An automatic line calling system that would make all the calls would be great.
However the system they are proposing is where a player gets two challenges per set.
A player challenges a call they review it and show it on screen as entertainment. They are looking to add entertainment to the game.
I am not sure if they are propsing that a player stop play or if they can go back to any point in a rally?
In any sport you have the players and officials making sure that the rules are obeyed and enforced.
I do not believe that a player should participate in the officiating function of a game.
a player should concentrate totally on playing the game as well as possible.
Having a player participate in officiating will detract players to various degreess from their prime function of performing in a game as well as possible.
Bad line calls were unfair. However this system adds a whole new ability required by a player to win a game. It has nothing to do with the ability to perform the sport.
This will be very unfair to some players. Especially to those players who do not have many people assisting them.
Will they have a good asssistant or a bad one?
The main reason for adding it is to add another type of entertainment to the sport. They think it will allow the spectators in the stadium and on tv to be more involved.
They are viewing sport as entertainment and are managing it on that level.
I wish people would remember the key difference between sport and entertainment.
Sport is entertaining.
The main premise of a game is to try to win with in a set of rules.
Some players are great some are poor.
At the top of any sport we get the best.
Why is sport different from other entertainment?
It is unpredictable. It is suprising. sometimes boring. sometimes great. sometimes dramatic. But it is not staged to a script.
the participants try to win the game within the rules.
They do not try to entertain.
They may be entertaining because of their great play and simply being who they are. The stress of participating in a game shows us their emotions or ways of handling things.
We the sports fans previlege to be spectators and share the agony of defeat or glory of a win.
I hate it when other things take away from it.
* Each player will receive two challenges per set to review line calls.
* If the player is correct with a challenge, then the player retains the same number of challenges.
* If the player is incorrect with a challenge, then one of the challenges is lost.
* During a tie-break game in any set, each player will receive one additional challenge.
* Challenges may not be carried over from one set to another.
I must admit I haven't read an arguement expressed in the manner that you have written it Frank. It makes me think with a different perspective, that's for sure. I guess we'll just have to see how it plays out, now that it appears that it will be used. I hope that the system does more good than harm. Hopefully players will not develop gamemanship ideas from this new system, as you propose, although I can totally see that happening with some players. And if players are only allowed two over rules, what happens if both over rules were found to be incorrect...then what? No more overrules and the players and audience are left knowing that two bad calls were made, with certainty? Hmm...
why do you say that the main reason is to add entertainment? The main reason is that the sport will be fairer than it is now. Nothing more disappointing than losing an important point because of a bad call when you've actually won it. The fact that players can challenge these bad calls doesn't take anything away from the excitement of the sport.
I agree with Frank. Using the technology is a good idea but I don't think the challenge system is any good. The chair umpire should be the only one to decide weather to use the system or not.
It works fine that way on clay : the umpire checks the mark if the player asks him to. He doesn't have to do it but there is no limit to the number of mark checks. It would make more sense and be more fair to use the technology this way and stick to tennis rules rather than creating this ridiculous and unfair challenge system.
I wonder if you have actually seen the challenge system in action? I have at the Hopman Cup. There is hardly any delay at all, it takes about 2 secs to come up. Even if someone wanted to use it for gamesmanship, it would not disrupt anything.
The challenge system is to make the game fairer, not to add entertainment. There is an unlimited number of correct challenges, but only two incorrect challenges are allowed to prevent gamesmanship. It will work well.
Yes but the player should not have the ability to force the umpire to check a call. The system of checking marks has worked sice clay tennis has existed and it is perfectly fair and accepted by everyone.
The new technology should be used the same way. It would be faster and more accurate than the clay system. There is absolutely no need for a challenge system.