To eliminate human mistakes, whatever unintentional or intentional, a precision video replay sytem is demanded for all badminton matchs, just like that in tennis court. I strongly agree with TH, LCW and so many other players like CH, BCL, etc in requesting IBF of a video system. Fair play is what we want.
Firstly, tennis is a multimillion dollar sport. I mean ticket prices for grand slams such as Wimbledon can go up to the hundreds or more. So naturally there would be funds to procure such systems for use. Badminton on the other hand lacks such availability of funds. Secondly, not all tennis matches are equipped with such devices. In fact, only the higher tier tournaments such as the grand slams and some Masters Series and Tier 1 events on the ATP and WTA tour will use these systems. Thirdly, in tournaments where the system is used, each individual tennis court has its own scoreboard and replay screen. Badminton on the other hand does not have this luxury and so it begs the question of how these video replays are going to be broadcast. Even if one were to say that it could be channelled directly to the umpire directly without the need to display it on a TV screen for all to see, it then creates a problem when players try to get involved by asking to actually see the replay if the umpire deems it not to be in their favour. All in all, I still think the answer is not technology at the moment. If a player thinks that a line judge is incompetent or biased, he/she should still just request for a change of line judges and umpires should also be more willing to accommodate such a change. The nature of sports such as these is that there is bound to be some human error involved. There is no doubt that we should work within our constraints to minimise these errors, but we must also bear in mind that it is impossible to eliminate them entirely.
this shouldnt be too too much of a problem. At worst there could be an old cathode ray tube tv hooked up to a live feeed of astrosports or whatever and the umpires/players can just watch what WE see
With regards to the comment about players abusing the instant replay system, you can limit the number of replay request per match to something like one per game. That way a player will only use it when he absolutely feels that the call is wrong. This is similar to what is being done in American Football to ensure that coaches refrain from abusing the instant replay. I also believe hockey does the same thing.
The coolest way would be if the umpire chairs had wireless lcd screen and there were cameras on the lines. The cameras would show on the umpire lcd and the big jumbotron hanging from the ceiling
Taufik in his press conference said WBF needs to implement the cameras. More press at this tournament after Taufiks explanation of walking out in the HKO.
Using a video system to decide whether a shot is in or out will disrupt the flow of the game. Only when they can come up with a system that is available for all linesmen, umpire, and service judge, and which allows the appropriate linesman or service judge or umpire an instant replay-say within 1 second on a screen assigned to each respective linesman-can video be used. You don't want to be like tennis because the interruption to the flow of play, whilst acceptable to tennis, could change the fate of the game in progress. It is like having your intensity, focus, and hype, all put out by a bucket of ice-cold water.
In a typical tournament, there are 4 or 5 courts on the floor. Currently, one court is assigned as the TV court. For this one, and only one, court, the TV coverage replays can double up as "eyes" for controversial line calls. Now, what about the other 3 or 4 courts? Is there enough $$$$$$ to equip each court with TV cameras? Of course NOT. You'll be quadrupling or quintupling the cost which would be very difficult to balance out in revenue. Ideally, yes, it would be nice to have some sort of replay or Hawkeye system to quell bad line decisions but in reality, the IBF cannot afford this luxury. So for those of you hoping to see anything like this in the near future, it isn't likely to happen
Exactly my point. I think badminton has fared pretty well without it thus far so I would say that such a system would be more of a luxury rather than a necessity. I mean there are certainly better ways to spend any extra money. For instance, up till now, we still have certain instances of the carpeting coming loose in the middle of a match (the most recent of which was at the HK Open).
For tennis, the stadiums are especially made for that sport. But for badminton, usually it is a multi-use facility, so it would be almost impossible to set up all the equipment necessary for line reviews.
not impossible, just too costly for it to be implemented in every tournament. This still doesnt mean why the higher end tourneys like WC, Olympics Thomas/Uber dont have video reviews equipent set up.
This year's world championships are the first time I've heard of where line calls were such a problem on neutral ground. The other times I've heard of were always cases involving accusations of biased judging helping hometown favourites in Malaysia, Korea and China. I'm sure there are others. That's just all that comes to mind. How often does it happen that human error alone is the problem and not human error+nationalism? If problems with human error alone aren't that prevalent, then trying to solve it with technology and rule changes which involve time, trouble and money for every match might be overkill. The only workaround I've ever heard of is the 2002 Asian Games in Busan when Taufik walked off the court and the IBF or ABF decided to replace the local line judges with off-duty umpires. Currently the IBF rules seem to require that umpires and service judges not be local in matches involving local teams. I say that only because there were no Koreans doing professional officiating in the Korea Open after the early rounds and I've seen similar situations in other countries' televised matches. If that is a rule or at least a convention, and it's selective, it sounds feasible for line judges too, apart from the expense, especially given the number of line judges relative to professional officials. However, it should be possible to justify the expense given that the impact of biased line judges on a game can so much more severe than that of biased service judges. If you limit it to games involving local players and foreign players and later rounds as is now the convention (rule?) for umpires and service judges, it might be cost effective and I'm sure it would be cheaper than implementing photo replays for every court and every line call. They could even limit it to singles where you have a vastly higher percentage of left shuttles. This world championship has highlighted two possible flaws in the above logic, I'll admit. The first is that two Lees became incensed at line judging which had no reason to be biased. I mean, why would Spaniards be pulling for an all-Chinese men's singles final? In other words, one might argue that trying to eliminate national bias is not a sufficient improvement. The second is that my earlier claim about the impact of service judging relative to line judging would seem to be mitigated by the experiences of Zhang Yawen and Hwang Yumi. However, I think it's possible that this might be a case of excessive zeal on the part of one or two judges and it might be related to the IBF's change to the codification of the "bottom rib" rule and a concurrent decision to attempt to apply this more stringently given that it is now down on paper. In any case, national bias in this context has already been eliminated and if Asian badfeds remain convinced of continental bias, the IBF can costlessly solve that problem by training some fulltime African Umpires to work the Grand Prix tour. I think that history has shown that local vs. international matches with local line judges have been the source of more disputes. These are cases where you can easily dispute the claim that "both sides face the same challenges".
My quick take on this.. There's a new article at the IBF official website as well as in this forum which mentions that IBF will try to do some research & figure out some way of incorporating a replay-system starting next yr... .. IMO, the main problem for them implementing this will be focused on finance. Further, if they start implementing the instant replay system, the duration of the matches will take longer as players would ask for a replay(s) for who knows how many times..And if time is an issue, how will IBF make a rule on how many challenges a player/coach/team can request??..And it won't stop there, not only will they request a line call review, but who knows, maybe they want to review a service fault..And on and on... The game will become so "technical", so unlike how the game was nurtured all this time..
It could also result in a World Championship title or the Winners of the Thomas Cup being decided by a court. That would be interesting.
Everyone's happier Those are imaginary excuses. The US OPEN implemented the IRS this year and the players are happier and can concentrate on playing and showing their best. It takes less time than having players go up to umpires and questioning his decision.Players are allowed two wrong requests per set but not all use up their quota.Surprising but true.
Yes indeed it can be considered to be very successful, but one must also note that their system uses an entire array of cameras amongst other high tech equipment to digitally determine if the ball was in or out (actually footage of the ball in motion was never shown). Cartainly if the IBF has the $$$ to use such a system, the hurrah to all. But if one can only afford to simple camera replays like those we get on television, then there is still alot of room for players to debate and argue about when they do see these replays.
..yah, they *could be* imaginary excuses, but why limit a replay to just a line call??..If IBF can come up with a solution, a viable one, and won't bankrupt their bank account, i'll say go for it and try it out. But reality is, it won't be as easy as the one used in the U.S. Open. And most important, it *will be* a costly experimentation..
..i concur...And doing so, i can see it will add more time to the matches; perhaps un-necessary time..For example, if the original call by the linejudge is correct, yet the other player challengesit but at the end the linejudge's call was indeed correct, it will already cost them extra time. Bottomline is, like i mentioned a few times in my other posts on this issue, I believe all calls FOR and AGAINST a player will at the end come out *even*. So, even if they use the most high-tech advanced IRS there is/are, whatever they get in favor of them now, those calls will be against them or *evened out* sooner or later..So, best solution is for players to just accept the call and move on, unless the calls are being made blatantly and repeatedly made..
