Crowd booing an umpire! A first?

  • Thread starter Deleted member 744633
  • Start date
T

tennis tom

Legend
AM75 said:
This umpire didn’t do his job properly. Rafa could have penalty for coaching at least twice, but the umpire didn’t want to notice it even when it was shown on screen.
Click to expand...
They're ALWAYS looking for new umpires and linespeople--I suggest you sign-up--pays well, lots of travel and best seats in the house--they'll school you too!
 
Mark-Touch

Mark-Touch

Legend
Elektra said:
Yup cause he was delaying Medvev on serve too much. The only time people got tired of Rafa's OCD behavior and he kept using the crowd noise as an excuse to take away momentum from Medvev.
Click to expand...

Occasionally players returning serve will put up their hands when there is movement going on in the crowd behind their opponent and it is distracting them.
At first I thought this is what Rafa was doing.
But when he did it repeatedly and also after Med popped aces that flew by him I knew something was amiss. :(
 
clayqueen

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Mark-Touch said:
Occasionally players returning serve will put up their hands when there is movement going on in the crowd behind their opponent and it is distracting them.
At first I thought this is what Rafa was doing.
But when he did it repeatedly and also after Med popped aces that flew by him I knew something was amiss. :(
Click to expand...
'Repeatedly' is a bit of an exaggeration. It was a very lively match and the stadium was packed so it's not surprising that it took time for them to settle down.
 
AM75

AM75

Hall of Fame
tennis tom said:
They're ALWAYS looking for new umpires and linespeople--I suggest you sign-up--pays well, lots of travel and best seats in the house--they'll school you too!
Click to expand...
Yup, I’m considering taking umpire courses next year. Unfortunately one need to do a lot of boring stuff on the national level first.
 
Last edited:
Bhagi Katbamna

Bhagi Katbamna

Legend
I didn't see any signals or Nadal's box talking back to him. I think they booed him for those time violation warnings in the fourth set.
 
Dedans Penthouse

Dedans Penthouse

Legend
Sunny Ali said:
Herr Sentinel ... no complaints either way. All trolling aside, who among Rafa/Nole/Federer is the greatest is not of much interest to me.

When I tune in, I'm looking for entertaining matches and the top 3 consistently find a way to deliver that

:) Long may they continue to play :p
Click to expand...
. .^ this +1 . . nice to read a fan of tennis who appreciates all of the greats
 
Last edited:
deaner2211

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
Sunny Ali said:
What the h*ell, I can understand the rationale behind Serena but Venus as well? :oops: Not good.
Click to expand...
How many times do we have to say this. Before the Serena match, Ramos accused Venus of receiving coaching and penalized her and he and Venus got into it.....THAT IS WHY!!!!
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
deaner2211 said:
How many times do we have to say this. Before the Serena match, Ramos accused Venus of receiving coaching and penalized her and he and Venus got into it.....THAT IS WHY!!!!
Click to expand...

It's Ramos' job to stop coaching and he did that. Just as it was Ali Nili's job to issue time violations to Nadal. If you're going to bar umpires in certain players matches for doing their job, it's setting a very bad precedent.
 
deaner2211

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
Sunny Ali said:
It's Ramos' job to stop coaching and he did that. Just as it was Ali Nili's job to issue time violations to Nadal. If you're going to bar umpires in certain players matches for doing their job, it's setting a very bad precedent.
Click to expand...
That is not the point! You said you can understand why Serena but not Venus, so I told you why Venus!
 
Fabresque

Fabresque

Legend
octobrina10 said:
Hmm. You obviously don't know what a 'let' means.
Click to expand...

See this? Returner wasn’t ready, server still aced him. No let, nothing. That’s because you play to the speed of the server.

Nadal has gotten preferential treatment, just don’t bother to try and defend it.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
Mike Sams said:
You get a warning first. You get a fault on a second offense. Nadal was lucky he didn't get deducted a game from all the tactics he employed. LOL
Holding up his hand several times to claim he wasn't ready was pretty crappy on his part. Like dude, you play to the speed of the server. So you better be ready.
Click to expand...
You can't be deducted a game for going over the time limit on serve.

You play at the speed of the server, but the server has to wait for the receiver to be ready, so tht one's not such a clear cut rule.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
BTW, I'm glad the crowd bood the ump. Issuing a time violation penalty in the fifth set of a slam final, after almost 5 hours of play, and while the public was still cheering. Please.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
Sunny Ali said:
Atherton ...

1. The shot clock was used from the very first set, not just the 5th set.

2. Each tournament is free to use it or not use. Wimbledon did not. The US Open did.

3. If the tournament decides to use it, the umpire (as I understand it) is obliged to issue a violation if the clock runs out. Else, there would be no point in a shot clock if the umpire ignores it.
Click to expand...

I don't think your last point is right? I think the ump is always supposed to issue violation, independently of the shot clock being there or not?

Of course, most umpires being reasonable people, they won't issue violations if the service motion has already started, or if there's still crowd noise, for example. Some umpires are idiots and behave like machines though.
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
Crisstti said:
I don't think your last point is right? I think the ump is always supposed to issue violation, independently of the shot clock being there or not?

Of course, most umpires being reasonable people, they won't issue violations if the service motion has already started, or if there's still crowd noise, for example. Some umpires are idiots and behave like machines though.
Click to expand...

Crisstti ... good point. In the absence of the shot clock, there was some leverage for the umpire such as crowd settling down, as you have said. So he could allow a few extra seconds. With the shot clock however, no such leeway is allowed. That's my understanding but I hope someone can clarify it because it's a new concept and not all too clear. For example, does the umpire start the clock and if so, when? Or is it automatic?
 
SumYungGai

SumYungGai

Semi-Pro
Sunny Ali said:
Crisstti ... good point. In the absence of the shot clock, there was some leverage for the umpire such as crowd settling down, as you have said. So he could allow a few extra seconds. With the shot clock however, no such leeway is allowed. That's my understanding but I hope someone can clarify it because it's a new concept and not all too clear. For example, does the umpire start the clock and if so, when? Or is it automatic?
Click to expand...
They start it after they announce the score. But they can also pause it at will, like we saw in the US Open.
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
Crisstti said:
I don't think your last point is right? I think the ump is always supposed to issue violation, independently of the shot clock being there or not?

Of course, most umpires being reasonable people, they won't issue violations if the service motion has already started, or if there's still crowd noise, for example. Some umpires are idiots and behave like machines though.
Click to expand...

It's a tough job. With hugely popular players like Nadal or Federer in the match, it's tough on the umpire. Some handle it well, others don't. Like the players, the umpires aren't immune to pressure and some just choose to implement the rules without consideration of extenuating circumstances. Like machines, as you rightly said :)
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
SumYungGai said:
They start it after they announce the score. But they can also pause it at will, like we saw in the US Open.
Click to expand...

SumYung ... thanks for the clarification. I had no idea they could pause the clock, that's interesting.
 
T

tonylg

Legend
Sunny Ali said:
Crisstti ... good point. In the absence of the shot clock, there was some leverage for the umpire such as crowd settling down, as you have said. So he could allow a few extra seconds. With the shot clock however, no such leeway is allowed. That's my understanding but I hope someone can clarify it because it's a new concept and not all too clear. For example, does the umpire start the clock and if so, when? Or is it automatic?
Click to expand...

There's still complete discretion on the part of the umpire, in starting the clock, choosing to enforce when it expires and the receiver holding up proceedings. All present problems, but the last two are just silly. For example, the clock had expired when Nadal served the final point of the match .. winning him the championship.

It needs to be automatic, because discretion isn't working.

Can't serve within 10 seconds and must serve within 25 seconds of the point finishing. Enforce that automatically and don't allow any of this disgraceful holding up of the game by the returner and it would be clear, simple and fair.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
tonylg said:
There's still complete discretion on the part of the umpire, in starting the clock, choosing to enforce when it expires and the receiver holding up proceedings. All present problems, but the last two are just silly. For example, the clock had expired when Nadal served the final point of the match .. winning him the championship.

It needs to be automatic, because discretion isn't working.

Can't serve within 10 seconds and must serve within 25 seconds of the point finishing. Enforce that automatically and don't allow any of this disgraceful holding up of the game by the returner and it would be clear, simple and fair.
Click to expand...
The discretion isn't working because there ISN'T enough discretion applied.
 
Crisstti

Crisstti

Legend
The receiver shall play to the reasonable pace of the server and shall be ready to receive within a reasonable time of the server being ready. A Time Violation may be issued prior to the expiration of twenty-five (25) seconds if the receiver’s actions are delaying the reasonable pace of the server.

From the rulebook.
 
octobrina10

octobrina10

Talk Tennis Guru
Fabresque said:

See this? Returner wasn’t ready, server still aced him. No let, nothing. That’s because you play to the speed of the server.

Nadal has gotten preferential treatment, just don’t bother to try and defend it.
Click to expand...

You are lying! The eyewitness told: "I watched this match. Very intense. The 'ace' in the video didn't count as the umpire reluctantly agreed with Crepatte after he complained that he wasn't ready."
 
L

LETitBE

Hall of Fame
Crisstti said:
The receiver shall play to the reasonable pace of the server and shall be ready to receive within a reasonable time of the server being ready. A Time Violation may be issued prior to the expiration of twenty-five (25) seconds if the receiver’s actions are delaying the reasonable pace of the server.

From the rulebook.
Click to expand...

so how does he get away with it time after time?
 
Last edited:
L

LETitBE

Hall of Fame
tonylg said:
There's still complete discretion on the part of the umpire, in starting the clock, choosing to enforce when it expires and the receiver holding up proceedings. All present problems, but the last two are just silly. For example, the clock had expired when Nadal served the final point of the match .. winning him the championship.

It needs to be automatic, because discretion isn't working.

Can't serve within 10 seconds and must serve within 25 seconds of the point finishing. Enforce that automatically and don't allow any of this disgraceful holding up of the game by the returner and it would be clear, simple and fair.
Click to expand...
people dont seem to understand the 25 seconds is the maximum time
 
D

Deleted member 744633

Guest
tonylg said:
There's still complete discretion on the part of the umpire, in starting the clock, choosing to enforce when it expires and the receiver holding up proceedings. All present problems, but the last two are just silly. For example, the clock had expired when Nadal served the final point of the match .. winning him the championship.

It needs to be automatic, because discretion isn't working.

Can't serve within 10 seconds and must serve within 25 seconds of the point finishing. Enforce that automatically and don't allow any of this disgraceful holding up of the game by the returner and it would be clear, simple and fair.
Click to expand...

Tony, agreed! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
So the umpire cannot control the crowd now?
Replies
36
Views
903
BeatlesFan
BeatlesFan
Jokervich
Are we witnessing a seismic shift in Djokovic's popularity?
Replies
41
Views
2K
BHud
BHud
tipsa...don'tlikehim!
'They are animals' (Australian crowd)
2
Replies
67
Views
7K
Dedans Penthouse
Dedans Penthouse
J
Chair umpire Carlos Ramos retires after a 32 year career
Replies
26
Views
2K
Rosstour
Rosstour
tennisaddict
Kyrgios : FO Code violation -So when Djokovic pushes an umpire that’s alright?
2 3
Replies
122
Views
9K
Wilhelm
Wilhelm
Top