PDA

View Full Version : ITF president says ban unlikely for Serena; Agassi comments


THUNDERVOLLEY
11-07-2009, 02:13 PM
http://msn.foxsports.com/tennis/story/10334402/ITF-president-says-ban-unlikely-for-Serena

Associated Press
Updated: November 7, 2009, 12:55 PM EST

REGGIO CALABRIA, Italy (AP) - Top-ranked Serena Williams will receive a hefty monetary fine but will not be suspended for her U.S. Open tirade, the president of the International Tennis Federation believes.

Grand Slam administrator Bill Babcock is due to hand his recommendation to the Grand Slam committee, which will likely announce the sanction Monday or Tuesday.

"I don't think (an Australian Open ban) would make much sense, because it would penalize the people handing out the punishment," Francesco Ricci Bitti told The Associated Press on Saturday. "For the Grand Slam committee to exclude her from a Grand Slam doesn't seem likely."

The Grand Slam committee is composed of Ricci Bitti and the four Grand Slam presidents.

Williams was fined $10,000 after her profanity-laced, finger-pointing outburst at a lineswoman during her semifinal loss to Kim Clijsters in September. An eventual fine from the ITF could be much greater.

"A significant financial penalty makes much more sense. But it has to be significant enough for the fans (to appreciate) it," Ricci Bitti said. "Of course it may not be significant for Serena Williams, who earns tens of millions."

Ricci Bitti spoke at the Fed Cup final between the United States in Italy, which Williams and her sister Venus skipped.

The ITF president is also involved in a request by the World Anti-Doping Agency to investigate Andre Agassi's recent admission that he took crystal meth in 1997.

Agassi wrote in his soon-to-be-released autobiography "Open" that he ingested the drug and then lied to the ATP to avoid a suspension after failing a doping test.

Ricci Bitti is also a member of WADA's executive committee.

"The WADA code is our reference point and in every doping case the rules are quite clear. There is an eight-year period for sanctions to apply," Ricci Bitti said. "In terms of the regulations, there is nothing that can be done because we're past the eight-year period. It's more upsetting than anything else - for our sport and for the players."

Still, Ricci Bitti noted that the ATP should have a dossier on the case.

"We'll see what happens," he said.

In another drug-related case, the ITF confirmed a one-year suspension for Belgian tennis players Yanina Wickmayer and Xavier Malisse on Saturday. The duo was suspended by a Belgian tribunal this week for failing to report their whereabouts to anti-doping officials three times during 2009.

"This reminds me of the cases of Italian players involved in betting a little while ago," Ricci Bitti said. "These players need to be aware of their responsibilities. If they don't know, this is the result.

"These cases create discussion because they're not reliant on positive tests, but there are rules to respect," Ricci Bitti added. "We're awaiting the details from the Belgian federation. These kids need to wake up. They're professionals and they earn a lot of money. They don't need to merely know the rules, they should also respect them."

So, after all of the anti-SW faux legal threats, cries for Serena being permanently banned, etc., it is likely to come down to another fine, which--as Bitti points out--"Of course it may not be significant for Serena Williams, who earns tens of millions." In any case, we will all know the real turn-out by Tuesday.

On the other hand, Agassi's mouth opened a door he may not have predicted in the wake of his gossipy tell-all....

JankovicFan
11-07-2009, 02:57 PM
"I don't think (an Australian Open ban) would make much sense, because it would penalize the people handing out the punishment," Francesco Ricci Bitti told The Associated Press on Saturday. "For the Grand Slam committee to exclude her from a Grand Slam doesn't seem likely."

USTA would be included, if any ban was for the US Open instead. It involves USTA, ITF, and I assume WTA. Yes, the Australian is the upcoming ITF level pro event, but it is not a USTA event. USTA governs the event at which the offense took place. However, she was already cleared to play doubles immediately afterward, so I expect it is all a tempest in a teapot, dragging it out long enough for the outrage to die down.

What seems offensive still is referring to the scripted apologies offered as sincere or genuine. You just can't have the same person playing both characters. Give us a break. Unless there is schizophrenia or some other alternate personality involved here, everyone is just going through the motions, trying to "fix it". Skip the unconvincing, sweet and innocent, "don't know what got into me" act. It feels like "I'm sorry (smirk), but meant every word of it. I am never wrong. Do you know who I am?"

I don't hate Serena. What I hate is not doing the right thing because of who it is.

Richie Rich
11-07-2009, 03:04 PM
If Malisse and Wickmeyer didn't report their whereabouts then they are as guilty as anyone who tests positive. Especially a guy like Malisse who has been around long enough. I know most tennis players are not rocket scientists but they must understand, or have someone in their camp that understands. the rules. no excuse.

settolove
11-07-2009, 03:13 PM
Is anyone really surprised? WTA is in a terrible state as far as marquee players go, they can't afford to ban her.

JennyS
11-07-2009, 03:15 PM
Is anyone really surprised? WTA is in a terrible state as far as marquee players go, they can't afford to ban her.

John McEnroe said her punishment should be being forced to play a lot of tournaments!

jimbo333
11-07-2009, 03:59 PM
John McEnroe said her punishment should be being forced to play a lot of tournaments!

LOL, Absolutely:)

zagor
11-08-2009, 01:57 AM
So they're sending a message that you can get away with death threat to an official as long as you're star? Typical.

1970CRBase
11-08-2009, 02:37 AM
So they're sending a message that you can get away with death threat to an official as long as you're star? Typical.

The message seems to be : you can get away with death threats to an official (and whatever else) as long as THEY think you are of use to them.

"I don't think (an Australian Open ban) would make much sense, because it would penalize the people handing out the punishment," Francesco Ricci Bitti told The Associated Press on Saturday. "For the Grand Slam committee to exclude her from a Grand Slam doesn't seem likely."

And after her threats of death, threats of violence, threats of shoving of a ball down a throat; Serena Williams just wanted to give the lines judge (whom she threatened) "a big ol hug"! How forgiving of her. Everybody really owes Serena Williams the apology!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-08-2009, 03:21 AM
So they're sending a message that you can get away with death threat to an official as long as you're star? Typical.

...which means nothing as no one took her rant as a serious intent to commit murder. Why? Because it was not. Some have the ability to understand this sans emotionalism generated by personal issues with a certain player.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-08-2009, 03:25 AM
What seems offensive still is referring to the scripted apologies offered as sincere or genuine. You just can't have the same person playing both characters.

The point is to issue an apology, which occured; that random people are not convinced is irrelevant, as no one needs to put on a teary-eyed, head-in-shame show for an apology to be accepted.

some6uy008
11-08-2009, 04:14 AM
...which means nothing as no one took her rant as a serious intent to commit murder. Why? Because it was not. Some have the ability to understand this sans emotionalism generated by personal issues with a certain player.

I agree. Seriously, some people actually thought she meant that?:roll: I think some people here just don't like her and will say anything against her

jwbarrientos
11-08-2009, 04:21 AM
John McEnroe said her punishment should be being forced to play a lot of tournaments!

NO Mac Donald's access would be also appreciated :twisted:

jwbarrientos
11-08-2009, 04:24 AM
Back to Agassi

Someone must say something serious, ATP should say that back 1997 rules an people running ATP were other people, but they are concern or worry about.

ITF should say sth like that Agassi doesn't represent Tennis'values.

Holy crap, nobody is paying attention to main issue, Agassi cheat everyone, waited for 12 years to go public?

zagor
11-08-2009, 04:51 AM
...which means nothing as no one took her rant as a serious intent to commit murder. Why? Because it was not. Some have the ability to understand this sans emotionalism generated by personal issues with a certain player.

I don't care much about Serena either way so I'm far from having personal issues with her or letting my emotions cloud my judgement.

Yes I don't think there was an actual intent on her part(I doubt anyone does)and what was said was in the heat of moment but I still think that threatening official in such a way(with physical harm)should be sanctioned more(say being forced to miss the next slam)than the average outburst that is common for players.I would feel that way if any other player did the same(even some of my favourites like Fed or Nalbandian).

With that said this doesn't surprise me as I never expected that there will be any serious sanction against Serena because she's by far the biggest draw in tennis(for a good reason,I'm not disputing that)and the field that is lacking star players at the moment on top of that fact so they need Serena even more.

jimbo333
11-08-2009, 05:38 AM
What this means though is that any player can now threaten violence and shout at officials on court and only get a fine!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-08-2009, 09:46 AM
What this means though is that any player can now threaten violence and shout at officials on court and only get a fine!

As of this day, the response is "only" a fine because TPB do not see it as a real threat.

Love Game
11-08-2009, 09:54 AM
. . . "I don't think (an Australian Open ban) would make much sense, because it would penalize the people handing out the punishment," Francesco Ricci Bitti told The Associated Press on Saturday. "For the Grand Slam committee to exclude her from a Grand Slam doesn't seem likely." . . .

In another drug-related case, the ITF confirmed a one-year suspension for Belgian tennis players Yanina Wickmayer and Xavier Malisse on Saturday. The duo was suspended by a Belgian tribunal this week for failing to report their whereabouts to anti-doping officials three times during 2009. . . .

one player not banned at all for offensive behavior witnessed world-wide.

two players banned FOR ONE YEAR for failing to report whereabouts!!!
Guess that ban won't "penalize the people handing out the punishment"!!!

Tennis justice obviously isnt blind to the incomes of the players being judged! :shock:

some6uy008
11-08-2009, 11:36 AM
one player not banned at all for offensive behavior witnessed world-wide.

two players banned FOR ONE YEAR for failing to report whereabouts!!!
Guess that ban won't "penalize the people handing out the punishment"!!!

Tennis justice obviously isnt blind to the incomes of the players being judged! :shock:

One on court outburst during the FINALS where emotions were flying high versus violating the rules 3 times.

Eviscerator
11-08-2009, 11:49 AM
Just goes to show that the powers that be cannot be trusted to make a decision that can effect their own bottom line.
It is like politics where someone from the other side is vilified for the same actions that someone from their own party did, yet they defended them a few years back.

I do not know why the USTA is giving her a pass especially since she is not playing Fed cup for us this year, and we will lose in the finals as a result. They should have at least coerced her to play otherwise they would drop the hammer on her. Then again the PC types and apologists for their racist father would scream racism just to help minimize her punishment.

jimbo333
11-08-2009, 11:50 AM
I still think that Serena getting a bit nasty on court, shows she is passionate about winning, but also shows she is sometimes a bit nasty!

What annoys me about her is that afterwards she pretends that she is this lovely gentle person, and what happened that day didn't really happen!

My message to Serena is carry on expessing yourself, but don't pretend to be someone your not!

I'll stay a fan as long as you stop being a hypocrite:)

paulfreda
11-08-2009, 02:31 PM
One on court outburst during the FINALS where emotions were flying high versus violating the rules 3 times.

No, not "ONE on court outburst".
Serena committed TWO assaults on the lineswoman.
First with the finger pointing and death threat.
The lineswoman went to the umpire chair.
Then Serena approached her again waving her racquet a few feet from the woman's head.
That SECOND assault then became an assault with a deadly weapon.

If this pair of rulings were not so sad, they would be laughable.
Failure to report location ..... one year ban.
[ Is that not a Pre-Crime conviction ? ]

Threat of violence which includes a death threat.......... no ban at all.

Very sad. These officials should be ashamed of themselves.
And their names should be remembered for the future record.

TheTruth
11-09-2009, 12:46 AM
It might go waay back to when they slapped Johnny Mac on the wrists for his tirades.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-09-2009, 01:27 AM
No, not "ONE on court outburst".
Serena committed TWO assaults on the lineswoman.
First with the finger pointing and death threat.
The lineswoman went to the umpire chair.
Then Serena approached her again waving her racquet a few feet from the woman's head.
That SECOND assault then became an assault with a deadly weapon.

If this pair of rulings were not so sad, they would be laughable.
Failure to report location ..... one year ban.
[ Is that not a Pre-Crime conviction ? ]

Threat of violence which includes a death threat.......... no ban at all.

Very sad. These officials should be ashamed of themselves.
And their names should be remembered for the future record.

What is sad is how some actually believe SW posed any danger beyond a heat-of-the-monent rant. The law (as some were desperately hoping) did not step in as no crime occured. This imagined "assualt" was nothing of the sort, hence zero legal action from any involved up to this day.

sureshs
11-09-2009, 10:15 AM
I agree - the assault and threat were imagined. The lineswoman who made the (incorrect) call tried to play the victim by claiming to the umpire that Serena threatened to kill her. That is why I have always said that there was something shady about her. She seemed to have been waiting for the right opportunity to bait Serena with an incorrect call and then play victim. I would not be surprised if it was motivated by something else, which is also speculated in the latest issue of Inside Tennis.

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 10:31 AM
I would have thought that if you did what Serena did in an office at work, it could be seen as assault of some sort?

I doubt if it would be, but it could be surely!

sureshs
11-09-2009, 10:32 AM
I would have thought that if you did what Serena did in an office at work, it could be seen as assault of some sort?

I doubt if it would be, but it could be surely!

Yes, it would be grounds for immediate firing.

rommil
11-09-2009, 10:50 AM
All tennis governing bodies decided not to suspend Serena when they found out it will require twice the amount of cables and metals to that of the Golden Gate bridge.

paulfreda
11-09-2009, 01:06 PM
I agree - the assault and threat were imagined. The lineswoman who made the (incorrect) call tried to play the victim by claiming to the umpire that Serena threatened to kill her.

Imagined ??

Assault does not require that you touch someone. Only that you make a threatening move toward them. Battery requires touching and there was no battery. And there were not one, but two assaults on Serena's part; before and after the lineswoman went to the umpire's chair. The second assault was an assault with a deadly weapon because she was waving her racquet a few feet from the woman's head..

I think these are undisputed facts.
Check with a lawyer if you do not believe me.

And I am told several members of the crowd distinctly heard Serena say "she would like to" kill the woman.
That is a death threat.

I wish I was wrong.
And I wish Serena's advisors gave her better advice.
But she did commit a crime and so far has not received the appropriate punishment.
If it had happened in an office or restaurant, she'd have been in jail within the hour.

Equal opportunity for all ?
Equal justice under the law ?

TennisandMusic
11-09-2009, 01:09 PM
I agree - the assault and threat were imagined. The lineswoman who made the (incorrect) call tried to play the victim by claiming to the umpire that Serena threatened to kill her. That is why I have always said that there was something shady about her. She seemed to have been waiting for the right opportunity to bait Serena with an incorrect call and then play victim. I would not be surprised if it was motivated by something else, which is also speculated in the latest issue of Inside Tennis.

Dude...just go watch it on youtube. She says shes going to kill her TWICE. The second time she storms over to the line and says "I'm going to ******* kill you!" The first time she said the thing about the ball. You can hear it on the direct feed footage. Now it's the lines woman's fault? Come on now...

There is simply no excuse for what Serena did. To all those that say it was not "assault" try doing that in public with something you could use to beat someone in the same manner she did. See how far that gets you.

Objective Danny
11-09-2009, 01:17 PM
Dude...just go watch it on youtube. She says shes going to kill her TWICE. The second time she storms over to the line and says "I'm going to ******* kill you!" The first time she said the thing about the ball. You can hear it on the direct feed footage. Now it's the lines woman's fault? Come on now...

There is simply no excuse for what Serena did. To all those that say it was not "assault" try doing that in public with something you could use to beat someone in the same manner she did. See how far that gets you.


I not sure but I believe the post you quoted was sacrasm. All rational, Objective posters think the punishment should be a 6 month ban and a 250k fine.

That'll get her attention.

TennisandMusic
11-09-2009, 01:18 PM
I not sure but I believe the post you quoted was sacrasm. All rational, Objective posters think the punishment should be a 6 month ban and a 250k fine.

That'll get her attention.

Man I hope it was, it's hard to tell around here sometimes. I'm sure there are people who believe what he wrote so...if it was sarcasm my bad. It's just that it's too accurate to tell.

veroniquem
11-09-2009, 01:44 PM
No, not "ONE on court outburst".
Serena committed TWO assaults on the lineswoman.
First with the finger pointing and death threat.
The lineswoman went to the umpire chair.
Then Serena approached her again waving her racquet a few feet from the woman's head.
That SECOND assault then became an assault with a deadly weapon.

If this pair of rulings were not so sad, they would be laughable.
Failure to report location ..... one year ban.
[ Is that not a Pre-Crime conviction ? ]

Threat of violence which includes a death threat.......... no ban at all.

Very sad. These officials should be ashamed of themselves.
And their names should be remembered for the future record.
The name I would like to remember is that lineswoman's because frankly her call was absolutely outrageous and I can only hope she's looking for another job at the moment. She had it coming big time, I don't mean threats, but a furious reaction by ANY player who would have been a victim of a call like that at that moment in the match! I'm really looking forward to not seeing that woman judge a tennis match ever again. Of course Serena should have controlled herself but still...

TennisandMusic
11-09-2009, 01:57 PM
The name I would like to remember is that lineswoman's because frankly her call was absolutely outrageous and I can only hope she's looking for another job at the moment. She had it coming big time, I don't mean threats, but a furious reaction by ANY player who would have been a victim of a call like that at that moment in the match! I'm really looking forward to not seeing that woman judge a tennis match ever again. Of course Serena should have controlled herself but still...

But if she foot faulted...it's a fault! So if Serena hit the second serve a few millimeters long they should play the point? They should just let a fault go? I hope you do realize that a fault is a fault. There are two ways to do it, with your feet or with the ball. The video makes it clear Serena's foot moved in some fashion. Hard to tell where it was from the angle. Calling it "absolutely outrageous" is what is absolutely outrageous.

Listen people...a fault is a fault..ok? There is no "don't call it on big points" rule. If you are inside the court, or your ball is outside the box, the serve is not good.

Can this argument please be laid to rest? (wishful thinking I know)

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 02:54 PM
Was it a footfault then or not, that's what I want to know?

veroniquem
11-09-2009, 03:12 PM
But if she foot faulted...it's a fault! So if Serena hit the second serve a few millimeters long they should play the point? They should just let a fault go? I hope you do realize that a fault is a fault. There are two ways to do it, with your feet or with the ball. The video makes it clear Serena's foot moved in some fashion. Hard to tell where it was from the angle. Calling it "absolutely outrageous" is what is absolutely outrageous.

Listen people...a fault is a fault..ok? There is no "don't call it on big points" rule. If you are inside the court, or your ball is outside the box, the serve is not good.

Can this argument please be laid to rest? (wishful thinking I know)
The foot fault in question was completely controversial. You saw a foot fault, good for you. I and half the viewers saw no footfault at all (I guess it all depends on the camera angle, doesn't it?). The least you can do if you're gonna call a footfault for matchpoint is to call it on something blatant, not on something very arguable where maybe the tip of the toes scratched the line. I know we won't agree on this though since both camps are adamant about what they saw. No doubt Serena should have kept her wits about her no matter what but the match was extremely tense and I would have liked a proper ending. Yes, Serena's reaction was inappropriate but the call was absurd as well.

sureshs
11-09-2009, 03:14 PM
Imagined ??

Assault does not require that you touch someone. Only that you make a threatening move toward them. Battery requires touching and there was no battery. And there were not one, but two assaults on Serena's part; before and after the lineswoman went to the umpire's chair. The second assault was an assault with a deadly weapon because she was waving her racquet a few feet from the woman's head..

I think these are undisputed facts.
Check with a lawyer if you do not believe me.

And I am told several members of the crowd distinctly heard Serena say "she would like to" kill the woman.
That is a death threat.

I wish I was wrong.
And I wish Serena's advisors gave her better advice.
But she did commit a crime and so far has not received the appropriate punishment.
If it had happened in an office or restaurant, she'd have been in jail within the hour.

Equal opportunity for all ?
Equal justice under the law ?

Who are those "several members of the crowd?" The same ones who tried to run the Williams out of Indian Wells?

A guy head butted another guy after a tennis match and left him with a bloody nose, and there was no prosecution. Check the Adults Tournament section.

If it was a deadly weapon, why was it allowed on court? What a stupid logic to associate a racquet in a player's hand with a deadly weapon. If it is deadly, it should not be allowed inside the premises.

I think anyone with common sense can understand what happened - a bad line call, probably deliberate, a lying and baiting lineswoman, and words spoken in the heat of the moment.

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:17 PM
It wasn't actually on matchpoint.

And from what you've said the camera angle does not show if it was actually a footfault?

So I would reckon the person with the best view was the lineswoman!

I can't believe some people are actually having a go at her, this is ridiculous!

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:19 PM
I think anyone with common sense can understand what happened - a bad line call, probably deliberate, a lying and baiting lineswoman, and words spoken in the heat of the moment.

What on earth are you on about?

"A lying and baiting lineswoman"????????????????

veroniquem
11-09-2009, 03:26 PM
It wasn't actually on matchpoint.

And from what you've said the camera angle does not show if it was actually a footfault?

So I would reckon the person with the best view was the lineswoman!

I can't believe some people are actually having a go at her, this is ridiculous!
It led to match point. Well, you're gonna have to accept this incident was controversial and give Serena a break because personally I did feel the lineswoman was baiting, maybe it's the wide smile that was plastered on her face during and after her call and her general attitude. I can't prove it of course and it doesn't really matter in the end (Serena was still wrong to do what she did) but Suresh is not the only one who saw it this way so you just have to accept that sometimes things are more grey and grey than black and white and Serena did have some mitigating circumstances. And for the record I was watching this match as a neutral spectator, I am neither a fan nor a hater of either player.

sureshs
11-09-2009, 03:29 PM
It led to match point. Well, you're gonna have to accept this incident was controversial and give Serena a break because personally I did feel the lineswoman was baiting, maybe it's the wide smile that was plastered on her face during and after her call and her general attitude. I can't prove it of course but Suresh is not the only one who saw it this way so you just have to accept that sometimes things are more grey and grey than black and white. And for the record I was watching this match as a neutral spectator, I am neither a fan or a hater of either player.

A possible motive behind the lineswoman's actions was alluded to in the latest issue of Inside Tennis, as well as the correctness of the call. And I have nothing whatsoever to do with the magazine.

TennisandMusic
11-09-2009, 03:30 PM
The foot fault in question was completely controversial. You saw a foot fault, good for you. I and half the viewers saw no footfault at all (I guess it all depends on the camera angle, doesn't it?). The least you can do if you're gonna call a footfault for matchpoint is to call it on something blatant, not on something very arguable where maybe the tip of the toes scratched the line. I know we won't agree on this though since both camps are adamant about what they saw. No doubt Serena should have kept her wits about her no matter what but the match was extremely tense and I would have liked a proper ending. Yes, Serena's reaction was inappropriate but the call was absurd as well.

Umm...where exactly did I say I saw a foot fault? I said it was hard to tell from the angle they showed. However movement was clearly visible. I swear, you gotta be able to read and understand what other people are saying before you basically say you're going to agree to disagree. But, how can you say she barely scratched the line? If she was a half cm on the line that is, IMO, a CLEAR foot fault. Is that what happened? Not sure. But I would hope the lady was just doing her job.

The only thing "controversial" about it, was that Serena flipped out. If she would have just said "shoot I goofed" to herself, no one would be going off on that woman for doing her job. That's just an age old smear tactic really. I really see zero ground for Serena or her defenders to stand on. Maybe it wasn't a foot fault at all, even though there was movement, but the way it was handled was atrocious.

I still completely disagree with the idea that you don't call foot faults on big points. Unless it's obvious? You're either touching the line or you're not, should be an easy call to me. Bottom line.

veroniquem
11-09-2009, 03:33 PM
A possible motive behind the lineswoman's actions was alluded to in the latest issue of Inside Tennis, as well as the correctness of the call. And I have nothing whatsoever to do with the magazine.
Thanks. I really want to read it. Is it something you can find online or do I have to buy the magazine?

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:34 PM
I am neutral as well, and I was actually there!

It was a really entertaining incident to be honest, the crowd went absolutely mental, but did ruin what could have been a really good end to the match!

veroniquem
11-09-2009, 03:38 PM
Umm...where exactly did I say I saw a foot fault? I said it was hard to tell from the angle they showed. However movement was clearly visible. I swear, you gotta be able to read and understand what other people are saying before you basically say you're going to agree to disagree. But, how can you say she barely scratched the line? If she was a half cm on the line that is, IMO, a CLEAR foot fault. Is that what happened? Not sure. But I would hope the lady was just doing her job.

The only thing "controversial" about it, was that Serena flipped out. If she would have just said "shoot I goofed" to herself, no one would be going off on that woman for doing her job. That's just an age old smear tactic really. I really see zero ground for Serena or her defenders to stand on. Maybe it wasn't a foot fault at all, even though there was movement, but the way it was handled was atrocious.

I still completely disagree with the idea that you don't call foot faults on big points. Unless it's obvious? You're either touching the line or you're not, should be an easy call to me. Bottom line.
As I said I couldn't see a foot fault and I found the way the linesjudge called it (exaggeratedly gleefully) disconcerting. I know I won't convince you, that's OK but I'm happy with the WTA's decision. This didn't deserve being banned from the tour. She was already penalized by losing the USO semi-final, since her outburst lost the match for her, not her racquet. That's a pretty big punishment already, adding a fine is OK, demanding an apology is OK, doing more than that would be harassment.

sureshs
11-09-2009, 03:45 PM
As I said I couldn't see a foot fault and I found the way the linesjudge called it (exaggeratedly gleefully) disconcerting. I know I won't convince you, that's OK but I'm happy with the WTA's decision. This didn't deserve being banned from the tour. She was already penalized by losing the USO semi-final, since her outburst lost the match for her, not her racquet. That's a pretty big punishment already, adding a fine is OK, demanding an apology is OK, doing more than that would be harassment.

She was playing the little poor victim of the big rich spoiled girl, and she was thrilled at having been able to take out her anger on Serena. It was plastered all over her face. And she is not a young girl who didn't know what was going on. It is a way in which insignificant people get a kick out of hitting out at rich and powerful people.

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:47 PM
She would have almost certainly lost that match anyway, so that's not really a punishment is it!

Let's face it, if almost any other player had done that they'd probably have had some sort of ban!

Like I said earlier, this now sets a precedent, and anyone shouting and threatening officials in this way will only get a fine, which isn't really good is it?

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:51 PM
She was playing the little poor victim of the big rich spoiled girl, and she was thrilled at having been able to take out her anger on Serena. It was plastered all over her face. And she is not a young girl who didn't know what was going on. It is a way in which insignificant people get a kick out of hitting out at rich and powerful people.

Put it this way, if the lineswoman had walked up to Serena and shouted threats etc what do you think would have happened?

Face it, rich/famous people are privileged and get away with things they shouldn't, it happens all the time!

But it ideally it shouldn't happen this way, but it always will becuase they have the power!

sureshs
11-09-2009, 03:55 PM
Put it this way, if the lineswoman had walked up to Serena and shouted threats etc what do you think would have happened?


The same thing that would have happened to me if I go and shout a threat at someone in the mall.

However, it is NOT the same thing as when a soccer player is upset with a foul call and hurls insults at the referee. He gets fined and penalized, but nobody calculates that his boot with spikes is a deadly weapon and could be used to kill the referee.

jimbo333
11-09-2009, 03:58 PM
^^^^^^Fair point!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-09-2009, 07:35 PM
Imagined ??

But she did commit a crime and so far has not received the appropriate punishment.


BS. No crime was commited, no legal action taken or suggested by any legal body in the state on behalf of the so-called "victim." There was no "assault," no matter how anyone wants to rewrite the books just to target Serena Williams.

paulfreda
11-09-2009, 08:44 PM
BS. No crime was commited, no legal action taken or suggested by any legal body in the state on behalf of the so-called "victim." There was no "assault," no matter how anyone wants to rewrite the books just to target Serena Williams.

With all due respect ....
You are mistaken.
Serena is guilty of an assault with a deadly weapon and there were 100 million witnesses.
That is not BS, just a fact.
She committed a crime which is a jailable offense.

Don't take my word for it.
Check it out for yourself with any lawyer.
You do not have to touch someone for an assault, only make a threatening move toward them.

1970CRBase
11-10-2009, 12:16 AM
It is a way in which insignificant people get a kick out of hitting out at rich and powerful people.

Thanks for your candid and honest description of yourself.

jimbo333
11-10-2009, 02:38 AM
BS. No crime was commited, no legal action taken or suggested by any legal body in the state on behalf of the so-called "victim." There was no "assault," no matter how anyone wants to rewrite the books just to target Serena Williams.

Yes and no. There was no crime committed that has been prosecuted, but there was an assault (in legal terms).

Gen
11-10-2009, 05:02 AM
If ITF doesn't penalize Serena Williams, the next thing we shall witness will be a beat-up. Players are getting more and more crazy. Obscenities on court are considered to be normal behavior. You can't bring your kids to a stadium because very few sportsmen have a level above the common punks. And now we are having the threat of physical abuse. Generally it's a criminal offence. No action will mean "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than the other".

sureshs
11-10-2009, 05:23 AM
If ITF doesn't penalize Serena Williams, the next thing we shall witness will be a beat-up. Players are getting more and more crazy. Obscenities on court are considered to be normal behavior. You can't bring your kids to a stadium because very few sportsmen have a level above the common punks. And now we are having the threat of physical abuse. Generally it's a criminal offence. No action will mean "all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than the other".

Really? Just remind me how many decades tennis had to endure JMac? Why all the rage against Serena? (Reason is obvious, from your use of "animals")

cigrmaster
11-10-2009, 05:46 AM
Serena should have taken her racquet and caved in the head of that lying, paid off piece of crap lineswoman......that's just my opinion.....I could be wrong.

sureshs
11-10-2009, 06:55 AM
With all due respect ....
You are mistaken.
Serena is guilty of an assault with a deadly weapon and there were 100 million witnesses.
That is not BS, just a fact.
She committed a crime which is a jailable offense.

Don't take my word for it.
Check it out for yourself with any lawyer.
You do not have to touch someone for an assault, only make a threatening move toward them.

I agree with you on that. When the incident was reported, I had posted that the lineswoman's lawyers would already be in contact with Serena's camp. She would have paid her off already, along with a gag settlement.

rommil
11-10-2009, 07:27 AM
I agree with you on that. When the incident was reported, I had posted that the lineswoman's lawyers would already be in contact with Serena's camp. She would have paid her off already, along with a gag settlement.

The ball going in her throat WAS the gag settlement.

Vector
11-10-2009, 08:35 AM
I agree - the assault and threat were imagined. The lineswoman who made the (incorrect) call tried to play the victim by claiming to the umpire that Serena threatened to kill her. That is why I have always said that there was something shady about her. She seemed to have been waiting for the right opportunity to bait Serena with an incorrect call and then play victim. I would not be surprised if it was motivated by something else, which is also speculated in the latest issue of Inside Tennis.

What a fanboy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_jlXjgxN8

jimbo333
11-10-2009, 11:22 AM
I like Serena, but my advice is be honest with yourself, you are like Connors and McEnroe, don't pretend to be this gentle innocent person, because we've seen what you are really like!

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 11:47 AM
Really? Just remind me how many decades tennis had to endure JMac? Why all the rage against Serena? (Reason is obvious, from your use of "animals")

Exactly. Odd how after the antics of other players, so-called "obscenities" tossed about with frequency, and of course the unforgivable Hewitt incident all go without much controversy when the acts--particularly Hewitt's--should have led to his dwarf *** suspended and fined, but what did the now-"outraged" fans say? Nothing.

Chadwixx
11-10-2009, 11:51 AM
Really? Just remind me how many decades tennis had to endure JMac? Why all the rage against Serena? (Reason is obvious, from your use of "animals")

The media and the internet were non existant when connors and mac were doing their thing.

Also, neither player physically threatened anyone. There is a line and serena crossed it. Silly comparison.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 12:01 PM
The media and the internet were non existant when connors and mac were doing their thing.

Also, neither player physically threatened anyone. There is a line and serena crossed it. Silly comparison.


No laws broken. No line crossed. Time to grow up and leave Seasame Street world views behind.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 12:06 PM
The media and the internet were non existant when connors and mac were doing their thing.

Get your history straight. The media existed long before any of the named players were born, and during their time, the world--via TV, radio and print knew all about McEnroe, Nastase, Connors and others' behavior--so much so that it moved beyond the walls of tennis to become part of the popular culture in general references, satire, etc.

jimbo333
11-10-2009, 12:23 PM
Serena is getting away with it because she is a very powerful person, which is completely understandable!

I don't mind her going off on one shouting etc, but she did pretend afterwards that it didn't happen. I'd prefer her to stand up for her real actual opinion of that linesperson, like Connors or McEnroe would have done. I like Serena, but she is a hypocrite regarding this matter, which I don't like I must admit:(

HellBunni
11-10-2009, 12:57 PM
No laws broken. No line crossed. Time to grow up and leave Seasame Street world views behind.

lets get the facts straight here.

1.) the call is NOT the topic here. Regardless of it being right, wrong, doesn't matter. It's Serena's reaction that is being debated.

2.) what she did is considered an assault with a deadly weapon. It is written clearly that if someone approaches you in a threaten manner (like screaming, threatening to hurt you) carrying a weapon and waving it towards you = it is considered assault with a deadly weapon.

http://www.bruzzolaw.com/criminal-charges/assault-battery.html
http://chestofbooks.com/society/law/Popular-Law-10/Section-25-Assault-With-Deadly-Weapon.html

some may argue that tennis racket is not a weapon (or deadly weapon), but if you get hit in the head with the frame hard enough, you can die.

jamesblakefan#1
11-10-2009, 01:09 PM
some may argue that tennis racket is not a weapon (or deadly weapon), but if you get hit in the head with the frame hard enough, you can die.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fi-CgSO9Evw

DEADLY.

Chadwixx
11-10-2009, 01:11 PM
Get your history straight. The media existed long before any of the named players were born, and during their time, the world--via TV, radio and print knew all about McEnroe, Nastase, Connors and others' behavior--so much so that it moved beyond the walls of tennis to become part of the popular culture in general references, satire, etc.

Are you honestly comparing the media of the early 80's to the media of 2009?

sureshs
11-10-2009, 01:13 PM
lets get the facts straight here.

1.) the call is NOT the topic here. Regardless of it being right, wrong, doesn't matter. It's Serena's reaction that is being debated.

2.) what she did is considered an assault with a deadly weapon. It is written clearly that if someone approaches you in a threaten manner (like screaming, threatening to hurt you) carrying a weapon and waving it towards you = it is considered assault with a deadly weapon.

http://www.bruzzolaw.com/criminal-charges/assault-battery.html
http://chestofbooks.com/society/law/Popular-Law-10/Section-25-Assault-With-Deadly-Weapon.html

some may argue that tennis racket is not a weapon (or deadly weapon), but if you get hit in the head with the frame hard enough, you can die.

Better be careful waving your pen in the air when having an argument with somebody, because if it is jabbed hard enough in the throat, it can kill.

HellBunni
11-10-2009, 01:44 PM
Better be careful waving your pen in the air when having an argument with somebody, because if it is jabbed hard enough in the throat, it can kill.

it's not arguing, it's the threat of immediate physical harm.

there is a huge difference.

berating and screaming at someone vs threat of immediate physical harm are different things.

and actually it's easier if you just stab the other person in the eye socket with the pen. And i'm sure you can and will be charged if you attempted to do such a thing to someone.

also are you saying if someone twice your size, is coming at you with a tennis racket threatening you, you would be okay since the racket isn't a "deadly weapon"?

sureshs
11-10-2009, 02:03 PM
it's not arguing, it's the threat of immediate physical harm.

there is a huge difference.

berating and screaming at someone vs threat of immediate physical harm are different things.

and actually it's easier if you just stab the other person in the eye socket with the pen. And i'm sure you can and will be charged if you attempted to do such a thing to someone.

also are you saying if someone twice your size, is coming at you with a tennis racket threatening you, you would be okay since the racket isn't a "deadly weapon"?

She wasn't using the racquet to threaten, she was pointing at her with the racquet, which every tennis player does by instinct.

jimbo333
11-10-2009, 02:11 PM
Look,

We all know she was out or order!

We all know she should get banned, but won't because it's not in anyones interests (Hers or WTA)!

And we all now know Serena has a nasty side to her!

I think that's really the end of the matter for me.

Blinkism
11-10-2009, 02:12 PM
If the ATP can't be models of their own philosophy then they should just scrap the rule altogether.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 02:12 PM
Are you honestly comparing the media of the early 80's to the media of 2009?

You said the media was "non existant" at the time in question. You were and are wrong. Not only did you have a major media in place (including cable TV), but the players' antics became known and parodied because of its well-known place in pop culture. This is historical fact, not the fantasy which seeks to make SW's non-incident some unique case.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 02:17 PM
it's not arguing, it's the threat of immediate physical harm.

According to...?

No official has ever stated this was the case, so all we are left with are the desires to damn SW based on reasons other than the yawn-inducing non-incident.


also are you saying if someone twice your size, is coming at you with a tennis racket threatening you, you would be okay since the racket isn't a "deadly weapon"?

Size is meaningless. A 5'1" person with a knife can stab you in a vital organ just as effectively as one who is bigger. Use, intent and accuracy are the factors which matter in any sort of attack, not size....but that is inapplicable to SW, because she was never accused of "threatening" the would-be victim with any recognized weapon, no matter how much others want that to be the case.

HellBunni
11-10-2009, 02:25 PM
According to...?

No official has ever stated this was the case, so all we are left with are the desires to damn SW based on reasons other than the yawn-inducing non-incident.




Size is meaningless. A 5'1" person with a knife can stab you in a vital organ just as effectively as one who is bigger. Use, intent and accuracy are the factors which matter in any sort of attack, not size....but that is inapplicable to SW, because she was never accused of "threatening" the would-be victim with any recognized weapon, no matter how much others want that to be the case.

I'll break it down for you. I can't remember the exact quote but what we all agree to at the very least is that she said something along the following.

"I will take this ball and shove it down your throat"

that is a threat,
"I will take this ball and shove" => threat
"ball down throat" => immediate physical harm

she didn't get charged, that's about it.
what she did was a threat.

if we take the racket out of the equation all together,
it is still classified as an assault, look it up. Threatening someone and moving towards them in a threatening manner => assault.

HellBunni
11-10-2009, 02:29 PM
She wasn't using the racquet to threaten, she was pointing at her with the racquet, which every tennis player does by instinct.

she was waving it towards the lineswoman, in normal cases that wouldn't be much. But coupled with her verbal threat, the intent on the racket is a weapon (or can be seen as such)

sureshs
11-10-2009, 02:30 PM
she was waving it towards the lineswoman, in normal cases that wouldn't be much. But coupled with her verbal threat, the intent on the racket is a weapon (or can be seen as such)

Yes it is, and it has probably been settled with some money.

HellBunni
11-10-2009, 02:37 PM
Yes it is, and it has probably been settled with some money.

probably, it's another case of the rich and famous having it their way.

sureshs
11-10-2009, 02:46 PM
probably, it's another case of the rich and famous having it their way.

That is because there were lots of people to witness it, which happens to the rich and famous. A lot of poor guys and nobodies get into shouting matches and such in the parking lot, but also never get prosecuted, let alone fined. So it is not a fair comparison here. Serena was in that situation because she was rich and famous.

If you want a good example, it would be Michael Jackson paying off kid's parents.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-10-2009, 04:49 PM
she was waving it towards the lineswoman, in normal cases that wouldn't be much. But coupled with her verbal threat, the intent on the racket is a weapon (or can be seen as such)

Unless she raised the racquet in what is universally determined to be an offensive posture/striking posture (implying threat or intent), she committed no offense...which was the case, because waving a racquet is not an offensive/striking posture to any degree.

paulfreda
11-10-2009, 11:59 PM
Unless she raised the racquet in what is universally determined to be an offensive posture/striking posture (implying threat or intent), she committed no offense...which was the case, because waving a racquet is not an offensive/striking posture to any degree.

You apparently did not see the match or any of the video replays.

She did raise her racquet up and shook it in a hostile manner toward the lady with it being only a few feet from her head.
She did this while committing the crime of assault, and issuing a death threat.

What more do you need ??

You must be either her PR man or her agent.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 12:28 AM
You apparently did not see the match or any of the video replays.

Absurd. I observed the non-incident as it happened, so it prevents lies based on a desire to claim she committed some offense.

She did raise her racquet up and shook it in a hostile manner toward the lady with it being only a few feet from her head.

In no way was that the dreamers' offensive/striking posture; waving a racquet to punctuate speech is another matter. I deal in specifics, not fantasy designed to pin a cooked-up "crime" on a person.

Blinkism
11-11-2009, 12:30 AM
Unless she raised the racquet in what is universally determined to be an offensive posture/striking posture (implying threat or intent), she committed no offense...which was the case, because waving a racquet is not an offensive/striking posture to any degree.

She raised her racquet and explicitly point out that she will do bodily harm (tantamount to threat of death, even).

Waving a racquet is not an offense, sure. Unless, however, it can be proven that there was a malicious will and intent to threaten and whether or not there was a perception of threat by the victim. The tone of Serena's voice, her demeanor, the fact that she actually presented the weapon of choice (tennis ball + racquet) and gestured said weapons towards the victim. And not only did she do this once, but she turned around and did it again.

One doesn't have to dig too deep underneath the cover of the whole thing to see that there would be a solid criminal case against Serena and a fool-proof Civil case against her.

It's almost a certainty that she would deserve a suspension under ATF rules. However, these rules are more arbitrarily upheld than actually binding civic and criminal law, so...... she'll probably get away with everything (no one pressed charges and the linesperson nor the ATP filed a lawsuit. They only fined her..)

HellBunni
11-11-2009, 07:03 AM
Absurd. I observed the non-incident as it happened, so it prevents lies based on a desire to claim she committed some offense.



In no way was that the dreamers' offensive/striking posture; waving a racquet to punctuate speech is another matter. I deal in specifics, not fantasy designed to pin a cooked-up "crime" on a person.

as I've said, even if you take the racket out of the equation.

by making a verbal threat of immediate physical harm (ball down throat), and approaching the lineswoman (walking towards). => assault

+ racket = assault with deadly weapon

so lets recap, no weapon = assault => still an offense
with weapon => assault with deadly weapon => a worse offense.

so either way she clearly committed assault.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 07:08 AM
Absurd. I observed the non-incident as it happened, so it prevents lies based on a desire to claim she committed some offense.



In no way was that the dreamers' offensive/striking posture; waving a racquet to punctuate speech is another matter. I deal in specifics, not fantasy designed to pin a cooked-up "crime" on a person.




Any half-way decent lawyer presented with Serena's situation would easily be able to get an Assault Charge.

cuddles26
11-11-2009, 07:10 AM
Serena shouldnt be banned. She was the one robbed of a possible U.S Open title by a racist little line judge.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 07:14 AM
Serena shouldnt be banned. She was the one robbed of a possible U.S Open title by a racist little line judge.



Really? The race card? Are you serious?

sureshs
11-11-2009, 07:17 AM
Really? The race card? Are you serious?

It is highly probable

HellBunni
11-11-2009, 07:20 AM
It is highly probable

could be, but the line judge didn't taunt her. so her reaction and what really cost her the match (with point penalty) was her actions.

and as other has mentioned, she's been called on foot fault in the tournament by other line judges.

sureshs
11-11-2009, 07:29 AM
could be, but the line judge didn't taunt her. so her reaction and what really cost her the match (with point penalty) was her actions.


And her reactions were such because she knew she was going to lose in any case.

She was angry with Clijsters and angry with herself. The anger with Clijsters was not because she was losing, but because she was losing to someone who had a kid and came back from retirement. It called into question whatever Serena had achieved since Clijsters retired. That was what was really bugging her, not just losing the match. It will be the same issue when Federer will be on the verge of losing to Nadal in the Paris indoors this week. 2 Slams, career slam, and GOAT title will be up for grabs.

The call just tipped her over the edge. She could do nothing about Clijsters, so she took it out on the lineswoman. Then she realized what she had done, and tried to be extra nice to Clijsters to make up for it. After that, she extended half-baked apologies fine-tuned by her lawyers, without really admitting anything, and then the lawyers must have arranged for a quiet payoff, probably in the 50K range. It is quite obvious - no expert psychology needed here.

What is more interesting is the behavior of the lineswoman.

HellBunni
11-11-2009, 07:34 AM
What is more interesting is the behavior of the lineswoman.

what behavior are you referring to?

sureshs
11-11-2009, 07:36 AM
what behavior are you referring to?

There are other people who have noticed it too. Go back and read the other posts.

samster
11-11-2009, 07:44 AM
I think anyone with common sense can understand what happened - a bad line call, probably deliberate, a lying and baiting lineswoman, and words spoken in the heat of the moment.

Yeah, sure....like the lineswoman was very intimidating...whatever.

samster
11-11-2009, 07:45 AM
I agree - the assault and threat were imagined. The lineswoman who made the (incorrect) call tried to play the victim by claiming to the umpire that Serena threatened to kill her. That is why I have always said that there was something shady about her. She seemed to have been waiting for the right opportunity to bait Serena with an incorrect call and then play victim. I would not be surprised if it was motivated by something else, which is also speculated in the latest issue of Inside Tennis.

how do you know she made the incorrect call?

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 08:07 AM
There are other people who have noticed it too. Go back and read the other posts.



So you are saying the lines woman was being racist? What proof do you have? None.

Richie Rich
11-11-2009, 08:32 AM
And her reactions were such because she knew she was going to lose in any case.

She was angry with Clijsters and angry with herself. The anger with Clijsters was not because she was losing, but because she was losing to someone who had a kid and came back from retirement. It called into question whatever Serena had achieved since Clijsters retired. That was what was really bugging her, not just losing the match. It will be the same issue when Federer will be on the verge of losing to Nadal in the Paris indoors this week. 2 Slams, career slam, and GOAT title will be up for grabs.

The call just tipped her over the edge. She could do nothing about Clijsters, so she took it out on the lineswoman. Then she realized what she had done, and tried to be extra nice to Clijsters to make up for it. After that, she extended half-baked apologies fine-tuned by her lawyers, without really admitting anything, and then the lawyers must have arranged for a quiet payoff, probably in the 50K range. It is quite obvious - no expert psychology needed here.

What is more interesting is the behavior of the lineswoman.


how do you know that is what was bugging serena? did she tell you herself?

Richie Rich
11-11-2009, 08:33 AM
So you are saying the lines woman was being racist? What proof do you have? None.

who needs proof and facts when you have opinions backed up by other opinions? :lol:

sureshs
11-11-2009, 09:47 AM
how do you know that is what was bugging serena? did she tell you herself?

Yes............

sureshs
11-11-2009, 09:48 AM
So you are saying the lines woman was being racist? What proof do you have? None.

Who says I had any proof? Have I filed a case? Of course not.

THUNDERVOLLEY
11-11-2009, 10:28 AM
Any half-way decent lawyer presented with Serena's situation would easily be able to get an Assault Charge.

No worth attorney would touch it. No one likes their cases thrown out of court.

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 10:47 AM
Who says I had any proof? Have I filed a case? Of course not.



So you make a claim without proof yet I can't make claims with circumstantial evidence that is in abundance? Hypocrite much?

NamRanger
11-11-2009, 10:48 AM
No worth attorney would touch it. No one likes their cases thrown out of court.



Do you even know New York state law? If she did that in public she would get arrested right on the spot and be charged with Assault if not Aggravated / Assault with a Deadly Weapon.




Your bias towards Serena Williams is totally clouding your logic at the moment. If Serena Williams did that to somebody in broad day light in the middle of the street, she would be charged and easily convicted of assault.

Richie Rich
11-11-2009, 11:50 AM
So you make a claim without proof yet I can't make claims with circumstantial evidence that is in abundance? Hypocrite much?

now you get how certain members of these boards operate. :rolleyes: