A Tennis Shot Clock? Yay or nay?

[Bartelby]

I see I'm keeping you up at night tossing and turning in your bed.

Yet you are still talking. For me, it is amusing to see you so throughly vivisected, so you will have to go away if you don't wish to converse

 

[Deleted member 716271]

I see I'm keeping you up at night tossing and turning in your bed.

Stop trying to trap me in the same go-nowhere arguments you've used your whole life and destroyed your entire family with

 

[Bartelby]

Paranoia sets in with insomnia.

Stop trying to trap me in the same go-nowhere arguments you've used your whole life and destroyed your entire family with

 

[junior74]

Nay when the umpires are free to start it when they like. The start it only after the applause is over and the score has been announced. So in reality, they just prolonged time between points to 35-40 seconds, and the time-wasting will continue or increase.

 

[vernonbc]

Nay when the umpires are free to start it when they like. The start it only after the applause is over and the score has been announced. So in reality, they just prolonged time between points to 35-40 seconds, and the time-wasting will continue or increase.

What makes this whole argument so ridiculous is the fact that the umpires have ALWAYS had the discretion to start the time clock when they wanted and the standard practice, which the players all were aware of, was to start it when they called the score. Anybody who has watched any amount of tennis broadcasts could always see the umpire call the score and then push the button on the score pads they all have on the arm of their chair. Nothing has changed and all the TT posters who hoped Nadal would get a bunch of time violations were dreaming in technicolor.

 

[Deleted member 716271]

Paranoia sets in with insomnia.

Actually, I work nights.

You should try getting a job

 

[Tennis_Hands]

What makes this whole argument so ridiculous is the fact that the umpires have ALWAYS had the discretion to start the time clock when they wanted and the standard practice, which the players all were aware of, was to start it when they called the score. Anybody who has watched any amount of tennis broadcasts could always see the umpire call the score and then push the button on the score pads they all have on the arm of their chair. Nothing has changed and all the TT posters who hoped Nadal would get a bunch of time violations were dreaming in technicolor.

The old rules were clear that the score should be called/time starts to run immediately after the ball went out, and for the most part that was the case, so your contention about similarities between the new and the old situation is misplaced.

If the umpires did something different, it didn't affect the perception of how much time has passed (unless in extraordinary circumstances, but that is an exception), as the rules were clear about when that happened, and the umpire had no influence over that occurrence.

Finally, to the last part of your post: Nadal will have to get in line, otherwise he is getting "a bunch of violations", and then some more.

However, Nadal is not stupid that way. He knows exactly that the new rules put a stop on his intentional stalling on crucial points, so he needs to conform to the new rules.

If we don't see him sanctioned often, it will be because he was forced to play by the rules, not the other way around.

The current rules are designed to give the players more time (thus validating the old situation), but will stop them from stalling intentionally, and since the Nadal fans claimed that the only reason why he does it is to have a bit more time to prepare himself, they should be extremely happy with what he got.

 

[Bartelby]

What's it like being a midnight cowboy?

Actually, I work nights.

You should try getting a job

 

[vernonbc]

The old rules were clear that the score should be called/time starts to run immediately after the ball went out, and for the most part that was the case, so your contention about similarities between the new and the old situation is misplaced.

No, you are mistaking the tv broadcasters supposed time keeping with the official game time called by the umpire. Just because some of the commentators (usually members of the Fed Adoration Society) blathered on about the time between serves, the games and the matches were always controlled by the umpire and their handy-dandy little score pads on the arms of their chairs.

 

[Bartelby]

Good analysis of the sole benefit of the change.

The old rules were clear that the score should be called/time starts to run immediately after the ball went out, and for the most part that was the case, so your contention about similarities between the new and the old situation is misplaced.

If the umpires did something different, it didn't affect the perception of how much time has passed (unless in extraordinary circumstances, but that is an exception), as the rules were clear about when that happened, and the umpire had no influence over that occurrence.

Finally, to the last part of your post: Nadal will have to get in line, otherwise he is getting a bunch of violations", and then some more.

However, Nadal is not stupid that way. He knows exactly that the new rules put a stop on his intentional stalling on crucial points, so he needs to conform to the new rules.

If we don't see him sanctioned often, it will be because he was forced to play by the rules, not the other way around.

The current rules are designed to give the players more time (thus validating the old situation), but will stop them from stalling intentionally, and since the Nadal fans claimed that the only reason why he does it is to have a bit more time to prepare himself, they should be extremely happy with what he got.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

No, you are mistaking the tv broadcasters supposed time keeping with the official game time called by the umpire. Just because some of the commentators (usually members of the Fed Adoration Society) blathered on about the time between serves, the games and the matches were always controlled by the umpire and their handy-dandy little score pads on the arms of their chairs.

You need to read the old rules ASAP.

The bolded is part of the official rules. It has nothing to do with the broadcasters.

If the broadcasters started their time keeping as stated by the rules, they can only be commended for actually respecting the rules.

Also, I am not clear what you state here: if you state that the umpires are those who decide how much time the players would get (until now), that is different from whether they upheld the rules.

It has been demonstrated without any doubt that the umpires' actions are often led by motives that have nothing to do with providing a fair platform for both players as stated by the rules.

For example, the hilarity of giving a time violation to Cilic, but not to Nadal, when it has been timed that Nadal was exceeding the allotted time a lot more in their match, was lost only on the people who couldn’t be bothered to check out if the situation was handled fairly among two time wasters, never mind between an extreme time waster like Nadal and a player who actually plays by the rule..

 

[junior74]

What makes this whole argument so ridiculous is the fact that the umpires have ALWAYS had the discretion to start the time clock when they wanted and the standard practice, which the players all were aware of, was to start it when they called the score. Anybody who has watched any amount of tennis broadcasts could always see the umpire call the score and then push the button on the score pads they all have on the arm of their chair. Nothing has changed and all the TT posters who hoped Nadal would get a bunch of time violations were dreaming in technicolor.

The rules prior to the shot clock says 25 seconds between points. A point ends when the ball is out or hit into the net etc. Why should we wait for the clowns to announce the score for the point to end? Ridiculous.

For me, it's nothing against Nadal. Never has been. The umpires are the ones who allow him and others to the rules, umpires are cowards. And now they don't have to be cowards anymore, because the shot clock rules alters the tennis rules and they hide behind it.

Everybody understands the discretion of giving a few seconds extra after 20+ rallies and points where players have run all over the court, that has never been the problem. The problem is taking 10-15 seconds extra as a tactic on certain points, and not getting warned.

We're lucky the new generation of tennis players are much quicker between points. And the vast majority of tennis players follow the rules with no issues.

 

[vernonbc]

The rules prior to the shot clock says 25 seconds between points. A point ends when the ball is out or hit into the net etc. Why should we wait for the clowns to announce the score for the point to end? Ridiculous.

That may be the rule in the book but it has never been enforced that way. The ATP has confirmed several times that it's up to the umpire to run the game and they are allowed discretion in calling many different rules, not just the time between points. Why aren't code violations given every time a player swears on court?. It's in the rules. Or smashes a racket. Code violations are given more often for that infraction but not always. The umpire has used his discretion. There are some players who goof off and make a mockery of some of the rules but they seldom get coded but the anti-Rafa brigade are losing their minds over a couple of seconds.

The umpires want the fans to be able to see the tennis players play so they are very reluctant to give code warnings to many players who more than deserve them. The only time I've seen an umpire really lay down the law was a match in Monte Carlo between Juan Monaco and Fabio Fognini and Fabio got a code warning, then a point penalty and then finally a game penalty but he was really crazy that day and deserved all the penalties he got. The point being, the umpires have been vested the discretion to call the matches a certain way and that's what they're doing, shot clock or no clock.

 

[WarrenMP]

I would like a shot clock with a buzzer. I would like to see timing strictly enforced. The more tennis move towards being TV friendly the better for the sport.

 

[junior74]

That may be the rule in the book but it has never been enforced that way. The ATP has confirmed several times that it's up to the umpire to run the game and they are allowed discretion in calling many different rules, not just the time between points. Why aren't code violations given every time a player swears on court?. It's in the rules. Or smashes a racket. Code violations are given more often for that infraction but not always. The umpire has used his discretion. There are some players who goof off and make a mockery of some of the rules but they seldom get coded but the anti-Rafa brigade are losing their minds over a couple of seconds.

The umpires want the fans to be able to see the tennis players play so they are very reluctant to give code warnings to many players who more than deserve them. The only time I've seen an umpire really lay down the law was a match in Monte Carlo between Juan Monaco and Fabio Fognini and Fabio got a code warning, then a point penalty and then finally a game penalty but he was really crazy that day and deserved all the penalties he got. The point being, the umpires have been vested the discretion to call the matches a certain way and that's what they're doing, shot clock or no clock.

If things are working so smoothly with the umpires' discretion to decide, why is the shot clock even being introduced? What led to it?

PS! This change is about tennis and its rules, not about Nadal and his routines.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

That may be the rule in the book but it has never been enforced that way. The ATP has confirmed several times that it's up to the umpire to run the game and they are allowed discretion in calling many different rules, not just the time between points. Why aren't code violations given every time a player swears on court?. It's in the rules. Or smashes a racket. Code violations are given more often for that infraction but not always. The umpire has used his discretion. There are some players who goof off and make a mockery of some of the rules but they seldom get coded but the anti-Rafa brigade are losing their minds over a couple of seconds.

The umpires want the fans to be able to see the tennis players play so they are very reluctant to give code warnings to many players who more than deserve them. The only time I've seen an umpire really lay down the law was a match in Monte Carlo between Juan Monaco and Fabio Fognini and Fabio got a code warning, then a point penalty and then finally a game penalty but he was really crazy that day and deserved all the penalties he got. The point being, the umpires have been vested the discretion to call the matches a certain way and that's what they're doing, shot clock or no clock.

If the umpire is not using the discretion as per the rules, the umpire is not doing a good job of creating an environment for a fair competition.

The fact that the umpires allow for certain time-wasting patterns to occure is a testament to their inability or unwillingness to prevent time-wasting being used as gamesmanship tactics.

"Always" or "never" has never been the objective of any rule, so when one uses those words to appeal to the validity of applying it, it is with a speculation in mind.

We are talking about time - wasting not being punished the majority of the time.

Also, unlike the raquet breaking and swearing, which occur in a moment of uncontrolled outburst of emotions, the time wasting is a stone-cold conscious decision, and even then they are much more frequently punished, including with sometimes severe fines.

I find it also hilarious that when it comes to allowing Nadal to go on with his time wasting, the umpires are "just doing their job correctly, because they have the discretion", and when Nadal is penalised suddenly the umpires are "damaging the game", "Anti-Nadal" etc.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

What we've observed is merely Serve Clock 1.0.

Thinking we're going to be seeing future iterations that move closer to keeping rule-breakers in line.

 

[VaporDude95]

What we've observed is merely Serve Clock 1.0.

Thinking we're going to be seeing future iterations that move closer to keeping rule-breakers in line.

By rule breakers, we’re clearly talking about a certain Spaniard who does it numerous times every match.

 

[Deleted member 743561]

We realize that 25 seconds is already too generous on the first serve.

However, there is still no clock whatsoever for the second serve.

John McEnroe is pushing for a 10-second clock between first and second serves.

Thoughts?

 

[michaelyoni]

Just as a side note.
My 14yo son plays tennis and one of the tactics he has started doing against more stronger opponents is to control the tempo of the match. By that I mean when he serves he is ready and "forces" the other player to be ready and receive sooner than they like. Even to the point of beginning his serving action before the kid is really ready. Works. And when he is receiving what he does is turns his back on the player slowly creeps up to the base line where he wants to receive, turns and is ready. Puts the other guy off his 1st serve.

If only my son can win most of his rallies!!. Killer serve for his age but is lazy in chasing balls down.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

 

[WestboroChe]

Just as a side note.
My 14yo son plays tennis and one of the tactics he has started doing against more stronger opponents is to control the tempo of the match. By that I mean when he serves he is ready and "forces" the other player to be ready and receive sooner than they like. Even to the point of beginning his serving action before the kid is really ready. Works. And when he is receiving what he does is turns his back on the player slowly creeps up to the base line where he wants to receive, turns and is ready. Puts the other guy off his 1st serve.

If only my son can win most of his rallies!!. Killer serve for his age but is lazy in chasing balls down.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

Do what you like on the return but if your son is serving before the returner is ready that is not sporting and eventually he will get called out for it.

 

[I Am Finnish]

Yay

 

[michaelyoni]

Do what you like on the return but if your son is serving before the returner is ready that is not sporting and eventually he will get called out for it.

No. He is "hurrying" the kid to be ready. It works and no kid has complained. Even in tournaments were officials are walking around they don't say anything. The receiver can easily put his hand up or not go to the base line to be ready.
He is not serving when they are not ready.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

 

[WestboroChe]

No. He is "hurrying" the kid to be ready. It works and no kid has complained. Even in tournaments were officials are walking around they don't say anything. The receiver can easily put his hand up or not go to the base line to be ready.
He is not serving when they are not ready.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

I gotcha. Your original post made it seem otherwise. What your describing is more like a pitcher working fast. Sure no problem there.

 

[michaelyoni]

Yeah. It was similar in my younger days as a cricket bowler. The bowler would wait for the batsmen to be ready before he started his run up. I would always start my run up a second or so before they were really ready, it surely made them be out of their comfort zone. And they would get out rather than being settled in and then it would be difficult to get them out.

Most of the time (generally in sport) most people are abut the same ability...buy using mind games gives you the edge. Getting them outside their comfort zone.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

 

[WestboroChe]

Yeah. It was similar in my younger days as a cricket bowler. The bowler would wait for the batsmen to be ready before he started his run up. I would always start my run up a second or so before they were really ready, it surely made them be out of their comfort zone. And they would get out rather than being settled in and then it would be difficult to get them out.

Most of the time (generally in sport) most people are abut the same ability...buy using mind games gives you the edge. Getting them outside their comfort zone.

Sent from my SM-A530F using Tapatalk

True! A lot of times in tennis people get out of their comfort zone as soon as you start playing real points. It took me years to get to a point where I can play close to full capability from the first few points. It used to take me about 3-4 games!

 

[OldschoolKIaus]

The Nadal doesn't care about it lol

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Lots of disappointment incoming for Fed fans over the next 2-3 years - lol.

You were right! And where did you go @-NN- ?

If people think this rule is going to negatively affect certain players, I think they are in for a rude surprise.

<3

Several in this thread really excited, thought some players would stop winning.

Sure. Although I doubt the clock will make a difference in the sport's popularity. I mean, seriously?

Not sure what that has to do with what I said though.

You were right love, it didn’t have any impact on the popularity of the sport. <3

Feels like ages ago! I wasn’t worried for Rafa wouldn’t adapt to the clock. What about you newcomers?Did you think it would ruin Rafas career? This was a big thing back then and discussed over and over and over in here to the moon and back.