Challenges/ hawkeye in tennis

[XFactor1979]

Should they reduce the number of challenges or get rid of them altogether?

It isnt making much of a difference to the flow of the game, and 99% of challenges by players are unsuccessful

Players make unforced errors, why cant the lines people and chair umpire be allowed to too?

If they got rid of challenges it will bring back bad boys back onto the court, and a bit of the argy bargy of tennis :->

With the challenges system Lleyton Hewitt hasnt got a case, and he hasnt spat the dummy since the challenges system came in

 

[pepsi]

The challenge system works an absolute treat. I think that even if a player gets the review wrong, it gives them peace of mind knowing that the correct decision has been made. The review system also beings a bit of crowd participation and engagement in the match. I think it has added to tennis.

 

[Lemma]

Some times the players use it even when they know they're wrong just to get a break between points

 

[Drummond]

The challenge system in tennis is one of the best introductions in sport in recent memory. Love it.

 

[hirdy_is_champ]

So XFactor, you would rather see players chucking fits (which I admit is entertaining) than actually have technology being used? Serena Williams has managed to throw two very decent tantrums with hawkeye being present, so its not like it stops it completely.

 

[hamohawk1]

my issue is the trust in the technology. there is no chance it can be 100% correct and often decisions are withing 1-10mm which is nothing. these decisions can change the face of the match. it also renders linespeople useless as any close decision can simply be decided by hawk eye

i do like the challenge system though, but surely limit it to 1 challenge including tirebreaks each set, 3 is a bit obsessive and is often abused

 

[XFactor1979]

So XFactor, you would rather see players chucking fits (which I admit is entertaining) than actually have technology being used? Serena Williams has managed to throw two very decent tantrums with hawkeye being present, so its not like it stops it completely.

that was the difference between tennis and golf in the past, with tennis players were known to possess firey tempers whereas golfers were so well contained.

nothing more entertaining than seeing a player cop a code violation after smashing their racket, similar to a rockstar smashing their guitars. or a code violation for cursing at the ref

 

[The_Doctor]

The challenge system in tennis is one of the best introductions in sport in recent memory. Love it.

+1

3 challenges is spot on, there are a fair few line ball decisions each set and all we want is the right decision to be made. It takes like 15 seconds so its not wasting time. No negatives to it what so ever.

 

[XFactor1979]

The worst part of the system is the players miss challenging calls during the meaty part of the set (eg early games, or when its 2-2) when there are actually incorrect calls, but they usually challenge at the end of the set when its all in hope and they just waste the three challenges that they still have

 

[roostersgal4eva]

It's gamesmanship nothing more

I like it and has the right amount of challenges only thing I dislike is you can't have it on all courts during a grand slam - which I know is hard to do

 

[matty p]

my issue is the trust in the technology. there is no chance it can be 100% correct and often decisions are withing 1-10mm which is nothing. these decisions can change the face of the match. it also renders linespeople useless as any close decision can simply be decided by hawk eye

You might not be able to trust the technology 100% but it's still far more accurate than linesmen's decisions.

 

[XFactor1979]

What about what happened with the farsical situation with the Nalbandian and Isner match when Nalbandian challenged a line call on a break point only for the chair umpire to say to him that he was too late to challenge

 

[Lemma]

That was a bad decision by the chair umpire not the hawkeye system

I really want to know if that was in or out btw, does anyone know?

 

[Belnakor]

the umpire was wrong it was out

 

[XFactor1979]

The joys of hearing the *crowd murmuring* when the linesmen misses an out ball are gone

Mainly because a crowd is quiet in tennis and when a murmur comes up it brings a bit of levity

rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb, thatballwasout, rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb

 

[Kaan]

I like Hawkeye.

Gives the players and fans a peace of mind knowing if it was in or not.

 

[Call Me Cake]

^^^^

I say make it unlimited.

It doesn't seem like it takes a lot of time to play and it makes me feel like they're just doing it to uphold the relevance of a chair umpire in today's age of technology.

If the technology is there, use it.

Especially in a game like tennis, where the landing of the ball determines the whole game as it is - it's crucial that it is able to be tracked. A decade or so, I can understand... we had to make do with what was available. But now?

Seriously. Make it unlimited and let the chair umpire take care of the latter things like crowd noise, player behavior and match structures.

 

[Lemma]

Nah i reckon there has to be a limit. Otherwise players would challenge points they know are out when they're tired just to get a bigger break. It's a waste of time, pure and simple.
It's not that often players run out of challenges anyway