Why doesn't RG use the challenge system? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Why doesn't RG use the challenge system?

ChampionshipPoints
05-29-2012, 01:45 AM
I've always wondered...:confused: They seem to have the cameras already in place on some of the courts. All the other Grand Slams use it but RG.
Of course, the ball leaves a mark on the clay and that makes it possible for the umpire to check whether the ball is in or out, but errors can occur and the umpire wouldn't have to leave his/her chair.
The funny thing is that even after the umpire checks the mark, they often show the camera shot. What if the latter is different from the umpire's interpretation?
I think it would make life easier - and avoid potential conflicts - at RG if they used the challenge system there. At least, RG would be on par with the other Slams. What do you think?

156mphserve
05-29-2012, 01:47 AM
search function is your friend

Topspindoctor
05-29-2012, 01:50 AM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.

Sri
05-29-2012, 02:29 AM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.
To take that notion further, we should have futuristic, intelligent court surfaces that sense whether the ball has landed and knows where we are in the match. When a ball is "out", it automatically changes colors or uses some other form of visual notification and auto-updates the score.

Of course this maybe 5-10-15 years in to the future.

Freak3yman84
05-29-2012, 02:32 AM
To take that notion further, we should have futuristic, intelligent court surfaces that sense whether the ball has landed and knows where we are in the match. When a ball is "out", it automatically changes colors or uses some other form of visual notification and auto-updates the score.

Of course this maybe 5-10-15 years in to the future.

First we should probably cure cancer....

paseo
05-29-2012, 02:32 AM
To take that notion further, we should have futuristic, intelligent court surfaces that sense whether the ball has landed and knows where we are in the match. When a ball is "out", it automatically changes colors or uses some other form of visual notification and auto-updates the score.

Of course this maybe 5-10-15 years in to the future.

Today's technology can already do this. But, the cost would be too great. It's way cheaper the way it is now.

Mountaindewslave
05-29-2012, 02:33 AM
are you on crack bro on clay it's pretty easy to see when a ball is out or not and fresh marks are not hard to distinguish. this is like asking why we don't have to call an astrologist to make sure we are seeing the sun in the sky, like versus asking one about the star constellations...

on clay the ball marks are proof and actually more reliable than hawkeye, I don't recall many instances where players have continued to argue about marks after taking a look themself.

dumb question...

Sri
05-29-2012, 02:34 AM
First we should probably cure cancer....
Absolutely. Scientists and funding agencies should get their priorities right. But this shouldn't stop people from wanting better in every other sphere as well.

Sri
05-29-2012, 02:34 AM
Today's technology can already do this. But, the cost would be too great. It's way cheaper the way it is now.
I guess so. Eventually the economics will make sense!

Mountaindewslave
05-29-2012, 02:34 AM
I've always wondered...:confused: They seem to have the cameras already in place on some of the courts. All the other Grand Slams use it but RG.
Of course, the ball leaves a mark on the clay and that makes it possible for the umpire to check whether the ball is in or out, but errors can occur and the umpire wouldn't have to leave his/her chair.
The funny thing is that even after the umpire checks the mark, they often show the camera shot. What if the latter is different from the umpire's interpretation?
I think it would make life easier - and avoid potential conflicts - at RG if they used the challenge system there. At least, RG would be on par with the other Slams. What do you think?

and seriously how much confrontation have you witnessed about ball mark mis-calls on clay? it hardly ever happens

Mongoose
05-29-2012, 02:48 AM
because u can see marks on clay.

hope this helps.

Kat_YYZ
05-29-2012, 03:14 AM
I don't think the OP's question is dumb. The fact that they have installed the system (cameras, computers, etc) just so the TV broadcasters can have their own unofficial Hawkeye replays is what makes the question interesting. If the TV broadcasters were hoping to create controversy by showing the umpires are wrong and that the ball mark is not always correct, it seems they've failed.

In a time of austerity, who paid to have this technology set up just for the heck of it?

LinkMage
05-29-2012, 03:16 AM
The French are so cheap that RG doesn't even have lights (something even future and challenger tournaments have) and you want them to spend money on HawkEye? :lol:

abraxas21
05-29-2012, 03:30 AM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.

:facepalm: to all of it

ChampionshipPoints
05-29-2012, 08:49 AM
The French are so cheap that RG doesn't even have lights (something even future and challenger tournaments have) and you want them to spend money on HawkEye? :lol:

Well, they already have some cameras installed, since they sometimes show camera shots on TV, after a replay.
BTW, until a couple of years ago, Wimbledon didn't have any lights either.;)

ChampionshipPoints
05-29-2012, 08:59 AM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.

This happens all the time with FIFA. Their stand on this matter is just laughable. It's really shameful that such gross human errors are allowed to happen in football, even at the prestigious World Cup.

If there was a way to get rid of the linespeople in tennis at a reasonable cost, I'd favor that any time over the possibility of human errors.

dazed1
05-29-2012, 09:51 AM
This happens all the time with FIFA. Their stand on this matter is just laughable. It's really shameful that such gross human errors are allowed to happen in football, even at the prestigious World Cup.

If there was a way to get rid of the linespeople in tennis at a reasonable cost, I'd favor that any time over the possibility of human errors.

LOL how do you think FIFA would fix games if there are no "human errors" :wavey:

EliSter
05-29-2012, 09:58 AM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.

That would cost too much and be too complicated. I dont see that happening in future.

Commander Data
05-29-2012, 11:47 AM
More relevant: Why doesn't RG use the blue clay?

Looner
05-29-2012, 12:16 PM
I don't think the OP's question is dumb. The fact that they have installed the system (cameras, computers, etc) just so the TV broadcasters can have their own unofficial Hawkeye replays is what makes the question interesting. If the TV broadcasters were hoping to create controversy by showing the umpires are wrong and that the ball mark is not always correct, it seems they've failed.

In a time of austerity, who paid to have this technology set up just for the heck of it?

Austerity? What austerity? Wimbledon keep raising their prices annually like crazy and people still flood to pay them. If there's one walk of tennis that austerity should NOT be mentioned with, that's the GSs.

hiperborejac
05-29-2012, 12:38 PM
It's stupid. As far as I am concerned Hawk Eye technology should replace umpires/lines judges completely. The game should be as fair as possible and the outcome of a match should not be decided by human error and bias.

I remember watching a football match in 2010, England vs Germany where a goal was not counted because of obvious human error. Tennis is even worse in this regard because every rally has potential to rob a player out of a point.

My opinion is: get rid of linespeople, make every point be decided by Hawkeye.

Hawkeye is not 100% reliable yet. Precision is perfect but it happened several times that computer system fails. I don't know what would happen if a whole match is covered by hawkeye. Also linesmen need to earn for their lives :p