Miami 2018 - Should technology replace lines judges?


Congratulations to Sloane Stevens for winning Miami.


The final, especially the first set, was exciting. I think Ostapenko played really well throughout the tournament. Strong on both sides, her forehand and backhand were weapons that could have clinched the final but a wrong call at the beginning of the second set seemed to disrupt her rhythm, or so it appeared to me, and the set ran away from her. However, she played brilliantly all round. It’s the clay court season now so this is in her favour and I look forward to her defending her French Open title.

The final left me wondering whether the tennis tour would benefit from using technology rather than lines judges. Ostapenko hits the ball so incredibly hard that it’s nigh to impossible for a human eye to see the ball accurately and judge whether it’s in or out since the margin of error is so miniscule. This is especially the case when a ball catches only the outside edge of the line so is ‘in’ but easily appears ‘out’ to the human eye. Anticipation is tricky too because the flight of the ball is changeable depending on the type of spin the player has used (not to mention weather conditions too), and so its trajectory does not always track whether the ball is aiming for the line accurately or not.


I was delighted that Azarenka made it to the semi-finals. It would have been great had she made it to the final but she definitely seemed more confident in this tournament and played exciting tennis. The tour certainly benefits from her presence. There’s no doubt she can win a Grand Slam once she’s playing regularly.


This is something Sharapova is finding a struggle. It’s very hard to play well if you are stopping and starting all the time, unsure when your next tournament is. This is something I found incredibly difficult on the ITF because it makes physical training and strength/stamina preparation tricky to plan, even if you know a fair amount of sports science! I thought it was lack of match experience so finding out that Sharapova feels the same way about it despite being an experienced top athlete made me feel much better!

Yet again we had the excitement of a lower ranked player coming through deep into the tournament. Danielle Collins, a qualifier, made it to the semi-finals. I was impressed with Collins’s ‘hook’ on the ball for disguising her shot placement, her unusual ball placement choices, her variety of ball height, all of which pushed her opponents eg Venus into making seemingly unforced errors. It seemed to me like Collins’s match play style at Miami was more similar to clay court than hard court match tactics so I’m looking forward to seeing more of her game on clay.



This reinforces my point that lower ranked players can be incredibly good and the disparity between them and top players is not as great as many think. Indeed, players on the ITF play amazing tennis so it’s a pity that their matches/tournaments aren’t given coverage. It would be interesting for the public to watch how well they play it’s not just nothing interesting happens and then suddenly there’s the WTA. It would also help these players financially and bring them on par with other professions eg acting, singing, where people can buy tickets to attend smaller venues to watch emerging talent. Otherwise, they are working hard for no financial recompense or very little depending on the tournament ‘pot’. This is something that needs addressing because these players are not given sponsorship deals that give them advertising exposure yet they still have expenses and overheads. Some players can obtain funding in their country but it can equally be withdrawn leaving the player stranded.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Giorgi wins Montreal (updated)

Should medics be court-side?

Not again, Martina!