ZACH COHEN: NO
HawkEye has definitely been a good addition to the tour, but I just do not want to see it on clay. There's something about spotting the ball in that dirt that just feels like tradition, and I think the ITF has done enough to impact the game this year already. Let the clay-court officiating stay the way it is—a beautiful mess.
ASHLEY NDEBELE: YES
Tennis players are easily prone to negative thinking during matches, especially when things are not going in their favor. HawkEye is one of the tangible elements that affords a player closure after a challenge. On clay, where players have to rely on chair umpires to make tough calls, it can be very tricky, since in some cases umpires don’t see the same impressions that the players see.
STEVE FLINK: YES
I have long believed HawkEye should be used at clay-court tournaments. It is true that ball marks make it easier to determine if a shot is in or out, but we have seen on telecasts instances when umpires have overruled incorrectly on clay, and when linesmen have been wrong. I am totally in favor of HawkEye on clay. Players should have the opportunity to challenge on that surface, just as they do on all of the others. I simply don’t understand the argument against it.
NINA PANTIC: YES.
As the past few weeks have proved, it’s possible to make mistakes calling lines on clay, especially when multiple ball marks crowd a small area. Stray dirt covers the lines often and it’s hard to see a 100+ mph shot on any surface. A universal HawkEye system in place all year long would help players be even more comfortable with using it and with working with umpires.
About Tough Call:
In Tough Call, our TC Live panelists debate the toughest questions in tennis. Is Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal the GOAT? Who would win between 2007 Serena Williams and 2017 Serena Williams? On court coaching - yes or no? Tennis is a competitive, one on one sport. In Tough Call our experts debate - and our viewers decide who wins.
Watch more editions of Tough Call