That Federer Line Controversy

[Salvation]

Looked in to me as well. I recall in cricket when they refused to introduce hawk-eye and still do because of its lack of complete accuracy

Think it's a similar scenario this time with him. In the replay the return clearly looked out

 

[Instant Karma]

hawk-eye >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> television camera angle replays.

 

[Salvation]

Bollocks to that

 

[B Cantona]

Looked in to me as well. I recall in cricket when they refused to introduce hawk-eye and still do because of its lack of complete accuracy

Think it's a similar scenario this time with him. In the replay the return clearly looked out

It only touched the faintest part of the line, the only angle TV showed was a poor one. For all the many correct decisions hawkeye makes, many more than before, even if it did get the odd one wrong - and I'm not sure it does - it's well worth using. Why they need 3 challenges a set is beyond me though, far too many

 

[Salvation]

It is obviously not foolproof technology. It has been at Cricket's disposal for a good part of half a decade. It is easy to use in any ball sport for that matter but only Tennis has gone ahead and overlooked its evident flaws

 

[crappycraperson]

Doesn't matter if it is not accurate every time. It's defy more accurate than human eye. Look at it this way, less close calls are going to be called wrong using hawkeye than just relying on linesmen.

 

[USDevil]

I liked the human error factor though. Good talking points, but I can see why they introduced it. No more McEnroe tirades.

 

[Escobar]

They said the hawk eye is not always 100% correct as the lines are not always perfectly drawn. Nevertheless, it's a good thing.

 

[B Cantona]

I liked the human error factor though. Good talking points, but I can see why they introduced it. No more McEnroe tirades.

There weren't many more tirades after McEnroe before Hawkeye was introduced though? That Jeff Urango I remember, but not many others. I like that fact that on the important points, the best player now wins. That's what sport is all about. Before, the best played could produce a piece of brilliance, but due to the fault of a lines person, could still lose the point. It's a near perfect system, and tennis is the better for it. Hpefully football can introduce something similar for line calls soon

 

[Reddish]

I liked the human error factor though. Good talking points, but I can see why they introduced it. No more McEnroe tirades.

Is that a good or bad thing though.

Are we to become a species of no outrageous spectacles, no flashes of magic and no sparks of ingenuity?

 

[Reddish]

There weren't many more tirades after McEnroe before Hawkeye was introduced though? That Jeff Urango I remember, but not many others. I like that fact that on the important points, the best player now wins. That's what sport is all about. Before, the best played could produce a piece of brilliance, but due to the fault of a lines person, could still lose the point. It's a near perfect system, and tennis is the better for it. Hpefully football can introduce something similar for line calls soon

I hope not.

 

[USDevil]

Is that a good or bad thing though.

Are we to become a species of no outrageous spectacles, no flashes of magic and no sparks of ingenuity?

You misunderstand me. While the human error fuels debate, this is certainly the way to go. But tennis is probably one of the few sports that can actually gain something from this technology.

How many times a season do we see a goal not called a goal because it did or didn't cross the line? Not enough times to stop play and check the replay.