Play stops and an animation of the shot is displayed on the court’s main screen.
The animations are not actual images of the ball in question as it lands on the court
but a representation drawn from the algorithm the technology uses to analyze every
shot, based on information gathered by high-speed cameras placed around the
court which track how fast the ball is moving at what trajectory at about 100
frames per second. Hawk-Eye doesn’t tell you where the ball landed—it just tells
you the statistically most likely path!
If this sounds like it could go wrong, well, yes.
The Negatives
During the early years of its use, many problems arose due to inconsistencies in the
rules which helped only to make the system seem more confusing than it really
was to the general public and gave more validity to the arguments of critics.
Another problem involves the decision on where the system will be used. At major
tournaments, the only courts that implement this technology are high profile courts.
The outer courts often have to do without the Hawk-Eye system which opens the
debate of whether or not it is fair that only high seeded players are privileged with
using the system. In addition to this, the high-profile courts are given the best
officiating staff as they are the ones that will be hosting televised matches. This
places lower ranked players playing on the outer courts at a disadvantage because
they will experience the same problems that warrant the need for challenging calls,
but will not have the technology to use in addition to a lower quality officiating
staff.
One problem that has evolved over the last few years is that chair umpires and line
judges have become increasingly hesitant when making calls. Now that the players
have the ability to challenge the rulings of these officials, the more weight a point
carries the more likely it has become that an official will leave it to the players to
just challenge. At the same time, instances of delayed calls or officials being
caught not paying attention to points have also increased dramatically.
36