Davis Cup Drama: Bergs knocks Garin to the ground

Lleytonstation

Talk Tennis Guru
Decent technique on the shoulder charge. 6.2/10, maybe 6.5 accounting for how it's disguised as a no-look.
Reminds me of this....
ezgif-1bd83b642db6d.gif

Need good technique to hide it.
 

roysid

Legend
Bergs breaks Garin at 5-5 in the third set and runs to his bench to celebrate, knocking down Garin by the shoulder in the process. The supervisor is called on after the incident and gives Bergs a warning for unsportsmanlike conduct. Huffed by the decision, Garin then refuses to play on. He receives a warning first, then a point penalty and then a game penalty. This was a decisive match in the group tie, so Belgium def. Chile 3-1



*edited for wrong scoreline
The official score says 7-5 in 3rd set. So did he get 2 game penalty
 

Big_Dangerous

Talk Tennis Guru
The official score says 7-5 in 3rd set. So did he get 2 game penalty
I think Bergs broke Garin at 5-5 in the third set for 6-5. He would have served for the match but Garin refuses to play on so the chair awarded the game and subsequently the match to Bergs.
 

N01E

Hall of Fame
Bad weekend for the a**holes in the Davis Cup. Both Wild and Garin were right, but it's difficult to root for them. Garin's fake fall and spreading misinformation about the DQ instead of the game penalty doesn't help either. But those are still 2 massive f*ck ups by the umpires.
If this was Kyrgios or even Djokovic this would have been a DQ. Should have been a DQ.

Garin is a jerk but cmon guys this isn't a hard decision.
Kyrgios got away with it during his only doubles GS title run because the mother of the crying child started laughing. I remember though how there were discussions here back in 2020 regarding Novak's DQ with many now banned users (but not just them) claiming that it wasn't subjective and that anyone would get DQed in that situation. The following years shockingly proved that one side as always got it right, with Aldila Sutjiadi and Miyu Kato being the only players getting the undeserved DQ (maybe even the worst one in this sport's history) since then. There's no consistency in umpiring the sport in which ironically consistency plays a huge part.

The fact that you can hit another player before serving for the match and just get a warning for that it's crazy. Tbh the whole warning system is broken. There should be options for game or set penalties from the start if they really don't want to give those DQs, but seeing how well umpires were doing this weekend maybe it's for the best that they don't have those options.
 

vive le beau jeu !

Talk Tennis Guru
This is one of the most bizarre tennis incidents I've ever seen...from clips, I didn't watch the match.

Bergs's bump (thump, etc) appeared to be accidental, not malicious, but still he was at fault for causing the collision. Unfortunate or not, if his recklessness caused a situation where Garin could not continue, then Bergs should have been DQd.

I really can't determine whether Garin could've continued or be expected to continue. Special circumstances: Perhaps, they could've given him more time to settle in and treat any injury.

As for Ramos, he was put in a very tough position. This was so much different than Serena at USO18, when she purposely, willfully went on an ugly tirade questioning his integrity in front of the world. One can question his judgment in both difficult situations, but they simply aren't comparable.

Me? He was correct in Serena- Osaka. Here? I'm not so sure. Leaning against.
Is it possible that the aggression (whether it is with ball, racquet, physical infliction etc.) rule is less stricly applied between players than against fan/ball person/line judge/umpire? Maybe, say, if it was ball person he bumped into there would've been immediate announcement of DQ but becasue it was player they viewed it differently? Sometimes players intentionally hit opponent and it's seen OK anyway.
The rule as written in the rulebook is the same, regardless of whether they hit an official or the opposing player. It's ultimately up to the umpire's discretion
If he bumped into a ball kid and the kid started crying, it most definitely would be a default - like the women's doubles situation at '23 RG. If the kid shrugged it off, they would have played on. Guess Garin should have burst into tears.

couldn't the umpire have given 1 or 3 penalty points to bergs? :unsure:
(or maybe you necessarily need a warning before giving those?)
would have sounded like some 'middle ground'...
 

merwy

G.O.A.T.
Here's the thing: Bergs was being an idiot for that celebration and should of been DQ.

Also, Garin was acting like a big baby when he got the Time violation, point and game penalty.

Was it an accident? Yes

Was it so bad to the point where Garin couldn't play? Don't think so.
I agree with every part of your assessment, except for your conclusion. Garin was overreacting, but at the end of they day, Bergs did hurt him enough for the damage to hinder Garin in play. If you get hit with a shoulder in your eye, sure you can play on. But it will hinder you significantly ( regardless of the doctor's examination) and Bergs doesn't deserve to have that unfair advantage. Your vision is such an important part of play and seeing even a little blurry in possibly the final game of the match is a huge handicap. So, I do think that Bergs should've been DQ'd, even though it was an accident.
 

reaper

Legend
I agree with every part of your assessment, except for your conclusion. Garin was overreacting, but at the end of they day, Bergs did hurt him enough for the damage to hinder Garin in play. If you get hit with a shoulder in your eye, sure you can play on. But it will hinder you significantly ( regardless of the doctor's examination) and Bergs doesn't deserve to have that unfair advantage. Your vision is such an important part of play and seeing even a little blurry in possibly the final game of the match is a huge handicap. So, I do think that Bergs should've been DQ'd, even though it was an accident.
That's the salient point. The issue is not whether Garin could play on: clearly he could. It's whether there's any impairment as a result of the injury his opponent inflicted. Plainly swelling around the eye can impair vision, unfairly placing Garin at a disadvantage.
 

Gerco

Semi-Pro
For the people here saying Garin overreacted, my guess is you haven´t seen this clip.


Intentionally or not (to me it was), Bergs should have been DQ. Tennis is not a contact sport as other here reminded.
 

Devilito

Legend
WTF was Garin doing? He could see Bergs celebrating and running for the bench, just hold back a second. Almost like he moved to block Bergs to create this entire situation on purpose. Dude probably watches a lot of soccer in his spare time.
 

JMR

Hall of Fame
The fact that you can hit another player before serving for the match and just get a warning for that it's crazy. Tbh the whole warning system is broken. There should be options for game or set penalties from the start if they really don't want to give those DQs, but seeing how well umpires were doing this weekend maybe it's for the best that they don't have those options.
I would have applied a one-game penalty for the collision (it was not "accidental" -- it was either intentional or reckless, and the latter warrants a penalty too). If Bergs says, "You can't do that!" I'd say, "Too bad, that's my ruling. If you don't play, you get a DQ." Then order an MTO for Garin (probably more for him to cool off than to recuperate). Then since the score is now 6-6, tiebreak.
 

socallefty

G.O.A.T.
With this ruling, what this means is that you can create an accident to injure your opponent so that their game is hampered, but you will not have any penalty from the referee as long as the player you injured ‘accidentally’ is cleared by a doctor as still being able to play. So, if you trip them accidentally, jump on top of them while celebrating, knock a waterjug onto their head etc., you can give them a limp to affect their movement, you can bruise their eye to affect their vision, you can hurt their arm/shoulder to affect their shots, you can give them a headache etc., but if they are not injured enough to stop playing according to a doctor, then you get to keep playing an opponent you injured yourself.

The distinction on whether you get defaulted or not should depend on how you injured your opponent - was it an intentional act (like Bergs did plowing into Garin) or unintentional act and it should not be based on whether the injury-causing act was accidental in motive or premeditated. If you even slightly injure your opponent through an intentional act, the opponent should not be forced to keep playing while hampered by the injury you caused them. Did the doctor test Garin to know if his vision was affected or he got a headache from the takedown - maybe he could play tennis, but probably not as well as he would have played if he had not been run over by Bergs. What a farce!

Meanwhile if you do something to make a ballkid cry or a linesperson or spectator slightly injured, you will be defaulted. But go ahead and injure your opponent just below the threshold of whether they can continue to play tennis, then you are fine.
 
Last edited:

reaper

Legend
For the people here saying Garin overreacted, my guess is you haven´t seen this clip.


Intentionally or not (to me it was), Bergs should have been DQ. Tennis is not a contact sport as other here reminded.
I don't know why you'd think it was intentional if you also think it should be a DQ. So Bergs wins a game to take the lead late in the final set, then chooses a mode of celebration that is likely to cost himself the match?
 

urban

Legend
A tennis player should control himself. People can and should let out emotions, but it should remain civil and with a rest of composure. Otherwise we get scenes like in you tube videos about Moutet, Andreev, Malisse and other really bad behaviour. Some sort of exuberant jubilation is common since the days of Becker, who began with this fist gestures, nowadays we see that after every point. But nobody has the right to run into another player or an official, or throw a racket or ball in a dangerous way, or use it as a weapon. In earlier eras it happened, that players were heckled and even attacked by people of the crowd, especially in Davis Cup ties in South America. The Seles incident is an all too bad reminder. I also find the use of medical time-ourts and other tactics questionable, a trend which is growing in the modern game. There should be clear rules, and umpires should use them in the full sense.
 
Last edited:

jm1972

Semi-Pro
It is really hard to be a fan of tennis sometimes.

Not a single sport out there on the planet would have an issue with this except maybe golf. Not a single player would not continue the match. Tennis needs to learn to embrace the passion, competition, and gutsiness other sports show but tennis does not.

You can leave. Tennis doesn't need fans like you.
 

bigR

New User
Are you arguing this was intentional because Bergs definitely saw Garin? How come Garin looked completely oblivious and made no apparent effort to dodge this?

They both completely misjudged how close they were to each other
I’m saying the man who ran and jumped, thereby extending his shoulder to his opponent’s face, should be punished.
 

jm1980

Talk Tennis Guru
I’m saying the man who ran and jumped, thereby extending his shoulder to his opponent’s face, should be punished.
Bergs was punished: he got a warning, which was a perfectly appropriate punishment for what he had done
 
Last edited:

Humbi_HTX

Professional
Bergs was punished: he got a warning, which was a perfectly appropriate punishment for what he had done

I disagree with the punishment. Next time a player smashes a raquet and hits his opponent on the shin badly enough he can't continue, all the player has to do is say it was an accident and takes the win.

Because the doctor said he "could" play, the chair judges the game should go on yet the other player feels he can not continue and looses after being the victim of the unsportsmanlike behavior.

I truly agree with Garin when he tells Ramos (in spanish) you don't have the balls to default the Belgian player, and the reffing was terrible by not de-escalating the situation and in fact added more controversy by talking on the mic over Ramos while still in discussions and giving the game penalty for time violation rather than a default/walkover.
 

Sudacafan

Bionic Poster
I disagree with the punishment. Next time a player smashes a raquet and hits his opponent on the shin badly enough he can't continue, all the player has to do is say it was an accident and takes the win.

Because the doctor said he "could" play, the chair judges the game should go on yet the other player feels he can not continue and looses after being the victim of the unsportsmanlike behavior.

I truly agree with Garin when he tells Ramos (in spanish) you don't have the balls to default the Belgian player, and the reffing was terrible by not de-escalating the situation and in fact added more controversy by talking on the mic over Ramos while still in discussions and giving the game penalty for time violation rather than a default/walkover.
After all these years, and my dislike of Serena, I’m discovering that Ramos is an @$$hole.
What an epiphany!
 

masilva1

New User
It is really hard to be a fan of tennis sometimes.

Not a single sport out there on the planet would have an issue with this except maybe golf. Not a single player would not continue the match. Tennis needs to learn to embrace the passion, competition, and gutsiness other sports show but tennis does not.
UFC is for you then.
F*** off and leave us taking care of the tradition underpinning this beautiful sport.
 

masilva1

New User
That's the salient point. The issue is not whether Garin could play on: clearly he could. It's whether there's any impairment as a result of the injury his opponent inflicted. Plainly swelling around the eye can impair vision, unfairly placing Garin at a disadvantage.
Independently of the possibly impairment, there is not allowed in tennis any sort of aggression against the other player. Period.
 

Third Serve

Talk Tennis Guru
It is really hard to be a fan of tennis sometimes.

Not a single sport out there on the planet would have an issue with this except maybe golf. Not a single player would not continue the match. Tennis needs to learn to embrace the passion, competition, and gutsiness other sports show but tennis does not.
Tennis isn’t a contact sport
 

JeffG

Rookie
Garin was as responsible for the collision as Bergs. It makes no sense to insist one player is fully responsible for watching where he’s going but the other player is not. It’s also not true that one player has the right of way as some have suggested here.

Honestly, I’ve seen kids take worse shots than that and finish competitions without so much fuss about it. Coach Massu was urging Garin to continue. Would he have done that if he really thought Garin was too seriously injured to play?
 
Top