|
|||
|
|||
|
 |
|
|
NASDAQ-100 OPENMarch 22, 2006Angie CunninghamMIAMI, FLORIDA THE MODERATOR: I'd like to introduce you, this is Angie Cunningham. She is the Vice President of On-Site Operations for the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask. Q. Have you had a challenging first day here? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Have we had a challenging first day? No, it's been really smooth. I mean, we were prepared for a busy day, but the first match went very well and the system worked really well. We were glad we had some challenges. So, yeah, we were very happy with the way the first match went. Q. Where did you watch the match from? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: From the review booth, which is located quite close to the media center. Q. Did you, at any time during the match, have to catch yourself from screaming, "Challenge that"? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: No. Actually, the calls that they actually challenged were all worthy calls to challenge on. They were all very close. Obviously, I don't know, you guys probably watched the match pretty closely, there was only one that we changed the call on. But otherwise, no, I was really -- actually, it's interesting for us because we've always judged the officiating and looked at it, but we never had a system that we could really take a closer look at it. I was really impressed with the officiating out on the court. Q. Do you think, as fans get more familiar with the player's ability to challenge a call, there will be more fan interaction? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: My expectation is that there will. I was up in the review booth, but we haven't got a lot of -- you sort of don't get an appreciation for the spectators. I came out for a little while and I was quite close to some spectators. I don't think they fully understand it yet. I think they'll really grasp it during the week. Obviously, they're quite spread out in the stadium at the moment so I think when there's more people around that they'll get, you know, a better feel for it as well. Q. What do you learn about the quality of line calls? Do you expect a certain error rate? What is that from your research? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Well, it's always been hard to quantify until now. I think, you know, I know personally when you're looking at it, even when I was involved in the testing of the different systems, and when we were looking at it, if you have a look at a stationary ball sitting on a court right next to a line, if you actually go and measure that, it can be sort of two centimeters out. But when you're standing back from a line, it's very hard to see it, a gap between the line and the ball. We've always looked at it as they do an unbelievable job, the officials. There are going to be calls that they're not going to be able to make when it's very close to the line. So we've normally said that there can be errors up for a couple of centimeters. Q. Curious as to whether the Serena Williams-Jennifer Capriati match from the US Open two years ago would be so controversial because people saw there were incorrect calls that went against the same player. Was that the impetus before this or were you looking at this before that match? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Definitely, we've never until now had technology. We did a lot of testing all last year and it was only late last year that we had the technology to actually use a system like this. It's always been the focus of the game, we're always looking at ways to improve the game. As soon as we knew that there was a system that we could use and we could bring it into -- this is our first opportunity, and it was a great opportunity to bring it into our biggest event and do it jointly with the ATP, and we've worked very closely with the USTA because it's their goal to use the system as well, and they were obviously trying to do that last year and we just didn't have a system to use. It's always been that, to make more accurate and reliable line calls, we need it, we were going to have to go to the technology as soon as it was available. Q. The cost of this for the 12 days, approximately $130,000? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: I believe -- I'm not involved in the business side of the deal, but I believe it's over $100,000. Q. How does one decide about the cost effectiveness of having it on other courts? Is $260,000 okay? Is $390,000 too much? Where do you draw the line in the number of courts you use? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: I think, again, that's probably a not sort of my area question. I think as soon as we can do it. I mean, the one thing that the players have asked is we like -- we want this to be brought in. We understand it's only on one court, the sooner we can do it on more courts, the better. So that would be our goal. But, obviously, cost is a major factor in it. Q. What did you think of the impact of the flow or lack of impact of the flow of the match? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: It's always been the goal that it shouldn't affect the flow of the match. And I think, I mean, actually from what I was watching and what we've seen at Hopman Cup even when we first trialed it, it actually is quite very fast. Actually, in a lot of ways, it speeds up the flow because you don't have the long, dragged-out conversations. I was actually quite interested, watching the players when they asked for the review. I didn't feel like they were really focusing on the review out there. I mean, that's something you could ask them, but I felt like they had a lot of trust in the system. Q. Do you feel like they're up to speed on the protocol and the way the procedure works? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: The players? Q. Yeah. ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, they were. We made sure that we went to the players beforehand and that they really understood it. In the prematch, the umpires in every match - like what they normally do - are going to talk to the players about it and, say, go over the rules again just to make sure they're really clear on it. But we actually made sure before those players went out on court, and we'll do that for all the players here because it is a very new thing. It's new for the players, it's new for the officials. The chair umpire that was out there today has used the system at Hopman Cup, which is why we chose her as the first match, but there's not many other officials here that have actually used it either. It's really new for everyone. We've done a training process with the officials and also we'll make sure we speak to all the players beforehand so that we can sort of one-on-one talk to them and talk about questions they may have. Q. If there's no controversy and a chair umpire is thinking of an overrule, can the chair umpire look at the screen? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: No, it's based on player challenges. The way the system works, what we've got in place and the protocols, is based on the players having to challenge. The only time that it won't happen - and the only time it won't be based on a player challenge - is if the linesman is unsighted. So you'll see them, they do that as soon as they're supposed to call the ball, they'll indicate that they're unsighted. If the umpire is unsure of the call, doesn't have a call on it, then they can call for it then. But it will only be in that case that they will be able to do that. Q. In theory, you could get every single call correct if you didn't have a challenge system, and the chair umpire and the technician in the booth were to work on every single point, you'd never get one wrong. So why not go in that direction if that's what you really want to do, is correct bad line calls? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: It was based on looking at the, you know -- this is obviously what we've decided. I think we sort of did a joint decision with all the different organizations working together, and it was based a lot on player feedback and input that we got from all our partners. So that's why we decided to go the limited. But you bring up the case that if a player -- we didn't see that today. What we've seen even when we used unlimited in Hopman Cup, we've never seen the players get to a stage where they're going to go over those. If they're correct, they basically have unlimited challenges. Really it was looking at -- it was a big sort of feedback from players initially when we were talking about bringing the system about, chances of abuse. So they were more comfortable with the limited system as well. You're right, we could have a system where if someone has run out of challenges and there's a call there, that we might be able to correct. Q. That is the one contradiction in the whole system. The whole premise of the system is to correct bad lines. You now have technology to get every single call perfect. You don't need a challenge system. Maybe you shouldn't even have a challenge system. ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Well, not exactly, because the system is not set up that it's calling every line. It's still an officiating aide. You can still have a call in the middle of a rally. Unless the player stops the point -- at the moment, at the end -- so the system is never going to be -- at the moment, it's not set up to get every call right because we're not set up to do every call. Q. Is there a certain call, it has to be close to the line? Does the ball have to be within a certain amount? Will the system handle all challenges? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: With the way that we've actually done the accuracy testing, we tested within a certain range, but the system can call all the balls. What we have seen is the further away it is, the accuracy isn't as good. It's much better closer up to the line. The bigger distances, the accuracy is different. We're not anticipating -- I mean, the challenges that we had today were -- all of the calls were within three centimeters of the line. So the players are going to be questioning the calls that we probably were expecting them to, the area that we think that there may be misjudgment on. Q. Are let cords subject to challenge? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: No, that's not part of the system. It's only actual line calls. Q. Foot faults? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: No. Q. Is there an official or umpire in the booth with the replay? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Yeah, every match will have what we call a "review official." Today there was quite -- at the moment, there's quite a few of us up there. But every day there will be a review official, and that will either be one of our supervisors or one of the designated chair umpires. One of the ideas is that we'll use them at any event that we use it, but it's a good way for them to get a feel of the system as well. Q. Do they have a button that says it's in or out, or is it software? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: We're working with the HawkEye tech guys, so there's a group of us up there. What we see is we see -- they can pull up different calls, but basically at the end they'll pull up the last five calls. So we will say -- because there might be a reflex shot or something like that. The review officials are the ones who make sure that we send the correct information out on to the board, and we give the okay for that to go out there. Q. Who ultimately makes the decision whether it's in or out? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: The system. The system does it, yeah. We see the call and say that's the call that the player is questioning, send it up there to the board, as soon as we know there's a challenge being made, and it's an official challenge. Send it up there and we all see it at the same time. Q. The challenge system is for entertainment value for the fans. In the National Football League, they have red flags they throw on the field. Do you think that would be a good idea, the players could whip the red flag out of their back pocket? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: I think it would be problematic for them, some of the girls' outfits anyway (smiling). Yeah, actually, we talk about all different innovations to have on the players. They're not comfortable with that at the moment (smiling). Q. Part of the rules, the challenge has to be made in a timely manner. ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: Yes. Q. What is the interpretation on that? Player walks away, frustrated. ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: What we're saying is it's on a point-ending shot, or if they're -- it's very similar to the clay court procedures basically. So they're allowed a reflex shot, you know. If it's coming off a serve, then they don't seem to return it because it's quite quick, but they have to anyway. They can't wait and see where their ball ends up before they can question it basically. They have to stop the play, or on the end of a rally. Q. As you know, even on hard courts, depending how much dust is on the court, you can sometimes see the outline of the ball on the court, a little bit of fuzz on the court. Would a player be allowed, on a point-ending shot, to examine what he thinks is a mark on the court before deciding to ask for a challenge even though that might take 10 or 15 seconds? ANGIE CUNNINGHAM: The idea is keeping it under 10 seconds with this at the moment, which is what we're looking at, how the system can work. I mean, interesting, I had a brief conversation with the chair umpire afterwards, and we did see the -- I don't know if you might have seen it. There was a question, it looked like Ashley might have been going to challenge a call, and the umpire said, "I saw it clearly." Apparently, there was a ball mark on the court that looked like it was out. And this is what happens a little bit on hard court. It's a little bit deceiving sometimes. We will be cautioning the players to be careful on ball marks. They'll have to use their own judgment on it. But actually, we were sort of checking it and the ball was in, it was correctly called.
End of FastScripts... |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
About ASAP Sports •
FastScripts Archive •
Recent Interviews •
Captioning •
Upcoming Events •
Contact Us
FastScripts | Events Covered | Our Clients | Other Services | ASAP in the News | Site Map | Job Opportunities | Links |
|
ASAP Sports, Inc. | T: 1.212 385 0297
|