that one was tougher to call... may have just nicked the line, or not...which is what the referee called it from what i see, it was close but not touching the line...
again, see? even if it's zoomed in and reviewed in slow-mo, it's still possible to get the call wrong. this is why getting a computer to decide the call is better like the hawk-eye in Tennis. That way, players cannot argue with it as it's generated by a program. BWF needs to find the right people and design this software. The brains behind the hawkeye can easily do the same thing with a shuttlecock. It's not round/symmetrical, but I still feel it's possible combined with slow-mo technology.
also, it's not good in a spectator's P.O.V anymore, since players have to stop play and wait for a decision. prior to this tournament, I thought replays will be shown on-screen for all viewers to see. if this case, there's no real drama or excitement as BWF claimed. Spectators now have to deal with continuous pauses... if there was a large computer screen for each court and the replay was broadcast to the audience... THEN it adds to the drama and excitement of the game as the spectators are involved
I see they've changed it after learning how confusing it was... Now a thumbs up means "IN", while thumbs down means "OUT". I think it's better this way.
Much better [h=3]BWF Committed to ‘Innovative Badminton’ apparently.[/h] http://www.bwfbadminton.org/news_item.aspx?id=79509 I see they travel all over to hold meetings about it. Like in this example they all went to Greece to come up with such mind blowing innovations as using your thumb.
No no, thumb up from referee means challenge is good, and thumb down meaning challenge fail. You see, the technical officials will eventually get the signals "optimised" to use the BWF vocabulary, consider this SSF as a trial for fine tuning the signals, as craigandy called it "mind blowing innovation." Even a top federation such as BWF cannot be expected to get things proper and correct the first time around - recall the mucking about with the 7 point system? So this line-calling technology will eventually be implemented to achieve the desired result of innovation and excitement. Already there are examples of using reviews, anyone who watches cricket will know how to involve several thousands of spectators in the stadium and also on the telly. The other one is from rugby when the official asks a specific question. Then there is field hockey. One thing is certain, the current signal by umpire is same as calling the referee on court. This has to now change for the review. Also, the mechanics of the signal from the referee to the umpire will need to be changed, as also the camera views. Only they know why what is being reviewed is not shown to the audience and the players. Most facilities already have a jumbo-tron in the arena. As for the review itself, the referee is likely provided the feed by the technician in the backroom. If I was that referee, that is where I would be, in the back room, mucking about with controls to get the correct frame to freeze. As many on this forum already know, BWF is feeding all the later round action from many places all year round, all of it freely available with a network connection. This has to count for something! Perhaps the BCers could draw their attention to this thread so that the federation may figure out how 'crowd-sourcing' from this forum can be put to good use, yes?
Lol, controversy... MS SF between LCW and Jan.... At 7-3 in 2nd set, Jan's shuttle was obviously on the line (in).... but the video refs say it's out.....
If they show the instant review video to everybody (not just to the referee), i think it is better. Justice must be done and must be seen to be done. It should be very easy (and not expensive) to show the video on TV. Secondly, I am sure there may be situations where even with the benefit of instant slow mo review, it may difficult to make a call. If that is the case, I think it is fair to just call it a let.
What is an in? What is an out? If the head of the cock touches the line (even very slightly), then it is in, right? If it doesn't touch the line at all, then it is out, right?
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php/18424-IN-or-OUT it is a 146 posts thread on that topic. and there are other threads too. there are always different interpretation. visual as well as mathematical interpretations. not the simpliest of topic. and probably why BWF don't want to disclose the video as 50% will think it is in, 50% think it is out. (on the borderline cases)
Thanks. Back then, without the benefit of instant slow mo review, it's all a matter of discretion. Now with all this high tech stuff, I think they need to issue some guidelines on this. If they can capture the landing at several hundreds frames per second from several different angles with ultra high resolutions, they need consistency on what it is in and what is out. You are right--that's probably why BWF don't want to disclose the video. Hopefully, after a few months of trial, they will disclose it. Everybody wants to watch it.
Even the inventors of Hawk Eye technology state that it is not 100% foolproof. No one questions it's accuracy but it has been quoted to be only accurate to +/- 5mm in tennis. Even then BWF is on the right track with these instant line call video reviews. They just have to work out their communications, and they must show it on the big screen to the audience and players if they intend on keeping their promise of injecting drama and excitement.
the borderline cases will definitely causes booo's from the crowd no matter what. so i think i am going to propose a new way of doing it. we will have the audience be the judge. Have them cheer and make noise for IN or OUT. whoever louder wins. let's call this the Roman Colosseum method. now the thumbs up / down makes so much more historical sense.
Haha... The referee will be holding a sound level meter to measure the loudness of the audience cheering for in and out. Whichever is louder decides the matter. Drama and excitement... I'm all for it.
I published some of my thoughts on how the system is doing so far here: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/bc/2014/01/10/thoughts-on-the-linecall-instant-review-system/ [h=1]Thoughts on the Line-call Instant Review System[/h] The Badminton World Federation announced in early 2013 that a line judging instant review system will be implemented, allowing players to challenge the decision made by line judges during a tournament. Here are some of my thoughts on the whole system and what effect it has on the organization, the linejudges and the players.. Out of all the court games, none makes as full use of the court boundaries as badminton. Think about it, tennis? nah. volleyball? neh. Easily 1/2 of the shots made in badminton the players are aiming for the boundary lines, perhaps with the exception of netshots, drops. Other shots like clear, smash, lift, even some drives are all designed to be hit as close to the line as possible in order to win or not giving away opportunities. It only make sense that something as crucial as line judging should not be trusted completely on the eyesight of lightly trained and over worked human beings, who not only can be inattentive and error prone, they can also be affected by external factors and make blatantly biased calls. I am not naming any tournaments here, but i am sure avid followers of badminton can name at least a couple. So hats off to BWF who finally realize it after all these decades. And despite some teething problem (seriously, thumbs up? thumbs down?) the system was deployed in the 2013 Super Series Finals and also in the ongoing 2014 Victor Korean Open Super Series. How has it affected the different parties involved so far? [h=2]Linejudges[/h]Linejudges are humans, so they do make bad calls (and the reason for implementing this whole review system in the first place!). However, bad calls comes in different categories. The genuine errors, or the biased calls. During the Super Series finals, there were a handful of genuine bad call and challenges were successfully made and the call corrected. Despite the small sampling population, the number of genuine bad calls seems to be around the same. So the prospect of getting reviewed didn’t make the quality of the linejudges any better or worse. And with either luck or brilliance in the part of the BWF, after debuting the system in the SSF, the next test is in the 2014 Korea Open. As most of us already know, the Korea open has, to put it mildly, a reputation of having questionable linejudges. It has been the subject of protests, fights and even walkouts. In the men’s doubles quarterfinal, the number of bad call against Endo/Hayakawa when playing against Lee Yong Dae / Yoo Yong Seong was abnormally high, all of which were overridden during challenge. That is surprising as the bias calls from the infamous Korean linejudges has not reduce despite the prospect of getting their calls reviewed. One would think any attempts would be futile but that doesn’t seem to have any effect on the (lack of) quality of the Korean linejudges. I guess old habits die hard. [h=2]Players[/h]There is also an interesting change of behavior from players. In the post-umpire-override and pre-review days, players often makes a big deal out of any calls, as the only person they can plea to is the umpire, might as well make a big fuzz to see if it works. However, after the review system is implemented, I noticed players are much less likely to throw a big tantrum. My take on it is this. Badminton player have excellent perception, eyesight, and awareness. They have to in order to be the best players in the world. After any shuttlecock lands, they already know exactly whether it is out or not. Before review, they can try to throw a big tantrum, but now with the review system, they know whatever they do won’t affect the outcome. In other words, players has been force to be more honest. Sometimes some players, like Lee Chong Wei in the recent Korea Open quarterfinal, did he usual “I don’t believe you called it in” reaction after one call, but in the end, he let it slip without asking for a challenge, as he already know that it was a good call. He didn’t even bother looking at the umpire. Before the system was put into practice, there was a concern of players abusing the system to get some breathing time as have happened often in tennis. So far we have not see any of that happening. Only time will tell if players will take advantage of the system this way. And in a brilliant move by BWF, the 2 incorrect challenge limit should prevent that from happening. [h=2]Fans[/h]The last group of people affected would be the fans. And there are two different takes on this. Everyone love to see fair competition, and everyone love to know that the heros and heroines win or lose a match in a fair manner. The addition of the review system will definitely make that happen. Perhaps the tantrum and walkover that we have experienced before will go away from now on. And also badminton will gain a better reputation, in which we haven’t been very good at lately as most of the headline news we got seems to be bad ones. On the other end, being a devil’s advocate, taking out the human variability into the system seem to have taken away the organic part of badminton. No longer we will see players twisting their faces, walking up to the umpire chair and shout “not fair!” to him. Line calls will be more clinical and lack in emotion. Overall, this is a great direction that badminton is moving towards. Hats off to BWF this time.
Good points, Kwun. Now all BWF has to do is to show the challenge video on the big screen and then we'll have the "drama and excitement" that they promised. Because as it is now, it is very boring both for the players and the fans while waiting for the ref to do the video review.
Have to correct myself above, just watched the Lee/Yoo vs Endo/Hayakawa match, they do show it on screen. Dang, there are some really bad line judging against the JPN. Fortunately they had this line challenge system in place.
