By: weekendatbernies1974 31/10/2008 12:39 pm Yahoo! Profile: weekendatbernies1974 Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| How can your ball be "theoretically" out peenpong when it was in by a mm. Yes it was "called" in. But it hasn't been called out. Every tennis player can not know for sure if the ball is in or out esp if it is a matter of mm which will determine it. And esp if it up in the far corner of the court. |
|
By: peenpong 31/10/2008 12:26 pm Yahoo! Profile: peenpong Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
When you walk off the court, having won.... how good or satisfied do you feel, when quite a number of your balls have been called in by a mm. Theoretically, your ball was OUT. Lines are meant to be played WITHIN not without...
I personally could not do it.... if I am of the calibre of the top players... |
|
By: bearyfolk 30/10/2008 1:20 pm Yahoo! Profile: bearyfolk Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I think the leaving court together at Wimbledon ended at about the same as bowing to the royal box.
Don't get me wrong about hawkeye, I think there is a place in the game for something like that. I just think that the picture representation of the ball isn't always right. I have seen players argue over both a drop shot and a lob after the hawkeye footage was shown. Lleyton Hewitt is one who springs to mind. He argued with the central umpire after a drop shot from his opponent was ruled in on a challenge. The video replay showed the ball represented as a very elongated oval. Of course Lleyton was ridiculed over it, but he has a point. If you watch a slow motion replay of a ball hitting the ground on a soft drop shot you will see that it hits in an almost round shape. Same with most lobs, they hit and bounce almost straight up again. If the ball hits the gound in an elongated shape it would shoot through more rather than bouncing high. |
|
By: peenpong 30/10/2008 12:34 pm Yahoo! Profile: peenpong Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
hello bearyfolk... thanks
I think Hawkeye is more than a gimmick... it is often the decider of a game, set or match. Not many balls are questioned for a soft drop shot - usually they are for serves, long or wide shots.
Obviously a player feels bad (and) mad when they have lost a match (especially a close one) but it is no reason to be ill mannered. Tennis Players work hard but they are also very privileged AND they are doing what they love to do for a living.
I dont know whether Wimbledon have those rules but no one seems to do it there either!! |
|
By: bearyfolk 30/10/2008 11:56 am Yahoo! Profile: bearyfolk Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
You've got some interesting discussion points there peenpong.
Hawkeye - I think is a good gimmick. You will never convince me that the ball lands in the exact shape (oval) every time it hits the ground. There is no way that a ball hit as a soft drop shot lands the same way as a full blooded flat forehand.
Shaking hands after the match - guess some people are just not good sports.
I thought the only place where the players ever walked off the court together was Wimbledon, and that was "the rules". |
|
By: peenpong 30/10/2008 11:37 am Yahoo! Profile: peenpong Did this message offend you? Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
I thought it would be nice to have a discussion about the finer points of tennis...
What do you think of Hawkeye.... with its millimetre calls?
Why do some players barely shake hands after the match?
When did they stop walking off the court together as was customary in the past?
There are other things to discuss as well as individual players aye?
Polite replies only please.... |
|