Wimbledon AI Line Judges Face Backlash from Pro Tennis Players
In 2025, Wimbledon made headlines not just for the tennis but for its bold decision to replace all human line judges with AI-powered technology. The new system, known as the Electronic Line Calling (ELC) system, promised flawless accuracy and real-time decision-making. But now, mid-tournament, players are pushing back. Wimbledon AI line judges have sparked widespread criticism, with players alleging errors that cost them critical points. From missed calls to technical failures and accessibility problems, many are questioning whether the switch from humans to AI was premature. The controversy raises an important question: is Wimbledon’s leap into AI officiating enhancing the game, or creating new problems for players?
Image Credits:Shi Tang / Contributor / Getty Images
Player Criticism Mounts Over Wimbledon AI Line Judges
The harshest critiques have come directly from top British tennis players. Emma Raducanu expressed frustration after a point that should have gone in her favor was ruled in, despite replay footage clearly showing it landed out. She pointed to the lack of human judgment and accountability as a flaw in the AI system. Similarly, Jack Draper, currently the British No. 1, said he believed several line calls were simply wrong. “It’s not 100 percent accurate,” Draper noted, reflecting a sentiment shared by multiple competitors. These remarks highlight a growing concern that Wimbledon AI line judges may not be as infallible as the tournament organizers hoped. While the intent was to improve accuracy and consistency, the technology seems to be falling short during crucial moments.
Technical Glitches and Accessibility Issues Undermine Trust
Beyond miscalls, players are also pointing out broader technical limitations of the system. American player Ben Shelton was warned during his match that the system could shut down due to poor lighting conditions—an issue that never existed with human officials. Meanwhile, the audio-based signaling system created confusion on court. Some players reported not hearing the calls clearly, while one deaf player highlighted a more serious problem: without visual cues from human line judges, she couldn’t tell when she had won a point. In a sport that relies on split-second reactions and psychological momentum, such gaps in communication are more than minor annoyances. They impact player performance and fairness, challenging the claim that Wimbledon AI line judges are ready to fully replace human referees.
Organizers Defend AI, but Pressure Builds for Change
Despite the backlash, Wimbledon organizers are standing by their decision. Debbie Jevans, chair of the All England Club, emphasized that players had previously complained about the absence of electronic line calling, suggesting it would bring more accuracy. “When we did have linesmen, we were constantly asked why we didn’t have electronic line calling,” she stated. However, incidents like the malfunction during Sonay Kartal’s match, where the system simply failed to make a call and had to be overridden by the umpire, are making it hard to defend the rollout. Wimbledon has since apologized and made adjustments, but many argue that these fixes are too little, too late. For a tournament that prides itself on tradition and excellence, the Wimbledon AI line judges experiment is shaping up to be one of its most controversial tech moves yet. Unless improvements are made swiftly, the debate around AI officiating in tennis is far from over.
Post a Comment