Did you See that Call - WoW

it was funny to see serena's inital reaction

"No, no no no no."

and then...

"do i have to speak in another language."

LOL

chair umpires should never overrule on the far side of the court to begin with. thank gawd fo hawk-eye now
 
It's one thing if that's a bad line call by a line judge, but that was an overrule on the far side. That means she went out of her way to make a bad call. Of course, the fact that we know about it means she'll probably never outlive that call, which is good.
 
Do umpires get punished for such calls, that was obvious, you cant make that big of a mistake, I can give people some credit on account of human error, but that seemed a little malicious, the ball didnt even touch the line...it was that far in...

Did Serena lose that match...?
 
wow, I guess you guys are a bunch of newbies. Its probably the most famous(try googling it & see how many articles come up) match of the last 5 years. It wasn't that long ago(2004) & was kinda at a big event(US Open QF)

That match is the sole reason instant replay exists today.
And yes Serena lost that match. The USTA president apologized to Serena the next day, the umpire was dismissed from the US Open(not sure she's ever worked again) So yes umpires are held accountable for screwing up.

What's most interesting to me(& no one ever seems to mention it) was that the umpire never audibly overruled(linesman called it good) so not only was it a bad call, but an illegal one, you have to let the players know you are overruling, not just announce the score. If Serena called the referee out & mentioned that, I have a feeling they would have at least played 2. But she was too upset to even think about that part(Mac & Connors never would have allowed that to happen)
Maybe the umpire really just lost track of the score, since she never said 'correction' & was just trying to save face. The whole thing was strange.
 
I find that Capriati's behaviour during that whole incident is the saddest thing of all....she knew very well that the ball was good and she kep quiet (its just impossible to see that ball out, its so way in its ridiculous)...

didn't know about this incident but JC has lost a lot of points on my list at least.
 
It wasn't Capriati's fault, nor was it her responsibility to correct the call. Sure, it's good sportsmanship to do so, but you shouldn't hold it against her that someone else screwed up and she didn't fix things.
 
I don't think it's the worst call ever. The one that happened to Agassi in the 5th set against Haas at Wimbledon, I don't remember the year, maybe 1999, was much worse in the sense that there was a much bigger gap between the line and the ball (a Haas lob that went like 2-3ft over the baseline and was still called in I think. But it was already very dark, they were playing in the evening).

Of course the Serena one is different because it's an actual overrule by the chair umpire, on the far side no less...
 
TooGood said:
I find that Capriati's behaviour during that whole incident is the saddest thing of all....she knew very well that the ball was good and she kep quiet (its just impossible to see that ball out, its so way in its ridiculous)...

didn't know about this incident but JC has lost a lot of points on my list at least.
Click to expand...

i don't think she deserves any blame in this situation. this is a big point and i'm sure capriati would have loved for it to go her way, as any player would. i would've done the same thing in her part. keep my mouth shut and let the ump and serena fight it out. and it's not like capriati was at fault for the ball going out or something.

she didn't argue in favor of serena and she didn't argue in favor of the call. good for her.
 
Thats what you get when you dress as trailer park trash. I mean a jean skirt playing tennis????

But yeah that was one of the worst calls I have ever seen in a tennis match from an umpire.
 
Did anyone else notice that on the slo mo the ball was slightly touching the baseline but on hawkeye it was about 10 cm in?

stupid hawkeye doesn't work
 
Moose Malloy said:
wow, I guess you guys are a bunch of newbies.
Click to expand...

?? Come on man, you've been on this site long enough to know that things come up again and again around here. 'The Call' with be discussed for years to come. So will that stupid fake footage of Roddicks serve getting stuck in the clay, and people will forever debate which is he best grand slam. You should know by now.
 
Moose Malloy said:
That match is the sole reason instant replay exists today.
And yes Serena lost that match. The USTA president apologized to Serena the next day, the umpire was dismissed from the US Open(not sure she's ever worked again) So yes umpires are held accountable for screwing up.
Click to expand...

The umpire in question is named Mariana Alves. She was suspended from the remainder of the 2004 US Open, but she continued to umpire matches after that.

I know I've seen her in the chair at least once since the '04 US Open, and this article intimates that she was umpiring again shortly after that tournament (including at the '05 Australian):

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Tenni...005/01/23/1106415457211.html?from=moreStories

Umpiring is extremely difficult... but that overrule, at that point in the match, from that far away... she deserved to get suspended from the tournament.
 
stupid hawkeye doesn't work
Click to expand...

The creator of hawkeye has an interesting explanation.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article2051307.ece

basically he says, that we aren't capable of seeing where the ball exactly hits, because of the way the ball compresses & skids.

under this system, I have a feeling many close calls of the past(even on clay, marks don't show exactly where it hits, but where it finishes) may not have matched up with hawkeye. nadal is right, they should try it on clay, just to see if it matches up.

heck, I should try that argument in my next match on close calls, "you didn't see the ball compress & skid before it seemingly went out, so its my point!"
 
Not comment on hawkeye's accuracy, but as for the above difference, the slow mo is in very poor resolution and that kind of TV video always makes the white lines seem larger than they are. fact.
 
The Gorilla said:
Did anyone else notice that on the slo mo the ball was slightly touching the baseline but on hawkeye it was about 10 cm in?

stupid hawkeye doesn't work
Click to expand...

btw. i don't think hawkeye was out in 2004.
because i remember the atptennis site saying that it was introduced first during the grass court season this year before Wimbledon.

wasn't it shot spot?
 
Moose Malloy said:
What's most interesting to me(& no one ever seems to mention it) was that the umpire never audibly overruled(linesman called it good) so not only was it a bad call, but an illegal one, you have to let the players know you are overruling, not just announce the score.[...]
Maybe the umpire really just lost track of the score, since she never said 'correction' & was just trying to save face. The whole thing was strange.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. The umpire never overruled or said anything. She called the wrong score and never had the face to acknowledge it and reverse her call. Capriati's behaviour is also pretty despicable. She was the closest person to the ball. She immediately walked to the ad side acknowledging the point was over, no question in anyone's mind the ball was in. There is no way she didn't see that ball was well in the court. When the umpire calls the wrong score giving her the ad, Capriati at first looks at her in disbilief, like What are you doing, waving her racket. Then the argument between Serena and the umpire starts, and Capriati just pretends she does not know the ball was out.
 
I saw the match. I think USA was replaying the point and showed that the ball was good. I hope I'm still alive one day to see umpires getting video replay monitors and seeing exactly what we're seeing on TV... thus making the correct rilling.
 
jmsx521 said:
I saw the match. I think USA was replaying the point and showed that the ball was good. I hope I'm still alive one day to see umpires getting video replay monitors and seeing exactly what we're seeing on TV... thus making the correct rilling.
Click to expand...

well your waiting days are over my friend because that day arrived nearly two years ago lol ;)
 
I don't get it Gorilla.... You mean to tell me that the umpires now have video replay monitors and can change the score to the correct-one?
 
You're obviously kidding Gorilla, because player challenges would be obsolete then. Why does the umpire call the score, then the player challenges the call... wins the point and proves that the umpire was wrong on the call!? This happens now all the time with the challenge system.
 
The Gorilla said:
Did anyone else notice that on the slo mo the ball was slightly touching the baseline but on hawkeye it was about 10 cm in?

stupid hawkeye doesn't work
Click to expand...

1. The camera angle was from the right of the sideline, thus making the ball appear closer to the line. Even so, the ball was clearly in. You can try stopping the replay when the ball hits the ground.

2. The "hawkeye" replay shows the ball about 2,5 cm inside, not 10. A tennis ball must be about 7 cm in diameter, and the distance between the ball and the line in the "hawkeye" shot is about 1/4 of a ball's diameter. Again, you can try stopping the replay when the ball hits the ground.

3. It was not "hawkeye"

4. To judge by the size of the fonts you like to use, I am not surprised you cannot tell 2 cm from 10 cm, Mr Magoo.
 
Benhur said:
1. The camera angle was from the right of the sideline, thus making the ball appear closer to the line. Even so, the ball was clearly in. You can try stopping the replay when the ball hits the ground.
Click to expand...

the ball definitely contacted the sideline

2. The "hawkeye" replay shows the ball about 2,5 cm inside, not 10. A tennis ball must be about 7 cm in diameter, and the distance between the ball and the line in the "hawkeye" shot is about 1/4 of a ball's diameter. Again, you can try stopping the replay when the ball hits the ground.
Click to expand...

semantics
3. It was not "hawkeye"
Click to expand...

yes it was, it was not callled hawkeye, but it was hawkeye.

4. To judge by the size of the fonts you like to use, I am not surprised you cannot tell 2 cm from 10 cm, Mr Magoo.
Click to expand...

GO SUCK A LEMON
 
The Gorilla said:
the ball definitely contacted the sideline
Click to expand...

No. You can't see the space between the ball and the line because the camera is positioned to the right of the line. Not much but enough to hide the 2 cm gap. If you move even further to the right, even a shot that is 15 cm inside the line will show no space between the ball and the line.

And, again, the "hawkeye" shot shows at most 2 cm space between the ball and the line, which seems about right giving that now you are looking *straight* up the line.

GO SUCK A LEMON

I love sucking lemons and limes. But you may want to have your eyes checked. And maybe pick up a ruler to see what 10 cm look like and where they fit.
[/QUOTE]
 
The Gorilla said:
the ball definitely contacted the sideline



semantics


yes it was, it was not callled hawkeye, but it was hawkeye.



GO SUCK A LEMON
Click to expand...


No, it's a different system, hawkeye shows the full chart of the ball as it compresses in the bounce, compare it with any hawkeye appeal and wimbledon and you'll see how different the two imprints are.
 
Benhur said:
No. You can't see the space between the ball and the line because the camera is positioned to the right of the line. Not much but enough to hide the 2 cm gap. If you move even further to the right, even a shot that is 15 cm inside the line will show no space between the ball and the line.

And, again, the "hawkeye" shot shows at most 2 cm space between the ball and the line, which seems about right giving that now you are looking *straight* up the line.

GO SUCK A LEMON

I love sucking lemons and limes. But you may want to have your eyes checked. And maybe pick up a ruler to see what 10 cm look like and where they fit.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]



AngryCat.jpg
 
out by a foot. good call by the umpire. hawk-eye was wrong again - thankfully back then it wasn't empowered to overrule the umpire's decisions.
 
Moose Malloy said:
The creator of hawkeye has an interesting explanation.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article2051307.ece

basically he says, that we aren't capable of seeing where the ball exactly hits, because of the way the ball compresses & skids.
Click to expand...

What is his explanation for Amelie Mauresmo's challenge at the Australian Open '07 in her second or third round match? Do you know what I'm talking about? The ball was clearly out, even the animation showed that it was out and you could see the space bewteen the ball and the line - about 1cm or 2cm - and the hawkeye said it's in. Mauresmo lost the game and the match afterwards. Why was that ball in? It couldn't have been the way a ball "compresses and skids". Also, whenever I see this decision, I really wonder why people discuss so much about Rafa's ball against Fed...
 
Last edited:
Moose Malloy said:
wow, I guess you guys are a bunch of newbies. Its probably the most famous(try googling it & see how many articles come up) match of the last 5 years. It wasn't that long ago(2004) & was kinda at a big event(US Open QF)

That match is the sole reason instant replay exists today.
Click to expand...

Let me guess, you're American, right?:)
 
I can't believe Crapiati didn't say anything about it.

Gotta respect players like Nadal who I've seen on more than one occasion correct a call in his opponent's favor.

I guess when Federer got mad at Hawkeye at Wimbledon this year, he has Mariana Alves to blame! I'm glad that there is some other system to safeguard against this though. As much as I am not a Serena fan, I am a tennis fan, and watching this happen is not entertaining at all. If I recall correctly, Serena has had this happen to her at Wimbledon also?
 
Last edited:



AngryCat.jpg
[/QUOTE]

Ah, if only cats could clean their master's eyes as neatly as they clean their own.

Look, this is very simple. Choose a straight line -- a board on a hardwood floor or whatever -- and place a ball or any object to the right of the line so there is a 2 cm gap. Move back straight down the line. The gap is there. Start moving to your right. The ball quickly hides the gap.

That's why hawkeye looks straight up the line. And that's why it shows a gap. The tv camera is well to the right of the line, that's why you can't see the gap. I don't think I will explain this again.
 
NamRanger said:
When Roddick corrects calls and you don't, you know there's something wrong then.
Click to expand...

I assume you're talking about the Verdasco incident, though I could be wrong. Roddick said that he only gave it back because it was on clay, and there was clearly a mark. He also admitted that, on hardcourt, he wouldn't have done anything about it.

I'm fine with that, too. It's not his responsibility to get the calls right. It's that of the line judges and the umpire. The player Hawkeye challenge stats indicate that the players often have no idea where the ball landed. It's possible that Capriati didn't even see the ball as 'in'.
 
Tennis_Ace said:
Has anyone seen this, I just came across it for the first time. I cannot believe it by far the worst call ever By a Chair Umpire.

Plus its funny to watch Serena go off.

http://www.tennisclip.com/media/168/US_Open_2004_Quarterfinals__The_Call/
Click to expand...


The ball was clearly in, no question.

HOWEVER, what I find more disturbing is that from the video, you can see the ball hit the inner part of the line, yet the computer animation shows that the ball hit inside of the line by a decent margin. So I would say that the accuracy of these computer generated systems leaves something to be desired.
 
Mikael said:
I don't think it's the worst call ever. The one that happened to Agassi in the 5th set against Haas at Wimbledon, I don't remember the year, maybe 1999, was much worse in the sense that there was a much bigger gap between the line and the ball (a Haas lob that went like 2-3ft over the baseline and was still called in I think. But it was already very dark, they were playing in the evening).

Of course the Serena one is different because it's an actual overrule by the chair umpire, on the far side no less...
Click to expand...


That was 1998, as Agassi lost to Sampras in the final of the 1999 Wimbledon. It was a round of 64 match. Otherwise you are right. That was a terrible call; easily one of the worst I've ever seen as it was both long and wide.

Not long after that point, they called the match for the evening due to darkness, and as the players walked off Agassi told the chair umpire that it was the worst call he'd ever seen, pointing out that it was both wide and long. It was an important point too, as it was in the 3rd set tiebreak that Agassi would go on to lose. The next day he lost the match.
 
Moose Malloy said:
wow, I guess you guys are a bunch of newbies. Its probably the most famous(try googling it & see how many articles come up) match of the last 5 years. It wasn't that long ago(2004) & was kinda at a big event(US Open QF)

That match is the sole reason instant replay exists today.
And yes Serena lost that match. The USTA president apologized to Serena the next day, the umpire was dismissed from the US Open(not sure she's ever worked again) So yes umpires are held accountable for screwing up.

What's most interesting to me(& no one ever seems to mention it) was that the umpire never audibly overruled(linesman called it good) so not only was it a bad call, but an illegal one, you have to let the players know you are overruling, not just announce the score. If Serena called the referee out & mentioned that, I have a feeling they would have at least played 2. But she was too upset to even think about that part(Mac & Connors never would have allowed that to happen)
Maybe the umpire really just lost track of the score, since she never said 'correction' & was just trying to save face. The whole thing was strange.
Click to expand...
She did audibly call the ball out. Couldn't hear it on tv as you can't many calls that the umpire makes becasue of the sound in that stadium. But on the closed circuit tv in the NTC, you could hear her call out on the mic.
 
Eviscerator said:
The ball was clearly in, no question.

HOWEVER, what I find more disturbing is that from the video, you can see the ball hit the inner part of the line, yet the computer animation shows that the ball hit inside of the line by a decent margin. So I would say that the accuracy of these computer generated systems leaves something to be desired.
Click to expand...

I see you read all of the previous posts before replying. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
In a pro match, has anyone ever seen a player successfully argue a bad line call?
Replies
2
Views
811
drwood
drwood
B
Worst pre-challenge sytem line call - Serena v. Capriati 2004 USO?
2
Replies
81
Views
8K
woodrow1029
W
cronus
Federer, Monfils expose the biggest problem with tennis replay
Replies
11
Views
2K
pame
pame
J
Rules Question
Replies
4
Views
1K
justinmadison
J
TennisProPaul
Why Player Challenges Are a Bad Call
Replies
2
Views
802
GrassCourtFan
G
Back
Top