that favor the home player, these are the ones that will leap out at you, whereas you will tend to overlook the calls that go the other way.

And purely based on chance there will be individual matches in which the contentious calls do overridingly favor the home player. It makes no sense to talk about bias unless there is a systematic difference between home and away players throughout the tournament.

[Maria rocks]

Originally Posted by Patrick345

I honestly can´t remember, but you watch events like Paris or Copenhagen that don´t have hawkeye technology and the hometown bias is off the charts. Wickmayer got screwed over by a linesman calling a ball out at her breakpoint for 5-5 atht was clearly in and would have put Wickmayer rin great position. And it wasn´t the first time in the match it happened.

Wickmayer got screwed over on points a number of times, Was shocking really. Not taking anything away from Kristina's fabulous win but something not right about those calls. Makes you realise how good hawkeye is really.

[KatjaS]

Mladenovic got lucky with the line calls two matches in a row, but I'm not sure I would call it corruption. It's really weird that Linz as an International can afford Hawkeye yet the Premier in Paris can't though.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by LUVMIRZA

Mistakes tend to happen often

No they're not mistakes.

It can't be honest mistakes if they keep benefiting one side, usually the home side, far more than the other (which is what was the case here: the home player getting almost all the crucial benefit-of-the-doubt calls).

It was a typical case of "homer umpiring" which is a disease not only in tennis but in sports in general.

[Mattographer]

It's difficult to call if someone has a big serve such as John Isner and Andy Roddick "Uhhh, out?"

[bjurra]

Originally Posted by pla

Calling it corrupt is a bit exaggerating. Home bias always existed, and will exist until the technology evolves to a level it will no longer need a linesman. Humans are biased, even at a subconscious level. I am sure the linesmen don't even realise they are doing it. It is as it is- our senses are not perfect, and the analysis of the data they "send" to our brain- even less.

Well said.

I think many chair umpires forget to overrule in non-hawkeye events because they have gotten a bit lazy.

[Chaosm21]

Of course they make mistakes, but in general umpires and linesmen do a good job, so I doubt they are corrupt
Players often have the ball nearly on their feet and are still wrong, so I really don`t understand how the umpires can overrule from their chair which is around 13 meters away. They must have great eyes

[Melange]

Originally Posted by Chaosm21

Of course they make mistakes, but in general umpires and linesmen do a good job, so I doubt they are corrupt
Players often have the ball nearly on their feet and are still wrong, so I really don`t understand how the umpires can overrule from their chair which is around 13 meters away. They must have great eyes

The ball was on the other side of the court but still quite near the umpire. They have a better view because all they have to do is sit there while the players are moving

[Melange]

Originally Posted by bjurra

Well said.

I think many chair umpires forget to overrule in non-hawkeye events because they have gotten a bit lazy.

They dont want to overrule and be proven wrong by the replay so they just sit there and do nothing. Same with all sports which are using video technology, the umpires get worse

[Sgt.Timmykinz]

Maybe there should be a system, whereby the linesmen get reviewed on their performance and accuracy after an event is finished and if someone is seen to have made 3 or more errors then they are struck off. Obviously at slams and other events where there is hawkeye this can done immediately, with a linesman dismissed after 2 errors in a match (meaning their call was overturned by hawkeye) and then one more mistake during the tournament and they are struck off/demoted to challenger level.

[Jane Lane]

Originally Posted by Sgt.Timmykinz

Maybe there should be a system, whereby the linesmen get reviewed on their performance and accuracy after an event is finished and if someone is seen to have made 3 or more errors then they are struck off. Obviously at slams and other events where there is hawkeye this can done immediately, with a linesman dismissed after 2 errors in a match (meaning their call was overturned by hawkeye) and then one more mistake during the tournament and they are struck off/demoted to challenger level.

Linesmen and umpires are evaluated every event; you need to apply to be selected and they look at your work record.