Comments on: Could there be an as yet unseen flaw with Hawk-Eye?..Consider the following possibility.? http://www.unseenforum.com/unseen-line/could-there-be-an-as-yet-unseen-flaw-with-hawk-eye-consider-the-following-possibility Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:57:59 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: aflumpire http://www.unseenforum.com/unseen-line/could-there-be-an-as-yet-unseen-flaw-with-hawk-eye-consider-the-following-possibility/comment-page-1#comment-2845 aflumpire Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:30:59 +0000 http://www.unseenforum.com/unseen-line/could-there-be-an-as-yet-unseen-flaw-with-hawk-eye-consider-the-following-possibility#comment-2845 I think that Hawk-eye is a fantastic innovation to tennis. But the other night in one of the mens game...I think Djockovic challenged a call in the Quarter Final against Hewwit and the ball was in by 1 SINGLE MILLIMETER! the bad this about that is that surley, there must be some margin of error in the Hark-eye system, no computer is perfect. it may have been in by a couple of millimeters but then again, it may have been OUT by a couple of millimeters....thats the thing that people also have to understand. just because it says its in doesnt mean it is. I remember a couple of years ago when they new hawk eye was braught into the australian cricket on ch. 9....the commentators said that there was up to a 3mm margin of error. sometimes the hawk eye will get it spot on...but it can be out sometimes. Yes, umpires have overruled linesman's decision then players have challenged the chair umpires decision and hawk eye has shown that the linesman was correct....devistating for the chair umpire as for match point....well, i wouldnt like to see a player win because of a computer prediction<br><b>References : </b><br> I think that Hawk-eye is a fantastic innovation to tennis.

But the other night in one of the mens game…I think Djockovic challenged a call in the Quarter Final against Hewwit and the ball was in by 1 SINGLE MILLIMETER!

the bad this about that is that surley, there must be some margin of error in the Hark-eye system, no computer is perfect.

it may have been in by a couple of millimeters but then again, it may have been OUT by a couple of millimeters….thats the thing that people also have to understand. just because it says its in doesnt mean it is.

I remember a couple of years ago when they new hawk eye was braught into the australian cricket on ch. 9….the commentators said that there was up to a 3mm margin of error.

sometimes the hawk eye will get it spot on…but it can be out sometimes.

Yes, umpires have overruled linesman’s decision then players have challenged the chair umpires decision and hawk eye has shown that the linesman was correct….devistating for the chair umpire

as for match point….well, i wouldnt like to see a player win because of a computer prediction
References :

]]> By: Hana Kyoyama http://www.unseenforum.com/unseen-line/could-there-be-an-as-yet-unseen-flaw-with-hawk-eye-consider-the-following-possibility/comment-page-1#comment-2844 Hana Kyoyama Mon, 08 Feb 2010 09:06:59 +0000 http://www.unseenforum.com/unseen-line/could-there-be-an-as-yet-unseen-flaw-with-hawk-eye-consider-the-following-possibility#comment-2844 In tennis, when you serve, the ball has to be aimed in the right court, and even if the ball touches the section where the service line and the middle court line meet, it would be considered in. The lines surrounding the court that the service is supposed to be aimed in are considered part of that court.<br><b>References : </b><br> In tennis, when you serve, the ball has to be aimed in the right court, and even if the ball touches the section where the service line and the middle court line meet, it would be considered in. The lines surrounding the court that the service is supposed to be aimed in are considered part of that court.
References :

]]>