ITF approves instant replay...

[Lakoste]

ITF approves system, but debut still uncertain

"The International Tennis Federation approved the latest version of Hawk-Eye Officiating after tests last week. The system, which has been used during television broadcasts, didn't meet approval when it auditioned in July.

"We have seen significant improvements in the system, especially since the last evaluation," ITF technical manager Stuart Miller said in a statement released by the federation.

It's now up to individual tournaments on the WTA and ATP tours to decide whether they want to use the technology to help umpires review calls during matches.

The ITF recommended that tournaments do their own testing at their stadiums before using Hawk-Eye Officiating.

It's too early to know which tournaments might be interested in using the replay technology.

"We're not saying anybody has to use it. It's just there if people want to use it," ITF spokesman Neil Robinson said Monday.

Spurred in part by a series of questionable calls during a quarterfinal between Jennifer Capriati and Serena Williams at the 2004 U.S. Open, the U.S. Tennis Association considered implementing some kind of replay system at this year's tournament.

But that proposal was dropped after Hawk-Eye's July test.

"At this point, we still feel more testing needs to be done," U.S. Tennis Association spokesman Chris Widmaier said Monday.

Officials from other Grand Slam tournaments couldn't immediately be reached for comment.

Players appear split on the issue of electronic line-calling. Some, including top-ranked Roger Federer and former No. 1 Lindsay Davenport, have said they don't think it should be used. Others, such as Andy Roddick, like the idea.

"I have a very strong opinion. I'm absolutely against it," Federer said in May at the French Open. "I'm against the challenge system. I'm for the way it is right now. Don't change that."

A form of instant replay was introduced this year by World Team Tennis."

http://msn.foxsports.com/tennis/story/5000330

Eventually do you think all grand slams will use instant replay?

 

[equinox]

I think it should only be allowed in tournaments if every playable court has the system installed and both players are in agreement to use the system prior to the match.

 

[LendlFan]

Absolutely why not??? The same thing happened with the electronic Net Judge and Hawk-Eye, these systems have been in place for years now and they still have glitches every once in awhile but all in all they were necessary due to the increased service speeds. My only concern isn't whether these systems will be accurate enough to make a judgement but how many times during a match can a Player challenge a call?


Like in the NFL each team can only challenge a few times per half and if they are wrong they lose one of their challenges. There absolutely needs to be a limit on the number of challenges.

 

[Thanatos]

Absolutely why not??? The same thing happened with the electronic Net Judge and Hawk-Eye, these systems have been in place for years now and they still have glitches every once in awhile but all in all they were necessary due to the increased service speeds. My only concern isn't whether these systems will be accurate enough to make a judgement but how many times during a match can a Player challenge a call?


Like in the NFL each team can only challenge a few times per half and if they are wrong they lose one of their challenges. There absolutely needs to be a limit on the number of challenges.

Sounds good. I just hope that it doesn't slow down the game too much. Tennis popularity has decreased in some countries.

Just like the NFL games, instant replay is ok, but when thoses umpires take 10 minutes to review a simple call...it drives me nuts and I start switching channels.

 

[rhubarb]

I think it should be used by the umpire alone, to assist him/her in checking close decisions. A challenge-system would be purely a gimmick; completely unnecessary and just for entertainment's sake.

 

[Mark S. Hogan]

Finally. Bad calls should decide a match.

 

[rhubarb]

Like in the NFL each team can only challenge a few times per half and if they are wrong they lose one of their challenges. There absolutely needs to be a limit on the number of challenges.

No, I disagree. If you have to have a challenge system (which I think is completely unnecessary), then there shouldn't be any limit on them. What happens if someone has used up their number of challenges and they get a bad call on break-point? The bad call will stand. So why limit challenges? The number of times players can question calls are not currently limited, so having restrictions could make the situation worse than it is at the moment.

It would be better not to have a challenge system at all. Let the umpire decide, as they do now, with the added use of the technology to make it easier. The players don't need to have challenges, it would only confuse matters.

 

[Babblelot]

"If the technology had been tried in Cincinnati, Higdon said, the chair umpire could have consulted a replay official, who would tell the umpire if a ball was in or out. There would not have been a limit to the number of challenges a player could request, and there wouldn't have been a penalty — such as the lost timeout in the NFL — if a questioned call turned out to be correct."

http://sports.yahoo.com/ten/news;_y...4v7YF?slug=ap-instantreplay&prov=ap&type=lgns

Finally!!!...IMO, the correct way to implement the technology; i.e., no different than RG.

 

[MagicMT]

why limit challenges? The number of times players can question calls are not currently limited, so having restrictions could make the situation worse than it is at the moment.

haha, that is true. players can currently question calls as much as they want, but there is no point in it! it's not like arguing is going to make the ump change his/her mind.

and i think it would need to be limited. otherwise every ball that is even remotely close to the line will need to be reviewed since a player will call it.

 

[jhhachamp]

If they can implement it so that it does not slow down the game, the players should get unlimited challenges. There is no other reason besides the slowing the game issue that this should not happen.

 

[rhubarb]

haha, that is true. players can currently question calls as much as they want, but there is no point in it! it's not like arguing is going to make the ump change his/her mind.

and i think it would need to be limited. otherwise every ball that is even remotely close to the line will need to be reviewed since a player will call it.

It wouldn't happen on every ball that's close to the line, only the last one of the point, as it does now. If a player believes a call to be incorrect he should stop playing.

I don't think it will slow things down at all since the umpire will be able to see the Hawk-Eye replay and make a judgement within a couple of seconds.

 

[LendlFan]

It wouldn't happen on every ball that's close to the line, only the last one of the point, as it does now. If a player believes a call to be incorrect he should stop playing.

I don't think it will slow things down at all since the umpire will be able to see the Hawk-Eye replay and make a judgement within a couple of seconds.

This Post makes the most sense in that I was concerned that every freakin ball and some guy is stopping play asking for a replay, would get pretty tiring but I think you're right in that instant replay is instant !

Ok Rhubarb ~ Upon Replay my call stands corrected