2016 U.S. Women's Open

[pmcuk]

Did it end up favoring Brittany, yes but thats like one player getting a lucky bounce out of a bunker another striping a drive into a 2 day old divot in the middle of the fairway.

 

 

Not remotely the same. You simply cannot subject some players to HD coverage and not others. It's not right, it's not fair and it should be stopped at once. Media cameramen are not officials and they have no business interfering with the game and how the actual officials run the game.

 

Sport has to be fair for all or it's not sport.

How do you feel about instant replay (ie - the Hawkeye system) in tennis? In particular, it's use at Wimbledon? There are 19 courts in play for the tournament and it's my understanding that the Hawkeye system is only used on the 6 'show' courts. So, it's not being used throughout the tournament and only being used for top players and their matches. Also, while it looks 'exact' based on the graphic shown, it's actually a representation of where the ball 'most likely' landed, based on statistics.

 

That's a very good point. I think Hawkeye is a good system - tennis is an example of the system working. Hard to say "You CANNOT be serious!!!" to a computer programme...

 

I don't know how widely it's used in competitions - maybe it's used for everyone in the later rounds. If it were used for all the competitors at a certain stage of the competition, I'd say that was pretty fair, but I do note what you say, that it only applies to the courts that have it.

 

And of course, it's integrated into the official system and managed by the referee, not a TV cameraman doing it.

[Shilgy]

Did it end up favoring Brittany, yes but thats like one player getting a lucky bounce out of a bunker another striping a drive into a 2 day old divot in the middle of the fairway.

 

 

Not remotely the same. You simply cannot subject some players to HD coverage and not others. It's not right, it's not fair and it should be stopped at once. Media cameramen are not officials and they have no business interfering with the game and how the actual officials run the game.

 

Sport has to be fair for all or it's not sport.

How do you feel about instant replay (ie - the Hawkeye system) in tennis? In particular, it's use at Wimbledon? There are 19 courts in play for the tournament and it's my understanding that the Hawkeye system is only used on the 6 'show' courts. So, it's not being used throughout the tournament and only being used for top players and their matches. Also, while it looks 'exact' based on the graphic shown, it's actually a representation of where the ball 'most likely' landed, based on statistics.

 

That's a very good point. I think Hawkeye is a good system - tennis is an example of the system working. Hard to say "You CANNOT be serious!!!" to a computer programme...

 

I don't know how widely it's used in competitions - maybe it's used for everyone in the later rounds. If it were used for all the competitors at a certain stage of the competition, I'd say that was pretty fair, but I do note what you say, that it only applies to the courts that have it.

 

And of course, it's integrated into the official system and managed by the referee, not a TV cameraman doing it.

As someone stated the tennis system is an accepted estimation of a ball moving 100 mph. So just one angle is given. Golf is multiple angles of a ball barely moving or club being grounded. Different scenario imo.

[TheGeekGolfer]

Did it end up favoring Brittany, yes but thats like one player getting a lucky bounce out of a bunker another striping a drive into a 2 day old divot in the middle of the fairway.

 

 

Not remotely the same. You simply cannot subject some players to HD coverage and not others. It's not right, it's not fair and it should be stopped at once. Media cameramen are not officials and they have no business interfering with the game and how the actual officials run the game.

 

Sport has to be fair for all or it's not sport.

How do you feel about instant replay (ie - the Hawkeye system) in tennis? In particular, it's use at Wimbledon? There are 19 courts in play for the tournament and it's my understanding that the Hawkeye system is only used on the 6 'show' courts. So, it's not being used throughout the tournament and only being used for top players and their matches. Also, while it looks 'exact' based on the graphic shown, it's actually a representation of where the ball 'most likely' landed, based on statistics.

 

That's a very good point. I think Hawkeye is a good system - tennis is an example of the system working. Hard to say "You CANNOT be serious!!!" to a computer programme...

 

I don't know how widely it's used in competitions - maybe it's used for everyone in the later rounds. If it were used for all the competitors at a certain stage of the competition, I'd say that was pretty fair, but I do note what you say, that it only applies to the courts that have it.

 

And of course, it's integrated into the official system and managed by the referee, not a TV cameraman doing it.

 

Not all competitors play on the 6 'show' courts, even in the later rounds. In the early rounds, the top seeded players would play on the main courts and have the use or replay challenges and the hawk-eye system while in the same round the 'middle' seeded players may not get on the main courts and would NOT have the use of replay and hawk-eye on their matches.

 

I do agree that the main point is it's managed by a referee (actually a team of 20 or so people go out and measure / layout the court to get this to work) and not a cameraman. In reality, it's a system that was sold to them and other tournaments to settle the ball in/out issue. Think trackman and the shot-tracer in golf. It's a 3rd party company running the system. So in effect, they are 'cameramen' running the replays, just like the 'cameraman' in golf could be given the replay authority, but the final review would be by an official.

[TheGeekGolfer]

Did it end up favoring Brittany, yes but thats like one player getting a lucky bounce out of a bunker another striping a drive into a 2 day old divot in the middle of the fairway.

 

 

Not remotely the same. You simply cannot subject some players to HD coverage and not others. It's not right, it's not fair and it should be stopped at once. Media cameramen are not officials and they have no business interfering with the game and how the actual officials run the game.

 

Sport has to be fair for all or it's not sport.

How do you feel about instant replay (ie - the Hawkeye system) in tennis? In particular, it's use at Wimbledon? There are 19 courts in play for the tournament and it's my understanding that the Hawkeye system is only used on the 6 'show' courts. So, it's not being used throughout the tournament and only being used for top players and their matches. Also, while it looks 'exact' based on the graphic shown, it's actually a representation of where the ball 'most likely' landed, based on statistics.

 

That's a very good point. I think Hawkeye is a good system - tennis is an example of the system working. Hard to say "You CANNOT be serious!!!" to a computer programme...

 

I don't know how widely it's used in competitions - maybe it's used for everyone in the later rounds. If it were used for all the competitors at a certain stage of the competition, I'd say that was pretty fair, but I do note what you say, that it only applies to the courts that have it.

 

And of course, it's integrated into the official system and managed by the referee, not a TV cameraman doing it.

As someone stated the tennis system is an accepted estimation of a ball moving 100 mph. So just one angle is given. Golf is multiple angles of a ball barely moving or club being grounded. Different scenario imo.

My point is that it's an estimation, it's not exact. The graphic given is so cut and dry that it appears that it's the actual ball it's tracking, so that leads to acceptance, as the average fan probably doesn't know that it's an estimation and not exact.

[Shilgy]

My point is that it's an estimation, it's not exact. The graphic given is so cut and dry that it appears that it's the actual ball it's tracking, so that leads to acceptance, as the average fan probably doesn't know that it's an estimation and not exact.

But the players know, and they are OK with it. Same as Anna was with the ruling. She knew if she moved the sand, no matter how little, it was a penalty. And she seems OK with that.

[pmcuk]

 

But the players know, and they are OK with it. Same as Anna was with the ruling. She knew if she moved the sand, no matter how little, it was a penalty. And she seems OK with that.

 

What she is required to say publicly and what she really feels inside may be quite different.

[Shilgy]

 

But the players know, and they are OK with it. Same as Anna was with the ruling. She knew if she moved the sand, no matter how little, it was a penalty. And she seems OK with that.

 

What she is required to say publicly and what she really feels inside may be quite different.

Could be, but after seeing the video she knows she did it.

[QEight]

But the players know, and they are OK with it. Same as Anna was with the ruling. She knew if she moved the sand, no matter how little, it was a penalty. And she seems OK with that.

 

What she is required to say publicly and what she really feels inside may be quite different.

Could be, but after seeing the video she knows she did it.

 

I think her first reaction and comment on the course when talking to caddie was revealing. She just said to caddie something like "did I? I did not think so, but I guess I did". I do not see any "publicly restrained" in it.