What if padel abandoned Foxtenn too quickly?

 Football has changed its refereeing methods. Why not padel?  For the past few seasons, football referees have adopted a new reflex: when a situation is contentious, particularly a very close offside, they  let the action continue until its conclusion If a goal is scored, the  VAR  Then, it intervenes to confirm or overturn the decision. This philosophy avoids ruining an opportunity due to a potential error.

What if this logic inspired padel?

Foxtenn, a revolution foretold

At the end of 2022, the  World Padel Tour  announced with great fanfare the arrival of  foxtenn , an arbitration technology already used in other racket sports. Thanks to ultra-fast cameras and a laser system, the objective was clear: to offer maximum precision on disputed balls and reduce human error.

The ambition was appealing. Professional padel would finally have a real decision-making tool.

What if padel took inspiration from football? Could video replay after the point change the way referees are made?

A technology that has never truly convinced

However, a few months later, the criticisms began to appear.

Several players are contesting some of the decisions made by Foxtenn. The problem doesn't seem to stem so much from the accuracy of the technology as from its adaptation to the specific characteristics of padel: bounces off the glass walls, particular angles, complex trajectories, or even the reading of certain phases of play.

The debate quickly gained momentum and, with the disappearance of the World Padel Tour for the benefit of Premier PadelFoxtenn also disappears from the professional circuit.

Today, major competitions rely mainly on classic video replays, interpreted by the referees.

FoxTenn sometimes criticized by players, the return of traditional replay?

Was Foxtenn really the problem?

In hindsight, a question deserves to be asked.

What if padel abandoned this technology too quickly?

Since 2023, video analytics tools have advanced considerably. Artificial intelligence, high-speed cameras, and image processing systems are far more powerful than they were just a few years ago.

But most importantly, perhaps the real mistake wasn't the technology itself…

Take inspiration from football rather than tennis

Football provides an interesting answer today.

When an assistant has doubts about an offside, he  no longer immediately raises its flag He lets the action run its course. Only then does the video intervene.

Why not imagine a system similar to padel?

When a ball appears to have hit the glass before the floor, when a double bounce is uncertain, when a ball near the line immediately creates controversy, the umpire could simply  let the point finish .

Once the exchange is over, the video – or a technology like Foxtenn – would only verify the disputed fact.

Thus, a spectacular exchange would no longer be prematurely interrupted by a decision that could ultimately prove to be wrong.

A more natural evolution than it seems

Padel is a spectacular sport. Rallies sometimes last more than two minutes and it is always frustrating to see a point stopped on a disputed decision when a review could have been possible a few seconds later.

Obviously, this wouldn't mean reviewing every single play. As in football, this possibility could be reserved for situations where the referee believes there is genuine doubt, or even for a limited number of requests per team.

The objective would not be to slow down the game, but rather to preserve the spectacle while strengthening the credibility of the decisions.

More than just a Foxtenn comeback, a new philosophy

Ultimately, the debate goes far beyond the issue of Foxtenn.

Perhaps the real question is this:  Should padel continue to immediately interrupt disputed points, or can it adopt a philosophy of letting play continue before checking? 

Football has profoundly changed its refereeing thanks to this approach. There's no reason why padel should copy this model. But at a time when technology is playing an increasingly important role in elite sport, the question is certainly worth asking.

And you, would you be in favour of an arbitration where the point is allowed to finish first… before video review is used?

If you wish to publish it on Padel MagazineI can also give it a more journalistic angle with more historical references (dates, tournaments, player reactions from the Foxtenn era and quotes) in order to make it a true analytical article.

On the same subject