Tennis Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
54,589 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
http://www.tennis.com/Tennis_World_Blog/entry.asp?ENTRY_ID=813

So here’s some news you might be interested in: I have it from pretty good sources that the upcoming NASDAQ-100 tournament in Miami is going to officially introduce Hawkeye-based instant replay. Right now, it looks like the ATP and WTA have agreed on using it in a discretionary rather than universal way. That is, neither the chair umpire nor any other officials will be monitoring every point and reversing bad calls. There will be a “challenge” system, much like the NFL uses. As I understand it, though, the WTA is fighting for unlimited challenges, while other constituents want to limit players to as few as three unsuccessful challenges per set. Challenges that are upheld will not count against a player.
 

·
Team WTAworld, Senior Member
Joined
·
12,720 Posts
Nice! :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
32,294 Posts
So if the ball is out but you ask umpire to verify on Hawkeye and you're right about she's in, you still have 3 Challenges? :confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,916 Posts
they should'nt have a challenge system.
The umpire's decision should be final though. If a player asks to challenge and the umpire KNOWS the ball was wide or in then the umpire should be able to say "nope you can't challenge the call was good" (this would only be if it was wide by alot or in by alot in case players try to take advantage of the system).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34,218 Posts
Erika_Angel said:
they should'nt have a challenge system.
The umpire's decision should be final though. If a player asks to challenge and the umpire KNOWS the ball was wide or in then the umpire should be able to say "nope you can't challenge the call was good" (this would only be if it was wide by alot or in by alot in case players try to take advantage of the system).
But that wouldn't help the player (except as a delaying tactic). And if she only had 3, why would she waste one on a call where she already knew she wouldn't get a reversal?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,916 Posts
*JR* said:
But that wouldn't help the player (except as a delaying tactic). And if she only had 3, why would she waste one on a call where she already knew she wouldn't get a reversal?
No what I mean is that with a challenge option you are going to have a new dimension to Tennis where the players are going to be hesistant about questioning the calls with hawkeye. They shouldn't have to do this. They should have unlimited calls so even if they arn't sure but think their ball was in, they can still question without worrying that they'll get one of their 3 bad calls taken off them.

But with unlimited you will have players who purposely question calls they know are good just to annoy their oposition. So with the rule that the umpire can decided whether or not to let the hawkeye system make a call, that won't be an issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152,750 Posts
:woohoo: I think it will be great if they use it - but I hope also that they can have unlimited challenges. 3 seems a little stingy - maybe if they made it 5 per set... :dhrug: But I guess they probably wouldn't be challenging that much anyway! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,916 Posts
about fuckin' time.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top