Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Technology

Djokovic Wants Line Judges Replaced by Technology (reuters.com) 60

Posted by msmash from the how-about-that dept.
Novak Djokovic's relationship with line officials has been difficult of late and the Serbian risked their wrath again late last week when he suggested they were unnecessary. From a report: The 33-year-old world number one was dramatically defaulted in the U.S. Open fourth round after inadvertently hitting a female line judge in the throat with a loose ball. Now he believes their job should be done by Hawkeye technology. "With all my respect for the tradition and the culture we have in this sport, when it comes to people present on the court during a match, including line (judges), I really don't see a reason why every single tournament in this world, in this technological advanced era, would not have what we had during the Cincinnati/New York tournaments," Djokovic said. The COVID-19 pandemic meant the majority of courts at the U.S. Open, part from the main show courts, dispensed with line judges as a health precaution. They are back at the French Open which, because it is on clay, does not use Hawkeye technology for close calls, relying instead on the umpire to examine a mark in the red dust. While the issue of whether players should be able to challenge via a Hawkeye review at the French Open and other claycourt events, as they do on other surfaces, has been debated all week here, Djokovic appears to want to go further.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Djokovic Wants Line Judges Replaced by Technology More

Djokovic Wants Line Judges Replaced by Technology

Comments Filter:

  • Tennis (Score:5, Informative)

    by ardmhacha ( 192482 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @10:34AM (#60574068)

    For the non sports fans in the audience the article is about tennis, which isn't mentioned in the summary.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Rei ( 128717 )

      Thank you! I was legitimately confused and was about to google what on Earth they were talking about.

  • Wish they would do this in baseball. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by olsmeister ( 1488789 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @10:37AM (#60574076)
    The balls and strikes calls from umpires are so inconsistent; they often cost teams runs and even games. I know "purists" would disagree but it's so frustrating when your team gets screwed by a call that is obviously wrong.

    • and take away good pay union jobs?

      • No. You would still need umpires to do things like determine whether a runner is safe when he slides into the base, whether the batter actually swung, etc. Just take away the ball and strike calling responsibility.

        • still need them to override if an
          NO Call comes up
          Players to game the system
          Very obviously bad call from the system
          etc
          and no job cuts / add an booth video judge for ball and strikes.

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by Luckyo ( 1726890 )

            Players already can challenge bad calls a certain amount of times in high level tournaments. Djukovic is just salty because he lost his long win streak for behaving in an exceedingly unsportsmanlike manner, and it coming back to bite him hard when he got disqualified for it.

            • This. He acted like a child, lashed out and unfortunately hit a person in the head. Fortunately, she was OK, otherwise he may be facing a civil trial over assault. But he got bit anyway because you just don't get away with crap like that in tennis. He defaulted, as was appropriate. As the parent pointed out, you can challenge, and I don't know if they always use it, but I have seen instant replay challenges with what appears to be pretty high quality cameras to verify the line judge call. So not sure what

              • Re:and take away good pay union jobs? (Score:4)

                by Luckyo ( 1726890 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @03:48PM (#60575202)

                It was worse. He hit her in the throat. However it wasn't an assault by any measure, it was clearly an accident. He smacked the ball from the offside without even looking where it went. It was a clear cut accident.

                The problem is that tennis is a gentleman's sport, and ethics code is very strict and is written into rules to which all players agree. His behaviour was a brazen violation, so he got DQ'd, ending his long winning streak.

    • The balls and strikes calls from umpires are so inconsistent; they often cost teams runs and even games. I know "purists" would disagree but it's so frustrating when your team gets screwed by a call that is obviously wrong.

      It would take too much of the human element out. Baseball isn't a foot race or weight lifting, it's a bizarre set of objectives and rules that somehow people enjoy participating in and watching. You might get a strictly fairer game, but it would be less interesting. People like the meta of baseball as much or more than the game itself. They like complaining about calls too much to take away that human element. It may be stupid, but it's baseball.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Nidi62 ( 1525137 )

      The balls and strikes calls from umpires are so inconsistent; they often cost teams runs and even games. I know "purists" would disagree but it's so frustrating when your team gets screwed by a call that is obviously wrong.

      Eh, the fact that there is variation isn't that big of a deal; with the fact that the variations between umpires are generally known, it can be expected and planned for. People only really get worked up if there is a variance in calls within the same game by the same umpire. If a pitch has a location that should be a ball is called a strike in the 2nd inning against the home team, then that same pitch/location against the away team in the 6th should be called a strike as well.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Pascoea ( 968200 )

        People only really get worked up if there is a variance in calls within the same game by the same umpire.

        This is generally the biggest issue with umpires in baseball, well that and the consistently variable grounds for ejecting a player that chirps about a shitty ball/strike call. Balls/strikes are basically the only call in baseball that a team cannot challenge. We have the technology to remove that variable, why wouldn't we? Maybe that's where the "romance" is in the arguments about getting rid of the umps ability to adjust their strike zone to suit their current fancy: Bitching about crappy calls is th

    • Just think of the jobs!

    • The balls and strikes calls from umpires are so inconsistent; they often cost teams runs and even games. I know "purists" would disagree but it's so frustrating when your team gets screwed by a call that is obviously wrong.

      There are two issues with calling the baseball strike zone. First, there is inaccuracy due to calling a really fast ball moving through a 3-D space with imaginary lines. Second, there is intentional perturbation of the imaginary lines. In some cases, the changing of the zone is so ludicrous that such "strikes" are clearly impossible to hit without leaving the batter's box. Some umpires are consistent with their ludicrous strike zone, so it's not a just a matter of consistency but fairness.

  • It's just a game (Score:3)

    by nagora ( 177841 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @10:55AM (#60574140)

    Hitting a ball about and earning serious money for no personal risk is a luxury Novak has been a lucky recipient off. The least he could do is shut up and get on with it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by grogger ( 638944 )
      It's true. Any idiot could be number 1 or 2 ranked player in the world in a major sport for a decade like Joker. All they need to do is buy a racket and sign up at the US Open or something and if they are lucky they could earn millions of dollars. You should join Manchester United (that is soccer/football) - they pay pretty good.

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by nagora ( 177841 )

        It's true. Any idiot could be number 1 or 2 ranked player in the world in a major sport for a decade like Joker. All they need to do is buy a racket and sign up at the US Open or something and if they are lucky they could earn millions of dollars.

        He is lucky. He's lucky he's not working down a third world mineshaft with minimum wage and no insurance.

        He's incredibly lucky that the totally unimportant and trivial skill he has is worth a fortune due to the popularity of a game and the invention of television and satellite technology to exploit that popularity.

        He's really, really amazingly lucky that he plays that game in a period when the equipment suits his style of play.

        So, if he could just focus on how fucking lucky he is instead of trying to put ot

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by grogger ( 638944 )
          He is an entertainer. People pay for him to entertain him. That would make his skill important and non-trivial. He has worked his whole life with extreme dedication and persistence to do something that him and maybe four others of his generation have achieved. You can disagree with his stance on human lines keepers but you do not make that point by downplaying his abilities and importance. If his silly game were not important to people the lines keepers, refs, stadium workers, television workers, webca

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by nagora ( 177841 )

            He is an entertainer. People pay for him to entertain him. That would make his skill important and non-trivial. He has worked his whole life with extreme dedication and persistence to do something that him and maybe four others of his generation have achieved. You can disagree with his stance on human lines keepers but you do not make that point by downplaying his abilities and importance. If his silly game were not important to people the lines keepers, refs, stadium workers, television workers, webcasters, etc would not have a job to begin with.

            I'm not downplaying his abilities but if the whole ATP vanished in a puff of smoke tomorrow it wouldn't make much difference to the world.

            Novak is in a mood because he got angry and hit someone by accident and was penalised. His solution for that is that the other people should be sacked so that he doesn't have to control his tantrums while being paid a fortune for playing a game.

            That's bullshit.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Rhipf ( 525263 )

        You missed the qualification that they need to cry like a baby when they are disciplined for their unruly behaviour as well.

        8^)

  • Keep Going (Score:3)

    by CanadianMacFan ( 1900244 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @10:57AM (#60574148)

    We have the technology to simulate it all with technology so why not get rid of the players too!

  • Do yourselves a favor, pro tennis players: keep the human element in your sport. Add high-speed cameras if you must, so there's no mistakes. But if you're thinking so-called shitty excuse for 'AI' is going to improve things? Think again. You can't trust it, not even for something as simple as this.

    • Re:If it involves so-called 'AI' then forget it (Score:5, Informative)

      by BeerFartMoron ( 624900 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @11:04AM (#60574174)
      There is no AI in Hawk-Eye [wikipedia.org]:

      All Hawk-Eye systems are based on the principles of triangulation using visual images and timing data provided by a number of high-speed video cameras located at different locations and angles around the area of play. For tennis there are ten cameras. The system rapidly processes the video feeds from the cameras and ball tracker. A data store contains a predefined model of the playing area and includes data on the rules of the game.

      In each frame sent from each camera, the system identifies the group of pixels which corresponds to the image of the ball. It then calculates for each frame the position of the ball by comparing its position on at least two of the physically separate cameras at the same instant in time. A succession of frames builds up a record of the path along which the ball has travelled. It also "predicts" the future flight path of the ball and where it will interact with any of the playing area features already programmed into the database. The system can also interpret these interactions to decide infringements of the rules of the game.

      The system generates a graphic image of the ball path and playing area, which means that information can be provided to judges, television viewers or coaching staff in near real-time.

      The tracking system is combined with a back-end database and archiving capabilities so that it is possible to extract and analyse trends and statistics about individual players, games, ball-to-ball comparisons, etc.

      • I likely posted too soon. Hawk-eye does include a "statistical" [uk.com] component to identify which pixels are ball/puck/etc in each frame of the video.

        Some may call that AI, others may not.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by OzPeter ( 195038 )

          I likely posted too soon. Hawk-eye does include a "statistical" [uk.com] component to identify which pixels are ball/puck/etc in each frame of the video.

          Some may call that AI, others may not.

          And a majority simply call it "Magic"

        • Like the joke says, it's always AI in the product pitch, machine learning in the job posting, and linear algebra in the implementation.

        • Some may call that AI, others may not.

          Image analysis is not AI. Hawk-eye predates neutral network training, or anything "AI" a marketing department can come up with. Hell man the system is old enough to vote.

    • He's talking about replacing line judges with the same technology which has literally been in use for a decade. It's like saying you don't trust that fancy computer thing and whip out your slide rule to do division. It's done. It's proven. And it's shown to be far better than humans have.

  • Or maybe trainers, for neural-oid nets.

    But I prefer the term "canned people extract".

    Because that's what it is: A condensed, prepared version of people's choices that is only as flexible as the designers could anticipate. Which is exactly the problem ... if it is a problem.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by msauve ( 701917 )
      >But I prefer the term "canned people extract".

      I always wondered what the generic term for Soylent Green was.

  • Next we replace Djokovic (Score:3)

    by fredrated ( 639554 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @11:13AM (#60574206) Journal

    with a robot.

  • As I understand the tennis rules, a ball counts as in as long as any portion of the ball contacts the line. This means that if the center of the ball hits, say, an inch outside the line, whether the ball is in depends on how much the ball compresses on impact. If it compresses enough, it will touch the line.

    From my reading, on clay courts the judges will actually examine the impression left by the ball in the clay, and if that impression overlaps the line, the ball counts as in. Hawkeye technology works by

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Strider- ( 39683 )

      Amusingly, "Clay" courts aren't even clay. The problem with actual clay is that if it gets wet, it turns into a soupy mess. Instead, the courts are built up out of compressed crushed rock (something like 1/2" minus mix), and then finally covered in a thin layer of brick dust to make it clay coloured.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Monday October 05, 2020 @11:59AM (#60574424)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • So I guess instead of correcting your behavior

      He had like a moment most big sports athletes have, or hell at any level of competition

      Yep good work. Just ask the best of the best to correct their behaviour despite at the same time acknowledging everyone does it.

      just suggest that human referees just don't exist on the court! Why not.

      But here you have gone off the rails. His anger was not at the ref's call or at the line judge. There are many people on court. Unless you think pro players are going to have a future collecting their own balls what you said is non-sequitur.

    • The thing is, many of those tantrums are actually justified. They took slow motion video of tennis balls hitting the line in the 1980s. They were expecting to see the ball hit the line (or not hit the line) and bounce. Instead what they found was that the ball hits, squashes and deforms, skids along the surface of the court for a bit, before returning to a sphere and bouncing back up. So it's not just position and velocity which determines where the ball hits the ground, it's position, velocity, spin, do

  • Since you want more technology into your game, go grab a Nintendo Wii and play Mario Tennis online. That will give you all the needed non-social interaction you want for your “sport”.

    Sincerely,
    True sports fans.

  • Why not for Football as well when it breaks the plane of the goal line. Seems like an easy thing to do.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Pascoea ( 968200 )
      What's your proposal? I can guarantee it's not as easy problem as you'd think. No way they're going to let you add/change anything about the ball. And you can't do it optically, as the ball is at least partially concealed most of the time.
    • Because it's not just if the ball breaks the plane. The refs have to determine whether that happens before any part (excepting the feet or hands) of the player carrying the ball hit the ground first, plus whether the player even has control of the ball at the time.
  • Only the two largest courts at the US Open used human line judges, backed up by Hawkeye when players challenged line calls. Every other court at the Open used Hawkeye Live with no line judges. If a tournament (or eventually your local tennis club) can afford Hawkeye Live, it should be preferred. What's distasteful about Djokovic's plea is that it would seem to come from an attitude of blaming the line judge for his misbehavior at the Open and getting disqualified. Earlier this year, he pushed for tournament
  • Let's just get ball hitting robots out there while we're at it. The players are unnecessary if we want to watch the ball being hit back and forth across the net.

  • ...and the wind shifted mid-serve, and the sun was in my eyes, and the fly-ball went higher than the stadium lights, and there was a notch in the ice, and the fans were making too much noise, and the fans weren't making enough noise.

    It's sports. How many times does a tennis ball bounce in a given match? How many of those have any chance of being mis-called? And then how many actually are.

    So sorry two calls didn't go your way -- out of 10x5x6x8=2'400 bounces. You had to win (or lose) by two anyway, and y

  • can we dispense with players too? robo players are definitely more entertaining,and much cheaper...

Slashdot Top Deals

Talent does what it can. Genius does what it must. You do what you get paid to do.

Close