U.S. Open Series Events Will Use Hawk-Eye [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

U.S. Open Series Events Will Use Hawk-Eye

smucav
06-08-2006, 08:40 PM
http://www.sportsmediainc.com/tennisweek/index.cfm?func=showarticle&newsid=15467&bannerregion=U.S. Open Series Events Will Use Hawk-Eye
By Tennis Week
06/09/2006

The U.S. Open Series will welcome a new player quick enough to cover all of the lines without moving from its stationary spot. The USTA today announced that the Hawk-Eye electronic line-calling technology, along with a player challenge system, will be used during the U.S. Open Series, the ten summer tournaments that are linked to the U.S. Open.

The announcement arrives three months after the USTA announced the 2006 U.S. Open will become the first Grand Slam tennis tournament to utilize line-calling technology and the player challenge system on Arthur Ashe Stadium and Louis Armstrong stadium courts (Instant Replay Will Soon Be A Major Player).

"Instant replay has proven to enhance officiating for players, while adding to the excitement and intrigue for fans and television viewers," said Arlen Kantarian, Chief Executive, Professional Tennis, USTA. "This initiative was developed in partnership with our friends at the ATP and the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, and we look forward to a consistent system that will benefit players, fans, and the entire sport."

At all U.S. Open Series tournaments, the on-court player challenge system will remain as follows:

* 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 his/her challenges is lost
* During a tiebreak game in any set, each player will receive one additional challenge
* Challenges may not be carried over from one set to another

Once a player challenges a line call, an official replay will be provided simultaneously to the television broadcast and in-stadium video boards, allowing players, officials, on-site fans and television viewers the opportunity to see the live results of a player challenge. Hawk-Eye made its North American tournament debut at the Nasdaq-100 Open on Key Biscayne where players challenged 161 calls in the 59 matches played on stadium court. Of the 161 challenges, 53 calls were reversed as a result of a player challenge. The system received positive reviews from players, fans and TV viewers.

The implementation of line calling technology at all U.S. Open Series tournaments is the result of a collaborative effort between the USTA, ATP, Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, the tournaments and U.S. Open Series broadcasters, including CBS, NBC and ESPN2.

"It was clear to us all in Miami that electronic line calling adds to the entertainment both in the stadiums and on television," said ATP Executive Chairman and President Etienne de Villiers. "To be able to showcase this enhancement every week during the summer through the U.S. Open Series is a tremendous opportunity for tennis."

ezekiel
06-08-2006, 08:48 PM
I am in favour of technology

Breakaway
06-08-2006, 08:50 PM
That's good I think. :D

WF4EVER
06-08-2006, 09:27 PM
I was wondering what the purpose was of having this sytem and not using it. It was used in Miami and that was it.

Conita
06-08-2006, 09:37 PM
i like the hawk-eye
its coooooooooooooool
xD

LoveFifteen
06-08-2006, 09:37 PM
It's an excellent system, and it's a hell of a lot faster than the "challenge system" in place on clay.

Deboogle!.
06-08-2006, 09:40 PM
They said months ago that it would be used for the USO series and the USO as long as everything went well at Miami. So it's not a surprise but glad to see it confirmed anyway.

rofe
06-08-2006, 09:45 PM
I am a fan of the technology but not the way it has been implemented because it completely undermines the way that technology should be used. The challenge system is worse than not having the technology at all. I hope the players realize it once it is used more and the union gets it implemented the right way.

Deboogle!.
06-08-2006, 09:46 PM
I am a fan of the technology but not the way it has been implemented because it completely undermines the way that technology should be used. The challenge system is worse than not having the technology at all. I hope the players realize it once it is used more and the union gets it implemented the right way.Someone's been listening to Mary Carillo lately! :p j/k but I basically agree.

rofe
06-08-2006, 09:53 PM
Someone's been listening to Mary Carillo lately! :p j/k but I basically agree.

:lol: Yeah, I remember her saying that during TMS Miami.

Deboogle!.
06-08-2006, 10:01 PM
:lol: Yeah, I remember her saying that during TMS Miami.She's said it a few times during RG too :p

scoobs
06-08-2006, 10:11 PM
Well I haven't had the pleasure of Mary Carillo but I sorta agree. Like Feds, I'm just not sure about the way it's being implemented right now. I mean, do we want accurate line calls or do we want audience participation and hit-and-miss calling.

Apparently we want audience participation and the possibility of bad calls being allowed to stand even though we can now see for certain the call was bad.#

Yet when they tried allowing every call reviewed last year at the seniors event they tried it at, it was apparently a total bore. So I don't know. Maybe it'll settle down and when nearly every tournament is using it on its showcourts (including the French - I don't agree that the ballmarks are infallible) we can really see how it's working out.

KoOlMaNsEaN
06-08-2006, 10:15 PM
Yay! :bounce:

WF4EVER
06-08-2006, 10:31 PM
I am a fan of the technology but not the way it has been implemented because it completely undermines the way that technology should be used. The challenge system is worse than not having the technology at all. I hope the players realize it once it is used more and the union gets it implemented the right way.

Well, I totally agree. What's the use of having the means of fair judgement if it's not used all the time. I think as long as there is uncertainty by the umpire it should be used, not if a player asks for it because if your challenges run out you can see a million wrong calls and can't do shit about it. Useless, I 'd say. Use it when you need it; make it worth all those big bucks you spent on it.

rofe
06-08-2006, 10:47 PM
Well, I totally agree. What's the use of having the means of fair judgement if it's not used all the time. I think as long as there is uncertainty by the umpire it should be used, not if a player asks for it because if your challenges run out you can see a million wrong calls and can't do shit about it. Useless, I 'd say. Use it when you need it; make it worth all those big bucks you spent on it.

Yeah, I follow cricket and similar technology is used the right way. If an umpire is unsure, he asks a third umpire to help him decide using tv cameras and the final decision is made based on that. It takes very little time and is fair to both teams. In tennis terms, the umpire could consult shot spot if he/she is unsure or if the player objects and this would work out very well in my opinion.

LoveFifteen
06-08-2006, 11:13 PM
You guys are looking at it wrong. Under the old system, all bad calls stood. Under this system, all bad calls can be overturned. Remember, you don't lose a challenge if you challenge a bad call. If you're not stupid, you can overturn EVERY SINGLE bad call against you. If you're stupid, you'll waste your two challenges.

Did anyone in Miami actually waste both their challenges (not counting the people who just wanted to try it out for the hell of it)?

LoveFifteen
06-08-2006, 11:16 PM
Well, I totally agree. What's the use of having the means of fair judgement if it's not used all the time. I think as long as there is uncertainty by the umpire it should be used, not if a player asks for it because if your challenges run out you can see a million wrong calls and can't do shit about it. Useless, I 'd say. Use it when you need it; make it worth all those big bucks you spent on it.

You're missing the point that only fools would waste both their challenges. The two challenge limit is designed to keep brats like Coria from challenging everything.

rofe
06-08-2006, 11:27 PM
You're missing the point that only fools would waste both their challenges. The two challenge limit is designed to keep brats like Coria from challenging everything.

No, you are missing the point. If it is done right, a player can object as many times as he or she wants (just like it happens today) but the final decision still rests with the umpire on whether to use shot spot or not. In the challenge system, it is up to the player to remember the challenge count and/or to use it judiciously. That is idiotic since the players need to concentrate on tennis and winning the match.

Johnny Groove
06-08-2006, 11:42 PM
No, you are missing the point. If it is done right, a player can object as many times as he or she wants (just like it happens today) but the final decision still rests with the umpire on whether to use shot spot or not. In the challenge system, it is up to the player to remember the challenge count and/or to use it judiciously. That is idiotic since the players need to concentrate on tennis and winning the match.

2 challenges. if you get it wrong, its 1. if you get it right, its still 2. is it that hard to count? i know not many players went to college, but come on now. If a player thinks a shot is out, they challenge, then they see the result, and they forget it.

but i agree with everyone. this problem is such a catch-22!:banghead: You want to get all the calls right, and a challenge system is good, but then there is a limit, and the strategery of using it, but if you dont, then youre screwed with a bad call, etc. :mad:

But at the end of the day, coria and kiefer will be a crybaby about it, nadal will pick his ass, PHM will choke, roddick will be a mile behind the baseline, safin will destroy a racquet, everyone will be hated on on MTF, Djoko will bounce the ball into Hell, and the world will go on.

rofe
06-08-2006, 11:48 PM
2 challenges. if you get it wrong, its 1. if you get it right, its still 2. is it that hard to count? i know not many players went to college, but come on now. If a player thinks a shot is out, they challenge, then they see the result, and they forget it.


You know as well as I do that I was pointing to the principle behind the challenge system. Why should a player have to deal with it when it is very easy to implement an alternate system where a player does not have to think about it?

Johnny Groove
06-08-2006, 11:49 PM
You know as well as I do that I was pointing to the principle behind the challenge system. Why should a player have to deal with it when it is very easy to implement an alternate system where a player does not have to think about it?

and what system would you suggest? :wavey:

rofe
06-08-2006, 11:50 PM
and what system would you suggest? :wavey:

Read my posts in this thread. It is not that difficult. :wavey:

Johnny Groove
06-08-2006, 11:55 PM
Read my posts in this thread. It is not that difficult. :wavey:

yeah, the shot spot in the chair umpire thing, right? i agree with that. would you have the challenges with the ump's shotspot? or no? the incessant whining would be inevitable.

atheneglaukopis
06-09-2006, 06:37 AM
At Miami, Hawkeye showed the audience balls that were clearly out but not challenged by the player, who was doubtful but didn't want to waste a challenge. That suggests to me that something is still wrong with the system, because Hawkeye was supposed to eliminate precisely that.