[blackwell]

It was clear out. Where did hawk-eye see touch of the line here

 

[Litotes]

That indeed looks clearly out.

 

[SheepleBuster]

it's a scam... millions of dollars spent financing some rich dude's hookers because he came up with this bulls*** tech ... I remember how people have complained about it showing a different mark and commentators say hawk eye is somehow more accurate than your lying eyes and the mark on the court

 

[BodyServe]

In Halle semi final between Federer and Karlovic i'm 99% sure a Federer forehand in the 2nd tiebreak was out but magic german hawkeye said it cut the line.

Hawk eye is far from being 100% reliable.

 

[Nolesaurus]

It was clear out. Where hawk-eye saw touch of the line here

how do you know it was out? It was a slice shot and the camera was on the ground.

 

[Rustie]

Still more accurate than humans though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=edlWAOZTBnQ

 

[mugahi]

If u watch a tennis ball hit in slow motion u will see two things happen, it will go out of round and it will wobble, hawke-eye does not see that but still puts the mark down as an oval, looking at this pic you can easily see that if the mark was round it would be well out.

 

[BodyServe]

If u watch a tennis ball hit in slow motion u will see two things happen, it will go out of round and it will wobble, hawke-eye does not see that but still puts the mark down as an oval, looking at this pic you can easily see that if the mark was round it would be well out.

It was not only a mark problem but the 3D trajectory was clearly not reconstituted correctly.

 

[Time Violation]

Hawk eye is far from being 100% reliable.

No one claimed it was 100%. More reliable than human eyes and that's the point.

 

[Logos]

Ofc it's not 100%. Nothing in motion measurement is 100%, d-oh! What matters is whether it's right 99% of the time (low margin of error). If so, then hawk-eye's cool, because man-eye makes errors a lot more often. Human perception is very very unreliable.

 

[Servebot]

Ofc it's not 100%. Nothing in motion measurement is 100%, d-oh! What matters is whether it's right 99% of the time (low margin of error). If so, then hawk-eye's cool, because man-eye makes errors a lot more often. Human perception is very very unreliable.

Not to mention most people who are now calling it out only saw it was out in the replay.

 

[Dr. Frankenfed]

The picture is misleading. A tennis ball skids quite a lot on contact before it bounces back up.
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/ITFgrass.mov

 

[Houstonko]

Hawk eye is good to catch sleeping line judges.

But for controversial calls when the ball is 1% in is not reliable. It just assumes how the ball bend, everytime it is different shape with huge variation.

Fed was robbed in 4th set Wimbledon 2007 by 1 of Nadal's forehand.

 

[Floki]

It was clear out. Where did hawk-eye see touch of the line here

Are you people blind? It did clip the line. Barely, but it did. Exactly as hawkeye showed. :facepalm:

 

[Floki]

The picture is misleading. A tennis ball skids quite a lot on contact before it bounces back up.
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/ITFgrass.mov

This too.

 

[dencod16]

Hawk eye has a 3mm margin of error, that is not huge. but not even machines are perfect.

 

[156mphserve]

The ball will skid quite a bit, where the ball is when it starts coming back up off the grass is not where it first contacted the grass. The gif is a bit deceiving in that way. It's tough to tell if it did clip the line or not. I took a few screencaps of the gif. The best I got was this one

Is the ball touching the grass at that point? It's still over/on the line there, and if it's not touching then it's pretty damn close.

hawkeye is not perfect but it's never way off, it looks like it could be wrong here but it's not some massive error, I can't tell if it clipped by watching it so I'm not going to bitch about hawkeye getting it wrong if it did which I can't tell if it did.

 

[Mr.Black]

whatever.

 

[retister]

The ball will skid quite a bit, where the ball is when it starts coming back up off the grass is not where it first contacted the grass. The gif is a bit deceiving in that way. It's tough to tell if it did clip the line or not. I took a few screencaps of the gif. The best I got was this one

Is the ball touching the grass at that point? It's still over/on the line there, and if it's not touching then it's pretty damn close.

hawkeye is not perfect but it's never way off, it looks like it could be wrong here but it's not some massive error, I can't tell if it clipped by watching it so I'm not going to bitch about hawkeye getting it wrong if it did which I can't tell if it did.

My initial impression was that it was out, which remained the same after watching the replay. But, after seeing the gif and your ss I am almost certain hawk-eye was correct. The skid is very misleading indeed.
I also remember seeing chalk dust in the air during live feed.

 

[TennisWizzard]

Looks in to me.