Djokovic on Zverev and sports domestic violence policies.

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Precisely nothing hangs on this supposed non-meeting of minds. Djokovic agreed that there needs to be a DV policy and that's how it's been reported. That's the substance of the matter.

And this here summarises everything of importance in that exchange. Why didn't he simply answer what he was asked?
 

Beckerserve

Hall of Fame
I’m starting from the presumption Djokovic knows what happened and he’s lying about not knowing. If he knows Zverev is innocent he would defend him more vigorously. He would say Zverev is my friend and I know he didn’t do it. Only if he knows that Zverev actually did something that he would choose to defend the character but not actually denying the allegations.
He cannot say that. World media would be all over him especially women journos. His response was perfect.
 

RaulRamirez

Hall of Fame
In my opinion, Novak handled it pretty well, although I do wish that he would have simply said that the ATP should have a DV policy, and left it at that. In his pressers, he is, generally, a very good interviewee - open and articulate. Obviously, he's had a misstep or two this year, but I don't think it's fair to lump everything into one big ball of condemnation.

For what he did add to the question, let's not conflate his very generalized support of Zverev to anything more than that.

DV - and violence against women...violence in general - should be taken seriously by everyone in all sectors. Fairly obviously. I don't know what happened between Zverev and Ms. Sharypova, and I doubt that Novak does, either. He also just came off the court having won what in essence was a QF match versus the player in question.
 
Last edited:

RaulRamirez

Hall of Fame
I’m starting from the presumption Djokovic knows what happened and he’s lying about not knowing. If he knows Zverev is innocent he would defend him more vigorously. He would say Zverev is my friend and I know he didn’t do it. Only if he knows that Zverev actually did something that he would choose to defend the character but not actually denying the allegations.
How are we supposed to take your opinions seriously - or as anything based on objectivity - when you build it upon that presumption?
 

Drob

Professional
Because this presumption is 99% correct. No way Djokovic doesn’t know.
Are you freaking serious? There is a 99 percent chance Djokovic does not know. Why would he know, and how could he know? Is Djokovic a witness in this case?

This is craziness.
 
An expert who is asked to share his expert opinion (has been asked specifically about it quoting his expertise), just like that decides to withhold it, but instead talks about something completely different? I know what explanation I would pick. There is no reason whatsoever that that is the case.
I see. That is why you are arguing.
You completely forgot the first part of the question, didn't you? That is why you are constantly reverting to talking about Zverev. However, the first part of the question exists. It gives context to the question that actually doesn't allow for a free speculation from the media: if Djokovic has said his "expert" opinion on the introduction and nature of the regulations against DV, he wouldn't have been perceived as anything else but an expert giving his honest "solution"/ his suggestion. That brings with it the spirit of impartiality, because the matter is being discussed on principle, so if you don't forget the first part of the question, the framework within which this situation is reviewed is completely different, and Djokovic is shielded from his position being interpreted as anything else, but his solution to the problem. No connection whatsoever to any specific case.

There are more problems with your claims however: Is there ANYONE that wouldn't be against the abusers? How is Djokovic's stance even questionable on this? So if he says what every decent person would say, it will be interpreted as an "attack" on Zverev? Is every person that assumes that position attacking Zverev? That would suggest that everyone views Zverev as an actual abuser!



TL; DR
WHAT? That is THE MAIN POINT I was making all the time: that Djokovic made a mistake by answering the question about what he thinks about Zverev's situation, instead of choosing the "expert" route, which would have given him the context to not even have to discuss specific cases without media making "accusatory" conclusions about his opinion for anyone in particular.
It was YOU, who claimed that there was no enough merit in the expert route, and also it was YOU who claimed that talking about Zverev is A-OK and should be estimated as "neutral".
If I have to I will quote every part from my previous posts that indicate that. What a way to try to get out of the mess you got yourself into!
I want to you to read your own sentence: Djokovic did not bring up Zverev: Oh yes, who did? I don't see any mention of Zverev anywhere in the question.
second bolded red: that is YOUR estimate, and I already laid out the "expert" route, why it, how and so on. You directly contradict this:
You have been doing exactly the bolded the entire time: you were refuting that Djokovic could have answered the question without bringing up Zverev. In fact, you whole stance boils down to that that without answer about Zverev there is no answer at all.Here:
Bolded blue: not only is it not "disingenuous", but that is the crux of the matter: the art of saying just enough, without springing the trap and still without exposing yourself towards criticism.You seem to be swinging between the desperation of claiming that there is no other way than to talk about Zverev, and the other extreme of accusing of disingenuity, if that doesn't happen. It looks like you see that the question is perfectly workable without talking about Zverev, and the only thing that stops you from admitting that is your self-imposed condition that for Zverev should be talked at any cost.

As I said previously, you see the springing of the trap as the only solution. Well, not only I explained to you in detail what is the alternative, but went at length to show you WHY that is so, and WHY what you suggest is erroneous on multiple levels.

TL; DR
Djokovic isn't shielded from anything in the media. It's media. They look for stories, and will draw connections, regardless of the intent. It must be qualified.
No, no one reasonable would be for abusers, but media is oft unreasonable. You may call the premise faulty, but it's just the world we live in, not the world you'd like to live in. And no, my point doesn't destroy my point. You just don't understand the way the world works.
It's not a deflection, it's how media works. Shocker - I know! They ask about news! And yes, people would assume that. You don't speak for everyone, no matter how much you'd like to.
Claiming impartiality doesn't make you impartial. (Am I doing it right?)People will interpret his words whether he wants them to or not. He doesn't get a say in it. The best he can do is make a statement beforehand that will keep it from being too misinterpreted.
TL; DR
He is shielded form the media making the conclusion that he is biased one way or the other, because he is seen as an expert, if he answers like one. Your effort at deflection is unsuccessful.
The moment you start going the route of unreasonable, illogical and misrepresentation you concede the debate. You can ascribe anything to anyone, if you act in such a manner. That is not what this debate is about
Same
If he answers from a position of impartiality, he is not "claiming" it, he is in fact being impartial. The answer in the framework I already explained will give him that position. For the

TFL!!!; DR


So, you either you cannot read, you you rely on some sort of mercy of anyone not reading what you quote.

Let's see:

Tennis_Hands said:
The question wasn't about whether Zverev is telling the truth or not. (1)In fact, the question wasn't about Zverev at all. Djokovic was supposed to share his knowledge on the regulations in other sports, as he supposedly was in the know of how these other sports are organised. Either Djokovic doesn't have a clue, or he has difficulty understanding what is being asked. Instead he went on a tangent to explain what a good lad Zed is.

Bolded red one: I state directly and unequivocally, that the question is NOT about Zverev.

Here is your claim.
Oh yes, it was. I stated it directly, so your multiple accusations of me "lying/changing the subject", are smearing with no substance, and as shown in the example above, in fact it is you, who apparently forgot what you addressed. The temerity of quoting something that directly disproves what you are saying is not lost on me.

Bolded blue one: my claim that he should have taken it up as an expert. Again clearly and precisely stated.

Bolded green one: My explanation as to what might have not allowed him to not entertain the expert part as much as he wanted. That DOESN'T mean, that he should have "filled the void",by entertaining a different question, mind you. He could have left it then and there. Not knowing is not a reason to be presented as biased, and that was a worst case scenario in that framework

It was a mistake from you to remind everyone what you were "refuting". It just gave me the opportunity to confirm how straightforward and consequential I have been throughout that discsussion.

WTF!!!...WTFL; DR
 

Clay lover

Hall of Fame
Why's there such a long debate? Some people read the subtext and answer accordingly and some people answer what is asked literally directly. There isn't anything wrong with either.
 

EllieK

Hall of Fame
There are many situations outside of tennis where men are abusive and able to hide it very well. Women are often afraid to speak up against this abuse from powerful and prominent men in particular for fear of not being believed. I'm sure that tennis players are no different. It's tough to say that Sascha is one of these men but it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility.
 

blablavla

Legend
There are many situations outside of tennis where men are abusive and able to hide it very well. Women are often afraid to speak up against this abuse from powerful and prominent men in particular for fear of not being believed. I'm sure that tennis players are no different. It's tough to say that Sascha is one of these men but it's certainly not outside the realm of possibility.
1. not only men commit domestic violence, it happens the other way around as well
2. people as well lie, and this is not limited to women lie but all men are telling the truth always, no, both men and women lie

3. can we accuse Sascha and send him to jail based on the available evidence?
if you answer yes, please consider that in a similar situation, when you will be accused, you should be ready to take the same punishment and go to jail for example, or be declared toxic for society and all your friends shall cut their ties to you, your spouse should take the kids and leave and your parents shall publicly declare that they are ashamed of you.

#3 would open a door to an easy revenge on people, isn't it?
you don't even need evidence, just make some public allegations, and voi-la.
 
Ben Rothenberg, being member of the notorious nefarious PC Police Execution Squad, wants all male pros eventually to be banned from tennis... just for being male basically.

Trust this extremist SJW clown to push this agenda with so much vehemence.

Why would the ATP need to "exert justice" before courts do? And if the courts don't send a player to prison why should the ATP ban him or whatever?

If the ATP ever ends up like the NFL, tennis is done. We'll have players on leashes, obedient and mono-political, reciting virtue-signaling poetry every time they step in front of journalists. They're PC enough as it is.
 

EllieK

Hall of Fame
1. not only men commit domestic violence, it happens the other way around as well
2. people as well lie, and this is not limited to women lie but all men are telling the truth always, no, both men and women lie

3. can we accuse Sascha and send him to jail based on the available evidence?
if you answer yes, please consider that in a similar situation, when you will be accused, you should be ready to take the same punishment and go to jail for example, or be declared toxic for society and all your friends shall cut their ties to you, your spouse should take the kids and leave and your parents shall publicly declare that they are ashamed of you.

#3 would open a door to an easy revenge on people, isn't it?
you don't even need evidence, just make some public allegations, and voi-la.
I agree with you on all points. People lie and men can also be victims. My points were directed specifically to this allegation, as well as the fact that powerful men can hide behind that power and status. My friend was severely abused by her husband who was a district attorney. Who would have believed her? She suffered in silence for a long time. I spent years knowing this woman and had no clue. The timing of Sharypova's accusation is somewhat suspicious given the fact that the girlfriend who replaced her just released news of her pregnancy. Interesting though that Brenda has said she will raise the child on her own. Whether he is innocent or guilty, the statements that Sascha has made were obviously carefully crafted by his management. Reading from his phone, really?
 

blablavla

Legend
I agree with you on all points. People lie and men can also be victims. My points were directed specifically to this allegation, as well as the fact that powerful men can hide behind that power and status. My friend was severely abused by her husband who was a district attorney. Who would have believed her? She suffered in silence for a long time. I spent years knowing this woman and had no clue. The timing of Sharypova's accusation is somewhat suspicious given the fact that the girlfriend who replaced her just released news of her pregnancy. Interesting though that Brenda has said she will raise the child on her own. Whether he is innocent or guilty, the statements that Sascha has made were obviously carefully crafted by his management. Reading from his phone, really?
and I know a case when a powerful men left his wife.
as a revenge she seeks to lie about him, quite awful lies to be honest.
on multiple occasions her conversation partners proved that those are lies, but this doesn't stop her.

so, with this in mind:
1. can we conclude that Zverev abused her and should face adequate punishment
2. can we conclude that she lies and should she face adequate punishment

when choosing between #1 and #2, think that exactly same approach should be applied to you in a similar situation.
 

EllieK

Hall of Fame
and I know a case when a powerful men left his wife.
as a revenge she seeks to lie about him, quite awful lies to be honest.
on multiple occasions her conversation partners proved that those are lies, but this doesn't stop her.

so, with this in mind:
1. can we conclude that Zverev abused her and should face adequate punishment
2. can we conclude that she lies and should she face adequate punishment

when choosing between #1 and #2, think that exactly same approach should be applied to you in a similar situation.
I'm done. You have obviously made up your mind, as is your right to express your opinion. I'm keeping an open mind. I actually like Sascha and hope he is innocent, but I'm certainly not naive enough to believe that both men and women are always telling the truth and that neither has an ulterior motive.
 

blablavla

Legend
I'm done. You have obviously made up your mind, as is your right to express your opinion. I'm keeping an open mind. I actually like Sascha and hope he is innocent, but I'm certainly not naive enough to believe that both men and women are always telling the truth and that neither has an ulterior motive.
you're funny.
I like how all the folks with "open minds" are running away when asked if they would accept to be judged in a similar trial and accept similar consequences.

and I am the one who made up my mind at the end :)
 

Arak

Semi-Pro
Why can‘t people just use common sense. We all would like to believe the girlfriend, but is there just the tiniest of possibilities that she could be lying? We all would like to think of Zverev as a horrible person, I mean the guy can’t hit two consecutive serves without double faulting, but is there the tiniest of possibilities that he could be telling the truth? For me personally, in order to take a stance on this matter, I need more info. Raonic’s agent was investigated by his agency and was found to be guilty of sexual harassment and was fired from his job. Before some kind of investigation with clear findings is done, I think it’s unfair to judge either of them.
 

TimHenmanATG

Professional
He is the go to news reporter for TTW
Unfortunately, many TTW posters also parrot talking points from media outlets which lack journalistic and intellectual integrity (Daily Mail, The S*n, Independent, New York Times, Fox News, news.com.au, etc.)

I wouldn't hold too much hope that these same posters are any more discerning in their choices of tennis journalism.
 

TimHenmanATG

Professional
Judging from the transcript, Djokovic is just being diplomatic.

Zverev denies the allegations, so there's also nothing unusual about his response.

I don't see how these interviews/comments have any relevance to the initial claims from Zverev's ex-girlfriend.
 

BorgTheGOAT

Hall of Fame
Ben Rothenberg, being member of the notorious nefarious PC Police Execution Squad, wants all male pros eventually to be banned from tennis... just for being male basically.

Trust this extremist SJW clown to push this agenda with so much vehemence.

Why would the ATP need to "exert justice" before courts do? And if the courts don't send a player to prison why should the ATP ban him or whatever?
Who is this moron anyways and why does he have any saying in things related to tennis? ATP banning Zverev without a court trial is completely ridiculous. The jealousy of these SJWs on more successful people (so from their point of view actually everyone) is so strong that they are happy to get famous people in jail without any evidence or trial.
 

Ducky Lucky

New User
Why can‘t people just use common sense. We all would like to believe the girlfriend, but is there just the tiniest of possibilities that she could be lying? We all would like to think of Zverev as a horrible person, I mean the guy can’t hit two consecutive serves without double faulting, but is there the tiniest of possibilities that he could be telling the truth? For me personally, in order to take a stance on this matter, I need more info. Raonic’s agent was investigated by his agency and was found to be guilty of sexual harassment and was fired from his job. Before some kind of investigation with clear findings is done, I think it’s unfair to judge either of them.
Just because the guy has a crap serve you want him to be a wife beater?
 

HBK4life

Semi-Pro
Who is this moron anyways and why does he have any saying in things related to tennis? ATP banning Zverev without a court trial is completely ridiculous. The jealousy of these SJWs on more successful people (so from their point of view actually everyone) is so strong that they are happy to get famous people in jail without any evidence or trial.

I bet every game his tee ball team played as a kid ended in a tie.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top