yea but getting into Istora as umpire is not an easy task as well, actually despite the fact that it is not payed, competition is not that small, usually most of the umpires are way more concerned about tracking other umpires mistakes and reporting them to referee than umpiring after each tournament umpires get assessed how they performed by the main referee, but then how it is done it is another question
I don't think it costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to find an umpire that can own up to an obvious mistake when it can be seen on the slow motion replay LOL.
It's no secret: After the tournament, the referee fills out the Referee Report form. Well-organized referees usually prefill most of it by finals or semi-finals day. This form includes the basics of the hall (hotel quality, size of the hall, temperature, humidity), organization(line judges, physio/doctor, catering, ...), match reports(shuttle count, withdrawn players, cards, IRS), and also an umpire evaluation sheet. For each umpire, there is a performance evaluation section. Each umpire is rated as Exceeds Expectations / Meets Expectations / Does not meet Expectations, and there is a comment section. I've not seen many reports (@samkool will have more data here), but I have never seen an umpire rated Does Not Meet Expectations. This huge blunder will probably feature in the comment section, and may justify such a rating. However, you have to put it into perspective: A similar blunder probably happens every tournament. Here it happened in the most-watched match, the Men's Singles final, and was not corrected by the service judge. It's much more likely to happen in a random R32 WD match between two unseeded Chinese pairs, where only the players and their coaches remember it afterwards. By all accounts, an umpire that makes a blunder at an easy match should be ranked below one that makes it at a stressful final. In addition to the referee, who submits just a basic evaluation, there are also assessments, which all umpires have to undergo regularly. At this very tournament, Gilles Cavert was assessing umpires. An assessment is a much more detailed report; the assessor watches the umpire through multiple matches, gives feedback, and fills out a detailed report for every assessed umpire. The aim of the evaluation and assessment is to find out how good the umpire will likely be at the next match and tournament, and help the umpire improve. Unless there is a pattern of mistakes, or other problems, a single blunder does not justify a downgrading of the license. It's the same way that a coach would not drop a player who totally wiffs their serve.
the lowest rating is rarely handed out even though i've seen many umpires make numerous basic mistakes in one tournament. the people (referees) evaluating the umpires tend to be sympathetic towards the umpires because they are all in the same social circle at the tournaments. they are not unbiased and remember what it was like when they were doing it. paying umpires is a very very very small part of the cure. there needs to be an unbiased 3rd party assessor. the current system is slowing down the move forward towards quality umpires.
Not sure that it is real but supposedly, the umpire and CTC seemed to have had a friendly word at the airport after the tournament.