System works fine on the whole, and/but unfortunately, this recent AO has shown that nowadays it's even very necessary
- a lot of those line judges were in despate need of a trip to SpecSavers Inc.
I say yes only because of examples like the Aussie Open final where Rafa and Nole were able to successfully overrule at least 20 incorrect calls with a challenge. If the lines people are missing up to 20 calls in a Grand Slam final (not to mention that some were horribly called out. One ball called long was actually on the inside of the line), the hawk eye is necessary to correct the human error. Although that was an extreme situation and the Aussie Open should be reassessing who its hiring.
BTW, watching the AO final, my BF came up with a rather intriguing plan to change the system: in stead of players having a challenge taken away from them when their challenge is wrong, perhaps an idea to give them an extra
challenge whenever they turn out to be right?
I LOL'ed at the idea of having the ump call out "Mr. Djokovic has 22 challenges remaining"
at a certain stage of the match.