says
The sticky bit is stuck.
says
The sticky bit is stuck.
Well-Known Member
The WD final did leave a very sour taste. Whatever great feats SYS and WMY may acomplish in the future, they will always be stained. There might be a way to redeem themselves, but right now I just don't see it.
Folks, let's not fall into that trap of thinking think that if there's a hard problem, then there must and will be an easy technological solution. Technological solutions affect technological problems only, and that's a part of the problem at best.
The problem here is not the limits of human perceptions, or the all too human errors of judgement sometimes made. The flaw here is basic and deep unsportsmanship, willfull exploitation of the built-in system of coping with human flaw to manipulate the flow of the game.
On point: even if technology was available and used to help re-evaluate disputed decisions, the fact that you can break the opponent's momentum by pretending there's a dispute at all and create a disturbance of the flow of the game by going into dispute resolution itself is enough. And that's what happened here. Players with poor sportsmanship wantonly invoked a dispute where they knew there was none. Mima Ito and Hina Hayata tried to cope with it, tried to have it affect them as little as possible, but it was plain for all to see that it broke Hina Hayata's stride even so.
A hawk eye system would have lead to the point being rewarded to MI/HH. They would have lead 10-9, but still their flow would have been broken.
Ugly as sin. I hold these two "winners" in deep contempt.
Folks, let's not fall into that trap of thinking think that if there's a hard problem, then there must and will be an easy technological solution. Technological solutions affect technological problems only, and that's a part of the problem at best.
The problem here is not the limits of human perceptions, or the all too human errors of judgement sometimes made. The flaw here is basic and deep unsportsmanship, willfull exploitation of the built-in system of coping with human flaw to manipulate the flow of the game.
On point: even if technology was available and used to help re-evaluate disputed decisions, the fact that you can break the opponent's momentum by pretending there's a dispute at all and create a disturbance of the flow of the game by going into dispute resolution itself is enough. And that's what happened here. Players with poor sportsmanship wantonly invoked a dispute where they knew there was none. Mima Ito and Hina Hayata tried to cope with it, tried to have it affect them as little as possible, but it was plain for all to see that it broke Hina Hayata's stride even so.
A hawk eye system would have lead to the point being rewarded to MI/HH. They would have lead 10-9, but still their flow would have been broken.
Ugly as sin. I hold these two "winners" in deep contempt.
