PDA

View Full Version : Hawk-eye technology buggy?


sureshs
03-01-2007, 02:16 PM
From Skynews (I have changed names to prevent spoiler) about Dubai:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The match was also tinged with controversy.

After his defeat, B launched an angry attack on the Hawkeye computerized replay system following an over-rule at the end of the first set tiebreak.

B appeared to have levelled at 6-6 when a line judge called A's drive near the tramline out.
But A appealed, the ball was shown as in by Hawkeye and the score became 7-5 and set to A.

B hurled a ball down in frustration and argued with the umpire. "I said 'look the ball is out'" B said later, "and the umpire said 'I know'. The mark was clearly still there but the challenge (Hawkeye) said it was in. It's unbelievable.

"I know it's not a bad thing for the spectators, but we should have Hawkeye at the French Open on clay and then we will all see what is happening." The balls leave marks in the court on clay, clearly indicating whether they are in or out.

Even A admitted: "It looked like it was out. I saw the mark, but I just took the challenge because it was a very important point. When it showed it was good I was a little bit shocked."

vive le beau jeu !
03-01-2007, 02:33 PM
ummm... i'd say B is a bad loser.


;)

danb
03-01-2007, 02:42 PM
ummm... i'd say B is a bad loser.


;)


Yes, you're right. In the same tournament when another player was taken to three sets before winning he said "I can only blame myself" (for not winning in straight sets). But that is just a totally different guy.

Moose Malloy
03-01-2007, 02:46 PM
B hurled a ball down in frustration and argued with the umpire. "I said 'look the ball is out'" B said later, "and the umpire said 'I know'. The mark was clearly still there but the challenge (Hawkeye) said it was in. It's unbelievable.

"I know it's not a bad thing for the spectators, but we should have Hawkeye at the French Open on clay and then we will all see what is happening." The balls leave marks in the court on clay, clearly indicating whether they are in or out.


Safin has been saying what B said for months, that the on court marks don't match up with hawkeye. During the claycourt season last year, there were many instances of hawkeye disagreeing with marks that the umpire used to make his decision.

They both can't be right. I think the only reason hawkeye exists is for fan involvement, not to make the game more accurate.

sureshs
03-01-2007, 02:49 PM
I have a better idea than Hawk-eye. Cheaper too.

If you have a few million dollars to invest, please contact me.

vive le beau jeu !
03-01-2007, 02:52 PM
Yes, you're right. In the same tournament when another player was taken to three sets before winning he said "I can only blame myself" (for not winning in straight sets). But that is just a totally different guy.
oh i guess you're talking about C.
this one is a cool player... ;)

danb
03-01-2007, 03:10 PM
oh i guess you're talking about C.
this one is a cool player... ;)

Please don't get me wrong - I can't say his name because I do not see a spoiler mark on the thread.

Swissv2
03-01-2007, 03:49 PM
Im still curious why they don't do detailed VIDEO rather than DIGITAL replay.

dh003i
03-01-2007, 03:49 PM
D was also upset over Hawk-eye after a loss to E, the 2nd Russian he played at Dubai.

Hawk-Eye is crap.

4brotherdrive
03-01-2007, 03:59 PM
It's not perfect, therefore you can't rely on it. B isn't a sore loser if A and the chairman thinks it was out too.

jelle v
03-01-2007, 04:17 PM
I too am one of the critics of Hawk-Eye. It frequently just doesn't match with the real slow motion images caught on camera.

Asking for Hawk-Eye to be used at the French Open (or any gravel tournament for that matter) is exactly what I want to see, becaue I think that it will prove that Hawk-Eye sometimes isn't that accurate at all. It is said to have a margin of 1/10th of millimeter, but judging by the images of tv that seems really exaggerated (correct spelling?).

TheTruth
03-01-2007, 04:24 PM
I've had my doubts about Hawk Eye's accuracy since its inception. BTW, B is not a sore loser. Out is out!

larlarbd
03-01-2007, 04:28 PM
I too am one of the critics of Hawk-Eye. It frequently just doesn't match with the real slow motion images caught on camera.

Asking for Hawk-Eye to be used at the French Open (or any gravel tournament for that matter) is exactly what I want to see, becaue I think that it will prove that Hawk-Eye sometimes isn't that accurate at all. It is said to have a margin of 1/10th of millimeter, but judging by the images of tv that seems really exaggerated (correct spelling?).


I second that . The Video Umpiring Idea is good - but Hawk-Eye is faulty . I've seen slow motion replay show ball touch the line & hawk-eye showed that as a foot long .
Buggy - 100% sure.

Baghdatis72
03-01-2007, 04:33 PM
Yes, you're right. In the same tournament when another player was taken to three sets before winning he said "I can only blame myself" (for not winning in straight sets). But that is just a totally different guy.

Yeap that's a guy who learns from his mistakes and admits that it's his fault instead of blaming the hawk eye for 1 lousy lost point. If B spent less time blaming everything else but his game then he would win more often.

sureshs
03-01-2007, 04:53 PM
Im still curious why they don't do detailed VIDEO rather than DIGITAL replay.

They do, and sometimes show it. But the resolution is not good enough to make out contact if the contact area is too small. In fact, Hawk-eye uses several video cameras and then extracts the cleaned up images from that, and then shows it along with graphics effects, making it look "digital".

tennis_hand
03-01-2007, 05:15 PM
I think the main reason of not using video is the clarify.
but video technology will be much straightforward. Hawk-eye is probably too complex to have such bugs.