In the hawkeye replays, they show a dark circle showing where the ball landed on the court. But a sphere like a tennis ball will have contact with the court only at a point, and not at a full circle. I don't know how they show a big circle showing where the ball landed. And if a portion of that circle is on the line, they call it in.
A ball can bounce and the ball's surface will get flattened a bit, but that will still be a small circle... certainly not as wide as the diameter of the actual ball. Hawkeye decisions are hazy.
The concern of the tennis players is very genuine. Hawk eye is a mere indicator of the direction of the ball which does not take into consideration the spin , the win factors and other such important factors. Hawk eye is used in cricket also but is never considered foolproof and so it's not used as a reference by the third umpire while taking decisions or by the umpire while giving lbw decisions. I therefore feel the hawk eye which is just an extension of technology but not exactly reliable should not be used in decisive sports like tennis. A point can change the whole game and the match as has been proved in a number of occasions.
RE:Hawk eye
by narsim krishna on Mar 02, 2007 10:36 AM
Valid point....but it also adds a new dimension to the game...given the current form of Federer, only such quirky events can be used by the opponents to beat him
