6 camera's... i would say 10 - since you can't go moving those camera's to swap between singles and doubles - make it 12 since you need two for doubles.. (high service line) you say transfer the line judges to the backroom staff - the line judges are all volunteers, they aren't going to know how to work the kit that controls televison replays. - the hawkeye system cuts out this human element... it may not be instantaneous - but the delay is acceptable for the pace of tennis. badminton is far quicker i think if there was a simple solution the BWF would have implemented it..
It may seem... cheap... but scotch tape will largely suffice to fix those cams. And 6 is enough for singles and doubles. Have you ever seen a challenge for the service lines in double? Never. Also, I never said that you will replace linesmen. Those cams are here for the player challenges. You're right though, volunteers may not know how to use video equipments. But in the media room, you'll just need at most two technicians to man the videos, and someone behind (one linesmen is sufficient) to judge the line call on instant replay. And I highly doubt BWF are professional enough to manage efficiently their organisation. After all, the crew are mostly badminton players in the past (ie. Punch Gun). If you did put someone with great management and leadership skills at the head of BWF, things would change. In my opinion, the BWF should be managed like any Fortune 500 company, like any sucessful business. Tennis does it really well. There is no reason why badminton can't do it as well.
I think BWF should start using the hawk eyes on semi-fianls & finals, ie on centre court only if they don't have enough money since most of the first & second round games are not that critical. This hawk eye system should be implemented asap so that everybody can have enough time to adapt before the Olympic.
I think if we just have linesman that'll do their job correctly, like not favoring for the home team or not paying attention. It should be all ok.
A lot of people are mentioning Hawk Eye, thinking that it's only a money issue. Well, my intuition (being trained as a physicist) is that the both the physics and the image recognition issues are vastly more difficult in badminton than in tennis. Even if the image recognition issue can be resolved, the trajectory and the air drag could well be impossible to calculate, not to mention there is also the draft (which I'm sure is impossible to take into account).
I don't know why the threads were merged. What I was proposing was an entirely different thing. Its not Hawk Eye. Its like the cricket third umpiring system. Solves all the problems. No bias, no need more money (we already have the existing equipment).
Ultimately the players should accept the officials call regardless of whether the player thinks its right or wrong, and then move onto the next rally.
Would you let a match slip away at 20-19 with a baseline gamble? If its smash across a sideline, you didn't get in anyway, or hoped it was out.
Yes, but it is frustrating for players, and also for audience, if bwf doesnt take every measure to ensure rules are being properly enforced.. With rally scoring these calls gets VERY important, and ensuring good line-calls should really be a priority for BWF. I am also abit annoyed that the rule of continous play between 0-11,11-21 is poorly enforced by judges.. Much too often allows towel, drinking etc. and other rests.. but thats another thread -Twobeer
