Calling footfault at 5-6 15-30 2nd set is dumb and unprofessional

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
And by the way - I've seen plenty of FF called not only in semis but in finals of GS events. So that point goes right out the window.

Can you cite which semis & finals you saw them in? I have every major final from the last 30 years on tape, its a pretty rare ocurrence.

I think the most foot faults I saw in a major final was Edberg at the '89 FO. He got called 4 or 5 times(at most), none of them at a crucial juncture(but Collins thought he should have been called on basically every serve he hit)
 

jeansain

New User
By the way - this is sport. Just because something hasn't happened before doesn't mean that it won't or can't.

That is exactly the point. Of course it has happened before! But no lines person has been stupid enough to call it at that critical moment!

As a matter of fact, every day, FF's are being committed at non-critical moments and not being called. Now, here is a questionable FF 1 point away from match point in a semi-final called by a stupid woman against the GS favourite! Tell me one player who wouldn't be pissed off by that?
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
Can you cite which semis & finals you saw them in? I have every major final from the last 30 years on tape, its a pretty rare ocurrence.

I think the most foot faults I saw in a major final was Edberg at the '89 FO. He got called 4 or 5 times(at most), none of them at a crucial juncture(but Collins thought he should have been called on basically every serve he hit)

Not off the top of my head - I don't have every final and semi of every event in my head or on tape. But I've see Edberg called many times - etc - Wimbledon, the FO like you mentioned etc. But Edberg was quite good at making sure he didn't ff on big points most of the time. Again - not because they didn't call it...Are you really saying that there aren't any FF called in any of the GS finals you have? You might want to re-watch them and make notes if it's that important to you. I for one can't remember an Edberg match ever where he wasn't called for at least one ff. So you might want to start with his finals first.

The whole point is that no, it doesn't happen often on big points - but it's not because they aren't calling it it's because the players themselves aren't doing it! What is the problem here?

Do you know anything about being a linesman? Your job if you are on the baseline is to stare at the servers feet and you have the most dead on clear view possible of the feet. It's real simple to see if someone touches the line or not. And yes - it is called all the time! If a person can't see that call - then there should be no human calls made on anything.
 

jeansain

New User
How about on a second serve on match point to loose the match? There's that video that's been posted all over the place of that very thing happening and the looser going apesh!t afterwards. And that was at a challenger just recently. Just look back in this thread - I'm sure someone posted it.

Are you serious? We're talking about a GS semi and you cite the example of a Challenger??!!:confused:
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
That is exactly the point. Of course it has happened before! But no lines person has been stupid enough to call it at that critical moment!

As a matter of fact, every day, FF's are being committed at non-critical moments and not being called. Now, here is a questionable FF 1 point away from match point in a semi-final called by a stupid woman against the GS favourite! Tell me one player who wouldn't be pissed off by that?

No. I'm saying that the players themselves don't FF on big points! Not that they aren't being called on it by linesmen who look the other way on big points. Are you guys being intentionally obtuse?

And I don't see it as questionable at all when it comes to the Serena FF - she moved her front foot forward - FF. The "stupid woman" as you so nicely put it - had the perfect angle to see quite clearly where Serena's foot was. From even the bad angle from behind we got on TV - you could plainly see her move her foot forward...IT IS NOT A BAD CALL. She was dead on doing her job. Now if you don't like it - take it up with Serena and tell her to go out on the practice court and learn how to serve without foot faulting.
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
Are you serious? We're talking about a GS semi and you cite the example of a Challenger??!!:confused:

Maybe you really aren't bright...but the rules are exactly the same at the challenger level and a GS final okay bub? The rules aren't open to open to interpretation or to big stars or "GS favorites" getting special treatment rule-wise. If you think that it is or that's the way it is or should be - then this discussion is done.

You can't argue logic with people who don't even understand the concept.


Wanda: To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. I've known sheep who could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs, but you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it.
 
Last edited:
Calling a footfault that'll give 2 break/match points to the opponent because Serena's toes were tickling the line is doing her job? :shock:

Well watching foot faults is part of the job description for "linesman" so...yes! I guess in your logic, rules shouldn't be enforced during crucial moments of the match so from now on let it be known that,

-Players may now serve from the service line during match point
-Players are allowed two bounces during break points
-Doubles alleys are good during tiebreaks
-Players are now encouraged to abuse, physically and verbally, line judges and other officials, just as long as, accoring the veroniquem, is during a crucial moment in the match


I'm glad most linejudges don't do their job this way. The last thing we need in tennis is footfault fundamentalists waiting until match point to bring their death sentence. This is a very creepy way of doing one's job...

Who said they were just waiting for the latter stages of the match to enforce rules? Serena was getting foot faults the entire tournament and got one earlier in the match!
 
Have you ever played a really important tennis match! If so, consider that you lost the first set and are serving at 5-6, 15-30 and your second serve is then called a foot fault. Please tell me: aren't you going to be furious with the linesperson? If you say no, he/she was just during their job--you are just plain LYING!!

Dude, I have been footfaulted before during one of my finals where I lost a break (and eventually the match) but its not like that entitles me to throw civility out the window. I wasn't mad at the guy who made the call, I was pissed at myself for making the foot fault to begin with!
 

jeansain

New User
Maybe you really aren't bright...but the rules are exactly the same at the challenger level and a GS final okay bub? The rules aren't open to open to interpretation or to big stars or "GS favorites" getting special treatment rule-wise. If you think that it is or that's the way it is or should be - then this discussion is done.

You can't argue logic with people who don't even understand the concept.


Wanda: To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people. I've known sheep who could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs, but you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto, they just don't understand it.

You're an idiot. I don't argue with idiots. The end.
 

T. H. Park

Professional
While we're at it, why don't we stop calling lets and aces when it's 5-6, 15-30? :roll:

Actually, let's make calls so that shots that are barely out are called in, and barely in called out. Dumb thread.

Wasn't the most popular call ever, but certainly was enforcing the tennis rules whether it is at match point or whatever ...
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
You're an idiot. I don't argue with idiots. The end.

What are you twelve? Gonna take your ball and go home to pout?

The entire point is that no one can come up with a real reason or justification why a professional linesperson - who's sole job is to look and see if a player steps on or over the line and call it accordingly - should not do the job they are expected to do to the best of their ability.

These are professional tennis players. They should be able to serve on any point at any stage of the match without footfaulting for sh1t's sake. If they can't - or we have to bend the rules for them - or they think they shouldn't be called on it - they they should get their *** off the damn court and make way for someone who can actually play the sport.

The lines of the court are NOT negotiable - they are not just a reference point to be used at a player and linesperson's discretion depending on the score - they are hard and fast. Any other approach is totally unprofessional and unsportsmanlike to say the least.

And anyone who thinks otherwise is - as you like to say - a total idiot. I guess you won't be arguing with yourself anytime soon then, huh?

You're right. This is the end. I'm done wasting time on people who probably don't even play this sport at all. And if any of you do - meet me out on the tennis court anytime and we can settle this there.

Here endtih the lesson.
 

FedererClone

Semi-Pro
Young? She seemed older than Serena to me. Small? She also looked on the heavy side to me, short maybe but certainly not small. Asian? What does the race have to do with anything? Unless you have your own scale of values as how Black compare to Asian? hum... I don't think I want to go there really...

...okay, I think you completely missed my point here... so maybe she was older, fatter, whatever. No big deal. And race doesn't have anything to do with it. I don't see any issue in mentioning her race if I do not condescend to her ethnicity. For example, my wife is Asian. Saying that my wife is Asian doesn't mean I have "my own scale of values" does it? -- it is merely information, very broad information granted but merely information. And, no, I certainly don't compare Asian to Black, Asian to anything in fact as I am not racist, and no I don't wanna go there either... my point was above and beyond these points... if you misunderstood I apologize...
 
Last edited:

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
The lines of the court are NOT negotiable - they are not just a reference point to be used at a player and linesperson's discretion depending on the score - they are hard and fast. Any other approach is totally unprofessional and unsportsmanlike to say the least.

Gotta disagree with u here bro.

McEnroe was against the call IIRC, and I'm pretty sure Navratilova and Connors were against the call also.

When Echagaray got FFd to lose his Challenger match against Witten, Witten said he felt bad for him and would play it over if he could.

Like I said in another thread, the court at Ashe Stadium is the biggest in the world, the linesperson was about 35-40 away from Serena calling an encroachment of anywhere from 1/4 - 1/2 an inch, allegedly.

I'm doing some very unscientific experiments right now with a ruler and my tennis shoe from about 10 ft away, and I have pretty good vision, and I cant tell for sure.

Also, what I just observed is that, even though the sole of the shoe isnt touching the ruler, because of the curve at the front of the shoe, part of the sole can be directly above the ruler, without the base touching the ruler.

There's no way u make that call at match game. Umpires/linespeople should NOT affect the outcome of a contest. Let it be decided on the field/court, by the players.
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
Gotta disagree with u here bro.

McEnroe was against the call IIRC, and I'm pretty sure Navratilova and Connors were against the call also.

When Echagaray got FFd to lose his Challenger match against Witten, Witten said he felt bad for him and would play it over if he could.

Like I said in another thread, the court at Ashe Stadium is the biggest in the world, the linesperson was about 35-40 away from Serena calling an encroachment of anywhere from 1/4 - 1/2 an inch, allegedly.

I'm doing some very unscientific experiments right now with a ruler and my tennis shoe from about 10 ft away, and I have pretty good vision, and I cant tell for sure.

Also, what I just observed is that, even though the sole of the shoe isnt touching the ruler, because of the curve at the front of the shoe, part of the sole can be directly above the ruler, without the base touching the ruler.

There's no way u make that call at match game. Umpires/linespeople should NOT affect the outcome of a contest. Let it be decided on the field/court, by the players.

Yes - Junior was not a fan of the call - what a surprise - he's not a fan of officials at all so I understand that - and I also understand that John is payed to stir up controversy.

As for Martina - she seemed against the call at first - it's everyone's first reaction - not to the call - but reacting to the fact that it happened and it's so unfortunate at that stage of the match.

But back to Martina - she reacted then immediately said - "Oh, I hope she didn't move her front foot - Serena has a tendency to do that." they then showed the replay and Martina recognized the FF and was much less vocal about the call...she then was concerned that Serena would go off on the linesperson and get a point penalty - which she promptly did.

Look, I'm not a Williams hater - quite the opposite. I like any female player that actually plays hard and can actually hit a damn serve. All I'm responding to is all of these people who are saying that this official had no business making this call at that stage of the match - and that is just plain out and out wrong and it's kinda scary that people who supposedly play this sport think this way.

And as for Jesse (who I know a bit and have hit with) he's a good kid and of course he doesn't want to win that way - I feel the same way. You want to win - beat the other player not have him just crumble and beat himself. But this whole discussion is about whether or not officials should monitor their calls due to the match situation or who's on court - and that mindset is very dangerous.
 

slagvaerk

New User
It may be dumb or not, and unprofessional or not, but I guess there will be at least one positive thing coming out of this mess:

We will probably not see _that_ many _huge_ foot faults among the recreational/low-level tournament players from now on! :)

It is unfortunately too common to see grotesque foot faults in unofficiated matches, and most of these foot faulting players are probably not even aware that they do break the rules...but they _should_ be now... ;-)
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
Good point. Maybe it will wake some people up to the fact that it is a rule and not just a suggestion and should be treated as such.
 

Grampy

Rookie
To all those who think the call should not have been made, let me ask you:

What should the line judge have done when she saw Serena foot fault? Whether the video shows a ff or not is irrelevent. The lines judge obviously saw a ff, so what should she have done?

Or better yet, on big points, how much of a foot fault should they allow,1/2 inch, 1 inch, 1.5 inches...?

The problem is that you are getting into a gray area when you say "ok, mrs line judge, make sure you cut some slack on the big points, ok?"
 

lawrence

Hall of Fame
That is exactly the point. Of course it has happened before! But no lines person has been stupid enough to call it at that critical moment!

As a matter of fact, every day, FF's are being committed at non-critical moments and not being called. Now, here is a questionable FF 1 point away from match point in a semi-final called by a stupid woman against the GS favourite! Tell me one player who wouldn't be pissed off by that?

so just because its a crucial point, we should bend the rules?
maybe next time someone faults a serve we should just let it slip because its a crucial point
 
so just because its a crucial point, we should bend the rules?
maybe next time someone faults a serve we should just let it slip because its a crucial point

+1, this is a ******** thread, and people seem to deny the fact that Serena was already called earlier in the match and earlier in the tournament where she gave a rafa-ish stare to the linesman
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
But back to Martina - she reacted then immediately said - "Oh, I hope she didn't move her front foot - Serena has a tendency to do that." they then showed the replay and Martina recognized the FF and was much less vocal about the call...she then was concerned that Serena would go off on the linesperson and get a point penalty - which she promptly did.
.

Im pretty sure Serena moves her front foot the same for 1st and 2nd serves.

What about my point about the distance from which the linesperson was making that call???
 

Grampy

Rookie
Im pretty sure Serena moves her front foot the same for 1st and 2nd serves.

What about my point about the distance from which the linesperson was making that call???


The point about the distance, I feel the line judge is positioned better than anyone out there to call the foot fault. Where would you put her? If someone can call Roddicks 140+ serve, a foot fault should be easy.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
+1, this is a ******** thread, and people seem to deny the fact that Serena was already called earlier in the match and earlier in the tournament where she gave a rafa-ish stare to the linesman

that's what i thought! :evil:
I heard serena in an interview on a sports program (a couple days after the incident) excusing her outburst by saying that in general she is not known for making foot faults and that, in particular, she had not made any in this tournament! :rolleyes:
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
The point about the distance, I feel the line judge is positioned better than anyone out there to call the foot fault. Where would you put her? If someone can call Roddicks 140+ serve, a foot fault should be easy.

How far away would u say she was? Can u accurately distinguish, without a shadow of a doubt, a 1/4 - 1/2 inch difference, if it was that much, from that far away??

One of these days, if I can remember, I'm going to bring an extra shoe when Im playing to see how hard it is, or isnt, to call foot faults.
 

TiradPass

New User
How far away would u say she was? Can u accurately distinguish, without a shadow of a doubt, a 1/4 - 1/2 inch difference, if it was that much, from that far away??

Obviously the lineswoman was close enough to be qualified to make a foot fault, and that's that. If not, then it shouldn't matter at what point in the match it happens, she (or anyone else at that distance) should never be allowed to call foot faults. Also, as far as I know, there is no requirement to accurately distinguish "without a shadow of a doubt" for any call. In the days before Hawkeye, were the linespeople required to only call outs, faults etc if it was "without a shadow of a doubt"? If so you'd have had some pretty strange matches with every fast shot remotely close to a line being called in!

I cannot believe there are so many people who still believe that the rules should be applied diferently just because it was second serve a point away from match point. If the lineswoman saw a foot fault, then she should call it. Look at the comments made by the USTA: "This rule covers the most decisive stroke in the game, and there is no justification for its not being obeyed by players and enforced by officials. No official has the right to instruct any umpire to disregard violations of it."

And as for the OP calling the lineswoman unprofessional... LOL. DO you really think she wanted all this negative attention? I am sure she would have loved to have let it go but she saw a foot fault (whether or not it actually was one is debatable) and made the tough decision to call it so that is hardly unprofessional...
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
Obviously the lineswoman was close enough to be qualified to make a foot fault, and that's that. If not, then it shouldn't matter at what point in the match it happens, she (or anyone else at that distance) should never be allowed to call foot faults. Also, as far as I know, there is no requirement to accurately distinguish "without a shadow of a doubt" for any call. In the days before Hawkeye, were the linespeople required to only call outs, faults etc if it was "without a shadow of a doubt"? If so you'd have had some pretty strange matches with every fast shot remotely close to a line being called in!

I cannot believe there are so many people who still believe that the rules should be applied diferently just because it was second serve a point away from match point. If the lineswoman saw a foot fault, then she should call it. Look at the comments made by the USTA: "This rule covers the most decisive stroke in the game, and there is no justification for its not being obeyed by players and enforced by officials. No official has the right to instruct any umpire to disregard violations of it."

And as for the OP calling the lineswoman unprofessional... LOL. DO you really think she wanted all this negative attention? I am sure she would have loved to have let it go but she saw a foot fault (whether or not it actually was one is debatable) and made the tough decision to call it so that is hardly unprofessional...

Do u think she would do it again, given the same circumstances???

Also, I mentioned conducting an unscientific experiment bringing an extra show with me the next time I played. Well, I did. I placed the shoe right next to the the baseline, without it touching, and went to the side fence to try to see what the linesperson might have seen.

Guess what, it looked like a foot fault from the fence even though the shoe wasn't touching the baseline. And Ashe court is wider than any public park tennis court.

Any chance the linesperson was under the same illusion??

And dont try to tell me about any special training, cause there is none for just seeing.

I'd suggest u do the same experiment. Just place a ball under the heel of the shoe to approximate the position the foot would be in prior to serving, then come back and post ur findings.
 
W

woodrow1029

Guest
Do u think she would do it again, given the same circumstances???

Also, I mentioned conducting an unscientific experiment bringing an extra show with me the next time I played. Well, I did. I placed the shoe right next to the the baseline, without it touching, and went to the side fence to try to see what the linesperson might have seen.

Guess what, it looked like a foot fault from the fence even though the shoe wasn't touching the baseline. And Ashe court is wider than any public park tennis court.

Any chance the linesperson was under the same illusion??

And dont try to tell me about any special training, cause there is none for just seeing.

I'd suggest u do the same experiment. Just place a ball under the heel of the shoe to approximate the position the foot would be in prior to serving, then come back and post ur findings.
If it was just a nudger, and she wasn't sure it was touching the line, she wouldn't have called it. Serena and Venus both foot fault. Serena may say that it was her first footfault called of the whole year, but guess what, it wasn't.

Serena picks the front of her left foot up during her serve motion. Sometimes, when she puts it back down, the front of the foot turns right onto the line.
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
Do u think she would do it again, given the same circumstances???

Also, I mentioned conducting an unscientific experiment bringing an extra show with me the next time I played. Well, I did. I placed the shoe right next to the the baseline, without it touching, and went to the side fence to try to see what the linesperson might have seen.

Guess what, it looked like a foot fault from the fence even though the shoe wasn't touching the baseline. And Ashe court is wider than any public park tennis court.

Any chance the linesperson was under the same illusion??

And dont try to tell me about any special training, cause there is none for just seeing.

I'd suggest u do the same experiment. Just place a ball under the heel of the shoe to approximate the position the foot would be in prior to serving, then come back and post ur findings.

The experiment is not valid if one is aware of the rule AND the rule which line umpires must abide by before calling a foot fault.

"Look[ing] like" a foot fault is not enough for a line umpire to make the call BY RULE.

5. The Line Umpire should give the Server the benefit of any doubt
in calling a foot fault.
Do not make any call until the ball has
touched the racket of the Server.

http://www.usta.com/AboutUs/~/media/USTA/Document Assets/2008/06/12/doc_13_15617.ashx

(page 173 of 317)

5
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
The experiment is not valid if one is aware of the rule AND the rule which line umpires must abide by before calling a foot fault.

"Look[ing] like" a foot fault is not enough for a line umpire to make the call BY RULE.



http://www.usta.com/AboutUs/~/media/USTA/Document Assets/2008/06/12/doc_13_15617.ashx

(page 173 of 317)

5

I'm sure the chair umpire has to be certain, beyond any doubt, before making overrules. We all know umpires have made incorrect overrules.

There's an article in this month's Inside Tennis regarding the incident which characterizes the call as iffy.

Writer Filip Bondy, according to the Inside Tennis article, didn't think it was made at an appropriate time. So there are credible, respected people who think u shouldn't be making foot fault calls on 2nd serves, at match game, in the semis of a Slam, not just anonymous people on msg boards.
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
I'm sure the chair umpire has to be certain, beyond any doubt, before making overrules. We all know umpires have made incorrect overrules.

There's an article in this month's Inside Tennis regarding the incident which characterizes the call as iffy.

Writer Filip Bondy, according to the Inside Tennis article, didn't think it was made at an appropriate time. So there are credible, respected people who think u shouldn't be making foot fault calls on 2nd serves, at match game, in the semis of a Slam, not just anonymous people on msg boards.

The argument is circular. Just because a handful of people, misplacing the responsibility for the foot fault, and are projecting fault on the lines person doesn't make the argument valid.

A few here are attempting to validate there argument with a "possibility".

And in this instance it is less than a simple possibility in that it is THE easiest call for the lines person to get right AND by a rule states that before making the call the lines person is expected to give ALL benefit of doubt to the server.

Therefore this "possibility" offered as evidence bolstering one side of the argument carries with it a belief that not only did the lines person disregard her mandate of "all benefit of doubt", but that she did that AND got it completely wrong.

Comparing a lines person's call of this specific violation of the rule to an over rule from the chair is at best disingenuous when one takes into account the angles, distances and speed of the object involved in the vast majority of over-rule situations.

From there we get into the subjective "even if it was...it shouldn't have been called". How much suspension of disbelief does this argument require?

Why hasn't it happened before? Maybe players, even those whose histories establish them a "chronic offenders", won't take the chance of flirting with a foot fault in that big a spot, which is far more believable based on the reactions of the players themselves and their opponents who have seen it called in huge spots in late rounds of big events during the past ten years.

If writers, fans, or whoever, want to rant about being shortchanged by a call made at 15-30, 5-6 of a straight set semi-final, there is one person to blame. The arguments vascillate between unsubstantiated claims that the lines person disregarded her mandate AND got it wrong and subjective projections that the call shouldn't be made in a big spot.

The responsibility for that FF call in that spot, falls squarely on the shoulders of the player who even flirted with that possibility. Those over-reaching for imagined possibilities or should have/could have, subjective rationalizations are misplacing their frustrations. Blame the person responsible, who in this case is Serena, for even flirting with the possibility in so big a spot.

5
 
Last edited:
The argument is circular. Just because a handful of people, misplacing the responsibility for the foot fault, and are projecting fault on the lines person doesn't make the argument valid.

Why hasn't it happened before? Maybe players, even those whose histories establish them a "chronic offenders", won't take the chance of flirting with a foot fault in that big a spot, which is far more believable based on the reactions of the players themselves and their opponents who have seen it called in huge spots in late rounds of big events during the past ten years.

I think your overall post is well thought out. However, it gives too much credit to one of the specious original claims; the idea that this kind of call has never happened before in an important Grand Slam situation is simply false. Since many on this and other threads seem to use the debating tactic that repeating something makes the statement stronger, I need to remind those saying that no one has ever been double faulted at an important point in a Grand Slam match is FALSE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE and also by the way FALSE. Oh, and it's not true either. Please stop using this pickle, as it just isn't true. It's happened before, and it's happened more than once. It's only the post-incident attention to the call that is different in this case. Once again, it has happened before.
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
I think your overall post is well thought out. However, it gives too much credit to one of the specious original claims; the idea that this kind of call has never happened before in an important Grand Slam situation is simply false. Since many on this and other threads seem to use the debating tactic that repeating something makes the statement stronger, I need to remind those saying that no one has ever been double faulted at an important point in a Grand Slam match is FALSE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE and also by the way FALSE. Oh, and it's not true either. Please stop using this pickle, as it just isn't true. It's happened before, and it's happened more than once. It's only the post-incident attention to the call that is different in this case. Once again, it has happened before.

Care to give an example??? The only other time I've seen this happen was the Echagaray incident at the Dallas Challenger, and I think that was 1st or 2nd rd.

And to Five0, there's no suspension of belief on my part, I dont think the call should have been made. It'd be nice if we could see a definitive replay which shows if she foot faulted or not, but either way, I don't think that call should have been made at match game.

The same way you never see Nadal or Djoko given a 2nd time violation to get a pt penalty, ever. That's a rule also, but the umpires are obviously enforcing it selectively, the linespersons should do the same on FF at match game.

I'm surprised this thread is still going.
 
Care to give an example??? The only other time I've seen this happen was the Echagaray incident at the Dallas Challenger, and I think that was 1st or 2nd rd.

They've been given upthread multiple times, including multiple instances with Safin, Edberg, etc.
 

pmerk34

Legend
Care to give an example??? The only other time I've seen this happen was the Echagaray incident at the Dallas Challenger, and I think that was 1st or 2nd rd.

And to Five0, there's no suspension of belief on my part, I dont think the call should have been made. It'd be nice if we could see a definitive replay which shows if she foot faulted or not, but either way, I don't think that call should have been made at match game.

The same way you never see Nadal or Djoko given a 2nd time violation to get a pt penalty, ever. That's a rule also, but the umpires are obviously enforcing it selectively, the linespersons should do the same on FF at match game.

I'm surprised this thread is still going.

There are none.
 
There are none.

Out of curiosity, why are you adding fuel to this fire? You know perfectly well that at least three examples have been given here, and there are almost certainly quite a few more. We understand the feeling of frustration that you (and Serena) must feel at what happened, but it's getting to the point of conspiracy theory now. At least twice, various posters gave examples, which were just ignored by those who didn't want to believe (or brushed aside due to slightly differing set scores, moon phases or shirt colors). Certainly, it's frustrating that it happened to a player you care about, who has arguably faced various injustices at various points in her career. And I'm sure it's frustrating that such a seemingly arbitrary and seemingly minute infraction could be called at such a time. But it has happened before and will again. You can argue all you want about whether the call was correct, or about whether or not it should have been called. But when you say such a thing has never happened before, you're just plain wrong. It's a fact. Ask Edberg. Ask Safin. Ask Courier.
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
They've been given upthread multiple times, including multiple instances with Safin, Edberg, etc.

Can u post the link to the post so I dont have to search thru the whole thread???

I know Safin got FFd on a 2nd serve within the last year or so, maybe last year's US Open for a center line FF, but it wasnt at match game. As far as Edberg, that would have been back in the late 90's, early 2000's, I believe. I dont exactly remember when he retired.

Edit. And the Echagaray FF was uncalled for, u dont do that at match point. Even his opponent Witten said so.
 

pmerk34

Legend
Out of curiosity, why are you adding fuel to this fire? You know perfectly well that at least three examples have been given here, and there are almost certainly quite a few more. We understand the feeling of frustration that you (and Serena) must feel at what happened, but it's getting to the point of conspiracy theory now. At least twice, various posters gave examples, which were just ignored by those who didn't want to believe (or brushed aside due to slightly differing set scores, moon phases or shirt colors). Certainly, it's frustrating that it happened to a player you care about, who has arguably faced various injustices at various points in her career. And I'm sure it's frustrating that such a seemingly arbitrary and seemingly minute infraction could be called at such a time. But it has happened before and will again. You can argue all you want about whether the call was correct, or about whether or not it should have been called. But when you say such a thing has never happened before, you're just plain wrong. It's a fact. Ask Edberg. Ask Safin. Ask Courier.

Because the various examples given were irrelevant. No one ever said foot faults were "never called in grand slams". That is a straw man argument.

They were never called at a time when it could determine the match in a Grand Slam. Edberg chronically foot faulted and was called many times but never near match point or on a second serve to give the opponent match point.
 
Last edited:
1

1970CRBase

Guest
Originally Posted by Rob_C
I'm sure the chair umpire has to be certain, beyond any doubt, before making overrules. We all know umpires have made incorrect overrules.

There's an article in this month's Inside Tennis regarding the incident which characterizes the call as iffy.

Writer Filip Bondy, according to the Inside Tennis article, didn't think it was made at an appropriate time. So there are credible, respected people who think u shouldn't be making foot fault calls on 2nd serves, at match game, in the semis of a Slam, not just anonymous people on msg boards.

So this "respected" writer believes the rules should only be rules when the time is "appropriate"? And so when, according to him, the time is "inappropriate", the rules are not rules? Why bother to play the sport then? Why not just make a circus of it?

That person has NO credibility because he lacks integrity and therefore doesn't deserve respect. That also goes for all the Tennis.com writers and their shameful, embarrassing opinions on the matter.
 

pmerk34

Legend
So this "respected" writer believes the rules should only be rules when the time is "appropriate"? And so when, according to him, the time is "inappropriate", the rules are not rules? Why bother to play the sport then? Why not just make a circus of it?

That person has NO credibility because he lacks integrity and therefore doesn't deserve respect. That also goes for all the Tennis.com writers and their shameful, embarrassing opinions on the matter.

Your post is disgusting
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
Because the various examples given were irrelevant. No one ever said foot faults were "never called in grand slams". That is a straw man argument.

They were never called at a time when it could determine the match in a Grand Slam. Edberg chronically foot faulted and was called many times but never near match point or on a second serve to give the opponent match point.

Firstly we're talking about what turned out to be two straight sets.

How about three straight sets 2009 AO:

Federer avenges 2005 semis loss to Safin

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP)—Roger Federer has avenged his 2005 semifinal defeat to Marat Safin with a 6-3, 6-2, 7-6 (5) win over the Russian in the third round at the Australian Open.

Federer’s victory keeps alive his quest for a record-tying 14th Grand Slam singles title.

In the tiebreaker, Safin was called for a foot fault on his second serve, giving Federer a 4-1 lead. The Russian player complained to the chair umpire about the timing of such a call, to no avail.

http://www.tennis.com/tournaments/2009/australianopen/australianopen.aspx?id=158112

How big was it to be down 4-1 v. potentially being down 3-2? Federer won that tie-break 7 points to 5 and the match.

Q. What happened with the foot faults in the tiebreak?

MARAT SAFIN: Well, just unfortunately some people, they want to take five seconds of the camera and to show everybody that he's in the match. It's sad story. Just unfortunately it's the most stupid thing I ever saw in my life.

It's just disappointment, because it's already 3‑1. There was a chance. It's a tiebreak. Every point counts. When it goes like that on the second serve in the tiebreak, why? I don't understand.

http://maratsafinnews.blogspot.com/

How about serving at 3-3 in the 4th Set of the 1998 US Open Men's SF as Moya did v. Philippoussis?

This tactic was worked to perfection in the fourth set, though he was guilty of letting Moya off the hook at 2-2, missing three break points. It mattered little since Moya collapsed completely in his next service game, when he was foot-faulted three times, double-faulted and dropped serve. From there on, all Philippoussis needed to do was stay calm and hold on for one of the most satisfying wins of his career.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/tennis-rafter-buries-stricken-sampras-1197802.html

That one ended 6-4 in the fourth, on a day where Flipper had lost 13 points on serve total over the first two sets, six of those on double faults and Moya had three break points during the entire match. Even still he had just managed to eke out the third set 7-5. How big was Moya getting broken to go down 4-3 in the fourth? Three foot faults and a break in the men's game where breaks don't come with anywhere near the frequency of the women's?

How 'bout serving at 4-2, 30-0 already up a set and a break to Safin in the 2005 AO Final?

The turning point

By Karen Lyon

The foot-faulting, and subsequent code violation, of Lleyton Hewitt during his four-set defeat to Marat Safin in the Australian Open final was entirely justified, tournament referee Peter Bellenger said last night.

The flare-up occurred during the seventh game of the third set - with the score at one set apiece and Hewitt leading 4-2 - after the Australian was called for a foot-fault while serving at 30-love.

Later in the game, after winning a point, Hewitt walked towards the linesman and appeared to abuse him. He was then hit with a code violation by the chair umpire Carlos Ramos for unsportsmanlike conduct.

The incident proved pivotal to the fortunes of both players, and possibly the outcome of the match. Safin ended up breaking Hewitt's serve in that game and in the Australian's next two service games to take control of the final, while Hewitt became unusually deflated.

Replays showed the call to be close but accurate, and last night Bellenger backed the code violation from Ramos, as well as an early violation against Safin for racquet abuse.

Both players identified the seventh game as the crucial one in the match, which was eventually won by Safin 1-6, 6-3, 6-4, 6-4. But the Russian sympathised with Hewitt, saying the official was wrong to trigger the turning point in the match.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/Tennis/The-turning-point/2005/01/31/1107020327134.html

Are "pivotal" or "turning points" big?

5
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
Care to give an example??? The only other time I've seen this happen was the Echagaray incident at the Dallas Challenger, and I think that was 1st or 2nd rd.

And to Five0, there's no suspension of belief on my part, I dont think the call should have been made. It'd be nice if we could see a definitive replay which shows if she foot faulted or not, but either way, I don't think that call should have been made at match game.

Okay. That's your opinion. But why put the onus on the lines person? If a small transgression makes so little difference, and, in light of the existence of an unambiguous, non-discretionary rule, what impact would moving a 1/2 inch further back have on the server?

If your opinion were entertained on any level, how far does it go?

What's egregious enough to call? What's a good time? What's a bad time? What if one player foot faults and the other doesn't? If it's got to be flagrant, what's flagrant? What's acceptable? What's acceptable/flagrant in the minds of different line judges? When's the cut off point? What if there is one and the opponent got called the game prior to lose serve and the next player get's a pass down break point on an ace?

No offense IMO "the opinion" of the opposition has not been thought through and appears based on emotion as opposed to a thorough examination of how such a shift to rendering the call "discretionary" could possibly play out.

The same way you never see Nadal or Djoko given a 2nd time violation to get a pt penalty, ever. That's a rule also, but the umpires are obviously enforcing it selectively, the linespersons should do the same on FF at match game.

No. The time violation is a poorly written rule, or rather the situation it addresses is not fully addressed, so it renders it a judgement call. While there is a tightly defined time the starting point, when the clock starts to run, is not defined in an officiated match. Does the clock start on the second bounce/out call, when the ball hits a fixed object, the call of a lines person, an over-rule, when the chair calls the score, or when all the balls are at the server's end of the court? When? I defy anyone to find that starting point because it's simply not defined. So the rule becomes subjective. Up to interpretation. A question of law rather than a question of fact. A foot fault is no such thing, it is a question of fact.

I'm surprised this thread is still going.

Well.....

5
 
Last edited:
W

woodrow1029

Guest
Okay. That's your opinion. But why put the onus on the lines person? If a small transgression makes so little difference, and, in light of the existence of an unambiguous, non-discretionary rule, what impact would moving a 1/2 inch further back have on the server?

If your opinion were entertained on any level, how far does it go?

What's egregious enough to call? What's a good time? What's a bad time? What if one player foot faults and the other doesn't? If it's got to be flagrant, what's flagrant? What's acceptable? What's acceptable/flagrant in the minds of different line judges? When's the cut off point? What if there is one and the opponent got called the game prior to lose serve and the next player get's a pass down break point on an ace?

No offense IMO the opinions are not even thought through.



No. The time violation is a poorly written rule, or rather the situation it addresses is not fully addressed, so it renders it a judgement call. While there is a tightly defined time the starting point, when the clock starts to run, is not defined in an officiated match. Does the clock start on the second bounce/out call, when the ball hits a fixed object, the call of a lines person, an over-rule, when the chair calls the score, or when all the balls are at the server's end of the court? When? I defy anyone to find that starting point because it's simply not defined. So the rule becomes subjective. Up to interpretation. A question of law rather than a question of fact. A foot fault is no such thing, it is a question of fact.



Well.....

5
Well, the timing is defined as being "from when the ball is out of play until the serve is struck on the next point," however, there are a lot of factors that still make time violations subjective such as crowd noise, length of point previously, pattern, broken strings, heavy wind gusts.

But things that are left up to interpretation such as time violations, code violations things like that are solely left up to the chair umpire. Line umpires don't have subjectivity. The ball is in or the ball is out. A player foot faults, or he/she doesn't foot fault.
 

FiveO

Hall of Fame
Well, the timing is defined as being "from when the ball is out of play until the serve is struck on the next point," however, there are a lot of factors that still make time violations subjective such as crowd noise, length of point previously, pattern, broken strings, heavy wind gusts.

But things that are left up to interpretation such as time violations, code violations things like that are solely left up to the chair umpire. Line umpires don't have subjectivity. The ball is in or the ball is out. A player foot faults, or he/she doesn't foot fault.

Add to the first paragraph, heat rules, movement of the crowd behind the receiver, whether a ball which has literally left the court may be returned to it by a fan, ball boys getting all balls down to the server's end of the court, over-rules, player discussions about calls with the chair and in the matches we are discussing, the spectre of the challenge system, it has been rendered a "judgement call".

Even determining when the ball is out of play, the ultimate determination being made by the chair, to concur with the lines person's call, or verify it or see their call in the first place, calls even that into question. In practice the chair is going to be ssure the ball is "out of play" before determining it is out of play, lest being embarassed by a late call, correction or other.

That judgement aspect is not part of a foot fault as it was called here.

5
 
W

woodrow1029

Guest
Add to the first paragraph, heat rules, movement of the crowd behind the receiver, whether a ball which has literally left the court may be returned to it by a fan, ball boys getting all balls down to the server's end of the court, over-rules, player discussions about calls with the chair and in the matches we are discussing, the spectre of the challenge system, it has been rendered a "judgement call".

Even determining when the ball is out of play, the ultimate determination being made by the chair, to concur with the lines person's call, or verify it or see their call in the first place, calls even that into question. In practice the chair is going to be ssure the ball is "out of play" before determining it is out of play, lest being embarassed by a late call, correction or other.

That judgement aspect is not part of a foot fault as it was called here.

5
I am agreeing with you.
 

Rob_C

Hall of Fame
No. The time violation is a poorly written rule, or rather the situation it addresses is not fully addressed, so it renders it a judgement call. While there is a tightly defined time the starting point, when the clock starts to run, is not defined in an officiated match. Does the clock start on the second bounce/out call, when the ball hits a fixed object, the call of a lines person, an over-rule, when the chair calls the score, or when all the balls are at the server's end of the court? When? I defy anyone to find that starting point because it's simply not defined. So the rule becomes subjective. Up to interpretation. A question of law rather than a question of fact. A foot fault is no such thing, it is a question of fact.



Well.....

5

Whichever of the above ending points you select, 2nd bounce, announcing of the score, Nadal still regularly exceeds that. Even if it's poorly written, the chair can inform the players when he considers the point to be over and the "clock" to be running.

As far as the examples, good find I guess.

I'd like to see the reaction of the commentators to the Safin call.

As for Moya, three FF DFs in one game, if I read that correctly, is his bad. After the 1st, he should have adjusted his positioning.

Edit: Just re-read the post with the examples.

Both players identified the seventh game as the crucial one in the match, which was eventually won by Safin 1-6, 6-3, 6-4, 6-4. But the Russian sympathised with Hewitt, saying the official was wrong to trigger the turning point in the match.

Interesting that even the player that benefits from the ruling disagrees with it, same thing with the Witten/Echagaray match, same thing with Serena/Clijsters.

Maybe you can find an example where the beneficiary is in favor of the FF being called??
 
Last edited:

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
It mattered little since Moya collapsed completely in his next service game, when he was foot-faulted three times, double-faulted and dropped serve.

Interesting. But it doesn't specify how long the game was, what points the foot faults came at, & if he received any 2nd serve foot faults.

From these comments, I don't think he got any 2nd serve foot faults called that game(& the double fault was the 1st point of the game, while that article seems to imply it was on break point )

Q. Can you comment on the three foot-fault calls.

CARLOS MOYA: I better not comment anything. I mean, I was fighting like crazy, you know. And first point, the woman, I'm going to try to say nice way, woman calls double-fault when the ball was in the middle of the line. Because I don't used to complain when I think I'm not right, you know. After that ball, three-foot faults the same game when they didn't call one the whole match. I don't know what to think anymore. But it pisses me off, you know, that I'm fighting the whole year, we are all the pro players, you know, and then for one ball, I mean, I not going to say that I could have win that match, you know, because for one ball you cannot say that. But at least it was Love-15, instead of 15-Love, which is very important. For that ball, then came the three-foot faults. You know, what I mean is that not only this match, last matches I also complained, also the first match. The referee, they should do something else, you know, because the way they are doing up there, you know, they can leave the court because they don't overrule not even one ball. We can play without him, just with the linemen, you know. They do what they say, and that's it. They don't overrule, not even one ball. So is the easiest job that I ever saw. So, I mean, they could leave from there. I will request, I mean, to prepare the lineman, because was one serve also, I'm sorry to say that, but the woman was a little bit old. You know, the ball was like 130 miles. For me was out. How can she see that ball? I mean, is no way. The way he hits, you have to be so concentrate. My God, that woman cannot see that ball. I saw it clearly out. But, you know, maybe is my mistake also, because that speed you cannot see anything. But I will request that, you know, to practice more. I don't know. I know is a tough job, you know, but to be a little bit better. I'm not the only one who complain about that. There are more players.

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=20540

Some other funny comments are in this press conference(him wondering why so many fans go to Wimbledon when there are 'no rallies,' him saying he doesn't deserve #1 over Sampras even though he had better results in the majors that year)

Philipppoussis wasn't asked about the foot faults in his press conference.
 

Moose Malloy

G.O.A.T.
came across this comment from 1998, looks like Safin's foot fault issues go way back:

Q. Have you been called for that many foot faults? Is that unusual for you? Does that happen quite a bit?

MARAT SAFIN: It's happening. But sometimes maybe it wasn't my fault. Maybe I think it's the people. Sometimes -- I mean not in my match, in other matches it was, I think my coach told me in one match I make on TV, was the second serve, set point, second serve, foot fault. I mean, you can't do this. Second serve for set point, you call foot fault. I mean is not correct, I think this.

here's Greg Rusedski talking about getting called for foot faults at the '02 USO(vs Srichaphan)

Q. How were you affected by the crowd in the fifth set?

GREG RUSEDSKI: Well, I think I had a real -- 4-love, I had two easy forehands. If I would have taken a little bit of a hit on it, the crowd could have gotten into it. He played a good game to hold. Served for it the first time, got it back to deuce from 15-40. Won the point. Then after the point was over I got a foot fault after I had won the point. Then, you know, the crowd started getting louder. I think the chair umpire didn't take control of the match whatsoever. People are calling "foot fault" on the side of the lines. Those were only two issues. I thought it was great tennis from the first ball to the last ball. I thought he played exceptionally well. I hit some deep returns, I was hitting the cover off every ball. So you just got to focus on the positives and make sure you got through. Probably just have a word with the supervisor and the referee so this thing doesn't happen again. I don't get called for one foot fault until I serve for it, twice.

Q. What did they say you're doing wrong?

GREG RUSEDSKI: Said my right foot was dragging on it. I just wish they'd let the players play rather than trying to get involved. That's where the guy in the chair and the people on the court have to use common sense. But, unfortunately, that wasn't used today.

Q. That's what you were saying to the umpire?

GREG RUSEDSKI: Yeah, yeah.

Goran on getting called for a foot fault in the '01 W Final:

Q. When you were broken at 4-2 in the fourth set, controversial point there, can you go over that with us, what you thought should have happened?

GORAN IVANISEVIC: First of all, that game, I was 30-Love up. I play some stupid shots. I make myself in trouble. Then first foot fault. Hit great serve. He missed it. First foot fault all tournament. That ugly, ugly lady, she was really ugly, very serious, you know. I was like kind of scared. Then I hit another second serve, huge. And that ball was on the line, was not even close. And that guy, he looks like a ***got little bit, you know. This hair all over him. He call it. I couldn't believe he did it. Just, you know, in two seconds, I won point twice and I'm down 4-2. Then I got little crazy, you know.

Davenport at the '01 AO

Q. Ever had a match where you were called for more foot faults?

LINDSAY DAVENPORT: It goes in streaks. I mean, I haven't been called yet the whole year; suddenly tonight I've been called. They seem to be foot-fault happy here because I've seen in it a lot of matches. I'll have to work on that. But like I said, it's the first match that it happened. Fortunately, the few times it did happen, she hit like great returns or I missed the serve, so it didn't hurt me tonight.

Q. How far back do you go back or inch back?

LINDSAY DAVENPORT: It was funny. I was watching Mauresmo, they called two on her. She was not foot-faulting. First thing I thought tonight was, "Oh, no." Yeah, you just scoot back a little bit. It's no big deal. Sometimes you forget.

some interesting comments from Hewitt at the '06 USO(I've heard this from other players before, about how 'pivoting' your foot can make it look like a foot fault, when it isn't)

Q. Is this the place you most get foot faulted?

LLEYTON HEWITT: No, last year in last year, yeah, in Sydney I got foot faulted a lot just in that one tournament. Ended up going to the referee at the tournament and, yeah, it's the way I pivot my foot sometimes, and it actually doesn't touch the line. But to the naked eye, you may actually 'cause the back of my foot, my heel sort of twists so much it doesn't touch the line but sometimes it's over the line. But the rules are if it is not actually touching the line then it's not a foot fault.
You can understand why sometimes they can, you know, see from the line that the actual shoe isn't touching the line
 
Top