Unfair Ruling for Janowicz

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by TennisCanada1, Jan 15, 2013.

  1. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,649
    I think he meant "right of the tram line" from the perspective of the line umpire. Either that, or he doesn't know his right from his left. Either of those 2 explanations are certainly possible, considering the source.
     
    #51
  2. thejackal

    thejackal Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,885
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    From the umpire's point of view, that would be an incredibly difficult overrule. Also, having seen the footage, I think the ball might've caught the line.
     
    #52
  3. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,649
    Exactly... I think it might've caught the line as well. But, from the video, nobody should be saying it was "clearly in" or "clearly out". It could have been just in or just out. If they would only get Hawkeye on more courts, it would show that (a) probably it was just on the line, and there would not have been the blow up, or (b) if it was out, there would not have been the blow up.
     
    #53
  4. hersito

    hersito Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Messages:
    399
    Look at the picture I posted or watch the video high def full screen, the ball clearly hits the line. the ball is in.
     
    #54
  5. bhallic24

    bhallic24 Guest

    it was in. Doesn't matter though, this rat is gonna get jizzed by Almagro.
     
    #55
  6. augustobt

    augustobt Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    2,844
    Location:
    Salvador, Bahia - Brazil
    I can see, there's a clear space between the ball and the line.
     
    #56
  7. Marius_Hancu

    Marius_Hancu G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2004
    Messages:
    17,791
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    It was impossible to decide on TV
     
    #57
  8. Rattler

    Rattler Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    296
    Location:
    On the fringe


    These kind of meltdowns, I find very entertaining.
     
    #58
  9. Rattler

    Rattler Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Messages:
    296
    Location:
    On the fringe
    The Code for unsportsmanlike conduct....wondering how come this didn't get mentioned. It wasn't for his tirade, but for his spitting on the court.

    Which was a great call by the chair.
     
    #59
  10. Clarky21

    Clarky21 Banned

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2011
    Messages:
    12,686

    Glad he got popped for that. He let loose a nasty fountain of spit straight up into the air. It was disgusting.
     
    Last edited: Jan 16, 2013
    #60
  11. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    What was mildly hilarious was how australianopen.com was spinning it as The Janowicz Meltdown all over the front page. Before the end of the match was called. It's only a meaningful meltdown if you loose. The Stosur performance was a meltdown. This was a question. And the question was: "How many times?" How many times will questionable calls need to be made before hawk-eye gets installed? Loud and clear.
     
    #61
  12. SoCalJay

    SoCalJay Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2012
    Messages:
    402
    It doesn't matter whether it was in or not at this point. In my opinion, if Indian Wells can put up the money to have Hawkeye on 8 courts then the Aussie open sure as hell should have it on court 8 (where Janowicz was playing) as well.
     
    #62
  13. beernutz

    beernutz Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2005
    Messages:
    4,400
    Location:
    expanding my Ignore List
    No there isn't, the ball is clearly at least overlapping the line in the picture if not outright touching it.
     
    #63
  14. augustobt

    augustobt Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2012
    Messages:
    2,844
    Location:
    Salvador, Bahia - Brazil
    I can clearly see, the ball is wide.
     
    #64
  15. TennisD

    TennisD Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    655
    No, you can't, because that's not how perspective and video work. I'm not saying you don't have wonderful, hawk-like vision, but no matter how high-def the video is, the camera angle and proximity of the ball to the line make it impossible to see anything clearly, other than the fact that it was damn close.

    Really though, the umpire did the right thing by not over-ruling; doing so on a ball that close on the far sideline would have been stupid and irresponsible on his part.
     
    #65
  16. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    Which is another way of saying the umpire was utterly useless in her role. Next time, though, give the guy some flowers to calm him down. Oh, they actually did that? How sweet.
     
    #66
  17. Vrad

    Vrad Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2012
    Messages:
    546
    Because she went with the line judge, who has the best view's call, on a decision which was clearly too close to call?
     
    #67
  18. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,768
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    No the umpire was right not to overrule because she was on the other side to where the ball landed.
     
    #68
  19. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    No to which question exactly?
     
    #69
  20. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    No really. A bunch of girls showered Jerzy with flowers. And in the absence of hawk-eye, the umpire was utterly useless in he role.
     
    #70
  21. Max G.

    Max G. Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,355
    Useless? She made the right call.
     
    #71
  22. Steve0904

    Steve0904 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2012
    Messages:
    10,768
    Location:
    NL, Canada
    I'm saying no to the statement that the umpire was useless in her role when she actually did the right thing by doing nothing. You don't have to respond yes or no just to questions you know.
     
    #72
  23. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    No problem. You are welcome to misinterpret what I say anytime you like. Moving on.
     
    #73
  24. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    Useless. Sure. In the absence of hawk-eye, an umpire that far away from the ball is about as useful as no umpire. ie. useless.

    Some girls gave Jerzy flowers to go home with. Useful. See the difference?
     
    #74
  25. hersito

    hersito Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Messages:
    399
    You should consider getting glasses...

    [​IMG]
     
    #75
  26. berg

    berg New User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2013
    Messages:
    67
    Are you talking to augustobt, or imaginatively to the line judge? Surely not augustobt, right? Because I don't think augustobt is saying augustobt can actually see the ball as out, certainly not from the manner in which you've posted the blurry freeze frame. That would be absurd.
     
    #76
  27. woodrow1029

    woodrow1029 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2012
    Messages:
    2,649
    I woke up this morning, and was thinking, "Please I hope this thread has died by now, because it's ridiculous for a bunch of people watching on TV think they are absolutely right by saying it was in or it was out when honestly nobody has any idea from watching it on TV as there was no hawkeye, and only a bad camera angle to make an honest determination."

    I was disappointed when I signed in.

    LOL
     
    #77
  28. hersito

    hersito Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Messages:
    399
    Hurry, quick! If you go with agustobt you might get a discount!
     
    #78

Share This Page