geoffism.com

I gotta toss this in there. I think Hawk-Eye is killing the game. Not the whole game. I’ll explain.I just watched the men’s final for Wimbledon and I’m a little torn on how I feel about the state of Professional Tennis these days. It was a great match - don’t get me wrong. Let me back up just a little bit. I grew up watching the likes of Johnny Mac, Connors, Noah, Becker, Edberg, Cash, etc… Very entertaining stuff. Not just the tennis, but the characters- maybe not so much with the Swedes, but the rest of the guys, even Lendl, who was tennis’s Dr. Evil, brought some color to the court.

Today, you have this Hawk-Eye system. It totally eliminates the arguing with the ump. THAT SUCKS! Not that arguing a call ever made the umpire EVER change his mind, but at least there was a little more than grunts and hand signals to coaches. Today, I mean, a player challenges, and “replay” shows it in or out. That’s it. Done. Move on. Very definitive - so to speak. It’s a computer model of the apprximate trajectory of the ball. I think I heard its like 90% accurate. Basically, some MIT guy got paid. Come on…I wanna see Federer smash his frame against a netpost. Could you imagine Nadal getting fired up (more than his N-Synch “hop-fistpump”)? Roddick at least chats it up on the court, let his mouth run a little bit, I like it, he’s also got Connors in his corner. Its not about being a showman (like Agassi) but just allowing a little character to come out. Don’t you want to see someone absolutely lose it because they think the out call at 30-40, 5-all in the final set was wrong. It would suck, to have a match end on a bad call, but that is what the ump is for, right? - to make sure its correct (maybe).

So, lets start there. Boot the Hawk-Eye system. Idea #2, have a tournament with only wood racquets, but that’s for another day.