Wilbon on Tennis, Instant Replay, and Getting it Right

[dlgood]

Another post where yours truly waxes philosophical on sports...

In today's Washington Post, Michael Wilbon discusses using instant replay to officiate tennis in the wake of embarassing and erroneous calls in the Serena Williams - Jennifer Capriati match at the US Open.

as silly as it seems for tennis to give itself over to such an intrusion (instant replay), the delay and the annoyance are preferable to having matches decided on calls everybody watching knows are incorrect.

This notion that human error is tolerable from officials and umpires because the competitors themselves make errors is about the dumbest argument I've ever heard, not to mention lazy. (emphasis mine) We don't watch sports to see refs and umps. If there's a way technology can instantly show us the correct call, it simply must be used. (snip)

Getting it right is all that should matter. And the current technology will get it right. In tennis, there's no judgment as there is in using football replays. There's no coordination of feet and hands, no decision on whether a receiver is juggling or has possession. Either the ball touches some part of the line or it doesn't.

The world is full of uncertainty. Shades of gray. But, there are also places where we can identify black from white, amidst all that gray. Indeed, it's one of the great tests of life. Being able to correctly make correct judgements amidst the confusion. And additionally, being able to recognize when you don't have enough tools to make the correct judgement, and raising your capability so that you can do so. Not taking shortcuts. And not settling for adequate when you can do even better.

In Tennis, we have such a scenario. There are rules that call for judgement. But whether a ball is on the line, or over the line, is not one of those places. The official, for this purpose, exists to make that call correctly. And to me, anything that can aid this core function, without too much intrusion, is almost required. Should we see Instant Replay on every tennis court? Probably not.

But "trying to get it right" is a core responsibility. Not just in tennis, or officiating. In life. Whatever it is, you deem worth doing -- is worth the effort of doing well. Presuming I take a task seriously... I have a hard time excusing or tolerating avoidable errors. I recognize that I (and everyone else) is human and flawed. But I also believe that we ought to be trying to rise above those flaws instead of letting us define ourselves by our flaws.

And getting back to the Tennis. I'd hate to see someone be denied a Championship, not because they were defeated, or because they failed, but because an official made an incorrect call. So I'm not going to object to a policy of minimal tolerance for error from the officials. I know they're human. But then, I'm asking them to be the best they can be -- even if that requires using a TV monitor to double check. If they're willing to settle for adequacy, they don't belong in the chair for a championship match.

Edited to Add: Upon further review by flyergirl, the match was between Serena and Jennifer Capriati, and not Lindsay Davenport as I'd originally written.

Comments

[stephanierb.livejournal.com]

I agree. I think in this particular instance it would've been useful, since the line judge called it correctly, but was overruled by the chair umpire. I also think that instant replay wouldn't be required often enough for people to get annoyed by the delay. Incorrect calls like the one made by Alves don't happen that often.

I'd hate to see someone be denied a Championship, not because they were defeated, or because they failed, but because an official made an incorrect call.

I agree, but unless it's match point, how do you make that determination? I've never given much credibility to the idea that winning or losing a particular point makes the difference between winning or losing the match. In the Williams/Capriati case, I don't believe that incorrect call cost Serena the match. IMO, her game was the reason she didn't win. She's a professional and if she wasn't mentally tough enough to handle a bad call and move on, then she never would've become the champion she is.

[dlgood.livejournal.com]

I agree, but unless it's match point, how do you make that determination? I've never given much credibility to the idea that winning or losing a particular point makes the difference between winning or losing the match.

It's a hard determination to make. Though there are obvious cases like the '85 World Series or the Fifth Down game.

Having been involved in competition since I was a kid, sports and academic, I've always believed that every point matters. The Sport has to do whatever they can within reason to reduce Officiating Bias/Error as a factor in the outcome of the game.

She's a professional and if she wasn't mentally tough enough to handle a bad call and move on

That's true, and Serena herself acknowledges it. But it's also no excuse for incompetence. It's hard enough to beat the opponent. It's increasingly tougher when you have to beat the officials too. If the player is to be held accountable for their good and bad plays, held to a championships standard, then the officials must be as well.