Do you support a "shot clock"?

[r2473]

YES: There should be a shot clock and it should be 100% black and white. It would start immediately upon completion of the previous point. No delay in starting the clock if there is a long rally, or any other reason. As soon as it expires, the chair umpire steps in and enforces the rule. It would work just like basketball. If the ball hasn't left the players hand when the clock expires, it is a violation.

NO: We keep the rule as it is. Chair umpire keeps the time and calls a violation at his discretion.

YES, BUT WITH DISCRETION: There should be a shot clock, but the umpire would still have some discretion. If you choose this option, please explain what type of discretion you would favor and how you would avoid controversy because of the discretion.

OTHER: Please explain your shot clock idea

I am personally not in favor of a shot clock.

 

[bullfan]

A "YES" vote means: There should be a shot clock and it should be 100% black and white. It would start immediately upon completion of the previous point. No delay in starting the clock if there is a long rally, or any other reason. As soon as it expires, the chair umpire steps in and enforces the rule (depending on how many previous violations, etc). It would work just like basketball. If the ball hasn't left the players hand when the clock expires, it is a violation.

A "NO" vote means: We keep the rule as it is. Chair umpire keeps the time and calls a violation at his discretion.

A "YES, BUT WITH DISCRETION" vote means: There should be a shot clock, but the umpire would still have some discretion. If you choose this option, please explain what time of discretion you would favor and how you would avoid controversy because of the discretion.

OTHER: Please explain your shot clock idea

I am personally not in favor of a shot clock.

You could actually add a poll for this, which you should, and please make all votes public. That keeps folks honest.

 

[Gary Duane]

I voted yes, but I believe the clock should be started after or exactly when the scored is announced. That's not so much umpire discretion as what appears to be done right now. No one is giving out violations when the crowd goes wild, and that can last quite a long time. So when there is an incredible point lasting 20 or 30 seconds, then a standing ovation and long applause, there is a built in cushion for a really hard point. The umpire can't even be heard until the noise dies down.

But not the kind of discretion umps have now, where they don't have to apply the rule.

The whole thing could be tweaked in many different ways.

 

[citybert]

YES but not for this generation. Start it NOW in Challengers, Juniors and NCAAs so those players will get used to it as they grow up.

 

[Bartelby]

I've already stated that 'no one' supports a shot clock, but if you want to poll 'nobodies' then go ahead ...

Tennis authorities are scarcely going to move from a situation of minimum enforcement of a rule to Big Ben now is it?

We would do well to think of more viable ways of achieving the desired outcome which is 'continuous play'.

I would advocate the following increase in penalties:

1. The penalty for a time warning is a $10.000 fine and 100 points loss of ranking points.

2. The penalty for a loss of service is another tranche of fine and ranking points loss.

If we keep the penalties off court we don't further penalise the viewers with both time violations and time wasting.

So Nadal would also have lost $20.000 and 200 ranking points from yesterday's match.

 

[Gary Duane]

I've already stated that 'no one' supports a shot clock, but if you want to poll 'nobodies' then go ahead ...

Fair enough as long as you accept that you are "nobody" too.

 

[bullfan]

Funny how the troll that claims what everyone thinks wont post a public vote! And bumblebee, you know who you are!

 

[Bartelby]

That goes without saying and I won't be voting in the poll.

Fair enough as long as you accept that you are "nobody" too.

 

[Gary Duane]

Funny how the troll that claims what everyone thinks wont post a public vote! And bumblebee, you know who you are!

Weird how Bartelby assumes we are less important than a cross-section of fans. I'm content to see what the results show. If most people say "no", then I'll simply accept that.

 

[chjtennis]

Unless players realize how much time they are taking between plays, they wouldn't be able to do anything about it so I said yes.

 

[Bendex]

I don't think it will work. Nadal will just request that the shot clock be replaced by a slower shot clock.

 

[Bartelby]

So players can perfect the complicated sequence of bodily events to hit a 200kph serve, but can't tell the time by their 'body clock'?

 

[bullfan]

Weird how Bartelby assumes we are less important than a cross-section of fans. I'm content to see what the results show. If most people say "no", then I'll simply accept that.

It doesnt matter, the non vote speaks volumes.

Bumblebee is a troll that has an unending hatred of Nadal. Which in and of itself is fine. Whats troubling is the years of only posting that hatred, along with the inability to post any positive thoughts about anything, anything at all.

 

[okdude1992]

Yes, make it fair for everyone. The way the rule is now is complete BS. Uneven distribution of punishment, and inconsistent judgement. Many players abuse the rule, but only a few seem to be scapegoated.

And its all so simple to fix. Umpire starts the timer after the crowd settles and the score is called. The countdown is displayed on the hawkeye screens

 

[Bartelby]

Yes, the clock will be set to 'island time'.

Instead of Greenwich Mean Time, it wll be Mallorca Manana Time.

I don't think it will work. Nadal will just request that the shot clock be replaced by a slower shot clock.

 

[bullfan]

My reason for no, is that I picture folks counting down, which would disrupt the play.

We already have enough rude fans, seeing a shot clock along with booze, and helping or hindering would be common place.

 

[Terenigma]

No. I believe the rule should be enforced much more but i dont believe an actual shot clock would be good for tennis. It would detract from the actual sport and i could see it becoming a farce with people paying more attention to the shot than the game.

Quite frankly in tennis right now its only really Nadal who takes ridiculously long between serves and every other play might do it occasionally but for the most part its not that big of a deal. So just get some umpires who are not afraid to challange Nadal regularly and beat it into that boys head and it wont be a problem anymore. When lower ranked players start seing a player like Nadal get punished, they will take note and not push it themselfs.

 

[Mainad]

Reluctantly, yes.

If the umpires are required to enforce the time rule strictly (as opposed to being flexible with it as before) then I think the players are entitled to know when they are in danger of going over the limit!

 

[r2473]

Umpire starts the timer after the crowd settles and the score is called. The countdown is displayed on the hawkeye screens

So Monfils would still be allowed to get the crowd worked up and delay the start of the time clock after a long rally (or any other time for that matter) allowing him more rest?

 

[r2473]

No. I believe the rule should be enforced much more but i dont believe an actual shot clock would be good for tennis. It would detract from the actual sport and i could see it becoming a farce with people paying more attention to the shot than the game.

That's what I see happening.

I'd guess there would be other negative consequences as well.

 

[ArcspacE]

Yes - eliminate the cheats from the game

 

[Bartelby]

Another interesting change might be to demand that the server use the first two balls relayed to him by a ball boy or girl.

It may not sound much but that's a few seconds saved in ball inspections for something that is usually of little importance.

 

[MichaelNadal]

The thought of a "shot clock" on Wimbledon centre court is gross.

 

[r2473]

Umpire starts the timer after the crowd settles and the score is called. The countdown is displayed on the hawkeye screens

It wouldn't take the crowd long to figure out that, if the clock was expiring on the player they are rooting for, they can just start yelling.

How would you stop that? It would turn into a circus.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

It doesnt matter, the non vote speaks volumes.

Bumblebee is a troll that has an unending hatred of Nadal. Which in and of itself is fine. Whats troubling is the years of only posting that hatred, along with the inability to post any positive thoughts about anything, anything at all.

Actually, you are wrong.

Bartelby wasn't always "posting that hatred".

He is one level-headed poster with higher than average ability to communicate and comment on the agenda of the day.

8)

 

[Backspin1183]

This was never a problem until a certain Roger Federer 'requested' that it be enforced. And no, 20 seconds between points in best of 5 is bs. If I were a player and an umpire TV me after 2 hours of play when I am facing a BP, I'd have to tell him up yours, sir.

 

[Bartelby]

Given ATP plays best of three you'd expect there to be 20 and not 25 for them and 25 and not 20 in Slams, but alas the world is never that rational.

 

[Gary Duane]

Another interesting change might be to demand that the server use the first two balls relayed to him by a ball boy or girl.

It may not sound much but that's a few seconds saved in ball inspections for something that is usually of little importance.

I agree with you there. The whole thing of examining about 4 balls every time before discarding them one by one is a huge time waster.

 

[cjs]

Another interesting change might be to demand that the server use the first two balls relayed to him by a ball boy or girl.

It may not sound much but that's a few seconds saved in ball inspections for something that is usually of little importance.

If you could actually play at a decent level, you'd realise its actually quite important.

 

[Gary Duane]

It wouldn't take the crowd long to figure out that, if the clock was expiring on the player they are rooting for, they can just start yelling.

How would you stop that? It would turn into a circus.

Reset the timer for the player who is being interfered with. Or add 15 seconds, do it again if the crowd continues to interfere.

 

[chjtennis]

Once players keep time well, we can remove the clock and revert to current rule. Without being disrespectful towards Nadal, this whole argument is mostly because of him and I wonder if a big change should be made because of just one player. I was a bit hesitant to say yes for this reason, but to avoid any further arguments about fairness, I reluctantly said yes.

 

[Bartelby]

Even if I conceded ball inspection was quite important, and I regularly get out my calipers to measure the nap, the fact is that all the balls are deemed equal in the sense of good to play and they are relayed randomly so accepting the bad with the good is a price worth paying for timely play.

 

[bullfan]

Actually, you are wrong.

Bartelby wasn't always "posting that hatred".

He is one level-headed poster with higher than average ability to communicate and comment on the agenda of the day.

8)

Hahaha! Just look at history for the last day or week or month!

Selective rule selection and selective choices for players adaptations is selective, which is bs when it comes to rules.

Btw, posters that post hate 365, and love 0 of 365 have issues.

 

[bullfan]

Once players keep time well, we can remove the clock and revert to current rule. Without being disrespectful towards Nadal, this whole argument is mostly because of him and I wonder if a big change should be made because of just one player. I was a bit hesitant to say yes for this reason, but to avoid any further arguments about fairness, I reluctantly said yes.

You are willing to have ther offenders than Nadal get treated the same as Nadal?

Or is the rule just for Nadal?

 

[Bartelby]

A lot of players shriek and a lot grunt and yet Sharapova is the poster girl of shriek, against which there is no rule.

And Nadal is the poster boy of the time violation for which there is a rule.

 

[Gary Duane]

Once players keep time well, we can remove the clock and revert to current rule. Without being disrespectful towards Nadal, this whole argument is mostly because of him and I wonder if a big change should be made because of just one player. I was a bit hesitant to say yes for this reason, but to avoid any further arguments about fairness, I reluctantly said yes.

I remember looking at a slam between Novak and Nadal from a few years back, and the time they were both delaying was incredible. Don't forget how many times Novak used to bounce the ball.

So I think the other players have gotten faster. I know for a fact that Nadal was playing faster today than he used to, even with the violations. I think a visible time display would simply be forgotten in the background if most players stopped stalling. We got to where we are now because there were no boundaries.

I agree that Nadal is the worst, and it is his rituals. He needs close to 10 seconds on each serve to bounce the ball with the racket while he goes through his tics. That's where the extra time goes.

I truly wonder if that is a medical/psychological problem. More than 90% of all the touching happened after his teens. He keeps touching more places. It is out of control.

 

[chjtennis]

You are willing to have ther offenders than Nadal get treated the same as Nadal?

Or is the rule just for Nadal?

The rule is for everyone, make no mistake, but Nadal is the major culprit who ignites the debate/arguments every time. I don't like seeing interference from umpires too much during a tennis match, but when there is a rule, it should be practised. Shot clock probably is the only fair way to keep the time, so I reluctantly voted yes, but it is actually terrible to have on out on the court like basketball. We want to concentrate more on the players and their play. Umpires can discretely practise the rules. Now that it seems impossible to apply the rule without a device due to all the controversies, we need to install them.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Hahaha! Just look at history for the last day or week or month!

Selective rule selection and selective choices for players adaptations is selective, which is bs when it comes to rules.

Btw, posters that post hate 365, and love 0 of 365 have issues.

I have known him since he joined this forum (and I don't even care to look whether he was a member before me or not), so this goes much further than "the last day or week or month". My statement stands.

He is an astute observer of the reality and, like I said, above average commentator of the game/rules etc.

If he chooses to pick on Nadal that is his choice, but he is generally spot on. You may not like it but it doesn't make him a hater.

I would rather think that he is exemplifying certain problem/s with the game by giving the most appropriate/grave etc. example. Hardly unfair, as any high profile player would have a much bigger influence (and subsequently responsibility) over what is going on in the game.

 

[chjtennis]

I remember looking at a slam between Novak and Nadal from a few years back, and the time they were both delaying was incredible. Don't forget how many times Novak used to bounce the ball.

So I think the other players have gotten faster. I know for a fact that Nadal was playing faster today than he used to, even with the violations. I think a visible time display would simply be forgotten in the background if most players stopped stalling. We got to where we are now because there were no boundaries.

I agree that Nadal is the worst, and it is his rituals. He needs close to 10 seconds on each serve to bounce the ball with the racket while he goes through his tics. That's where the extra time goes.

I truly wonder if that is a medical/psychological problem. More than 90% of all the touching happened after his teens. He keeps touching more places. It is out of control.

Good point on Djokovic. I think when I first saw him, he didn't bounce the ball as much as he does now. Maybe he developed that habit intentionally as some kind of gamesmanship.

I just don't want anyone feel they are mistreated unfairly. Let's do it the most fair way even though it doesn't necessarily look good. That would be to have a shot clock on the court.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

A lot of players shriek and a lot grunt and yet Sharapova is the poster girl of shriek, against which there is no rule.

And Nadal is the poster boy of the time violation for which there is a rule.

QFT +1mil and in accordance with what I was writing when this post was posted

 

[bullfan]

I have known him since he joined this forum (and I don't even care to look whether he was a member before me or not), so this goes much further than "the last day or week or month". My statement stands.

He is an astute observer of the reality and, like I said, above average commentator of the game/rules etc.

If he chooses to pick on Nadal that is his choice, but he is generally spot on. You may not like it but it doesn't make him a hater.

I would rather think that he is exemplifying certain problem/s with the game by giving the most appropriate/grave etc. example. Hardly unfair, as any high profile player would have a much bigger influence (and subsequently responsibility) over what is going on in the game.

Sorry, but I call major BS on someone that posts the same thing 24-7, 365 and its both hate and full of BS. Someone that cant say one positive thing about anyone. Hate alone is unhealthy. And if you are fine with that hate, thats fine. I dont expect to agree with everyone ever, and understand folks have their own thoughts. But, i understand hate and lies.

Your support speaks volumes.

 

[RanchDressing]

Yes, make it fair for everyone. The way the rule is now is complete BS. Uneven distribution of punishment, and inconsistent judgement. Many players abuse the rule, but only a few seem to be scapegoated.

And its all so simple to fix. Umpire starts the timer after the crowd settles and the score is called. The countdown is displayed on the hawkeye screens

Tennis is a top heavy sport. These boards are proof as to why. Those top 4 guys sell EVERYTHING. How much those guys SELL, is directly related to how much they WIN. How much they sell/win also dictates how many corporate sponsors pay the tournaments/advertisement/tv time.

So of course there are double standards. Of course there is unfair catering. Draw differences, and I have for quite some time seriously suspected PED/doping blind eye stuff too. That's beyond just their own individual benefits; having more money buys better well everything. Food, trainers, doctors, traveling. It's no wonder why someone ranked 144 in the world gets destroyed by number one or two. The top guys get all those on court/tournament benefits, but also spend 100x as much money in preparation to be as fit and sharp as possible.

It's starting to become more clear to the conscious public what the "edege" top competitors truely have in the game. It's kind of sickening to be perfectly honest. And it's definitely not just mental.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Sorry, but I call major BS on someone that posts the same thing 24-7, 365 and its both hate and full of BS. Someone that cant say one positive thing about anyone. Hate alone is unhealthy. And if you are fine with that hate, thats fine. I dont expect to agree with everyone ever, and understand folks have their own thoughts. But, i understand hate and lies.

Your support speaks volumes.

If the problem/s repeat itself 24-7 what would you have him do, if he is to show the reality?

Some people (especially those, who take issie with the problems in the reality) would rather concentrate on solving/discussing the problems above anything else. Especially if that is what they do for a living or invested a considerable amount of time and effort in learning how to do.

BTW, you are wrong. I have seen posts from him that are related to other things than Nadal's influence on tennis. The fact that you are frequenting mostly Nadal threads may distort your perceptions.

I take your comment about my support as your right. You are entitled to it. I certainly am partial to some aspects of the game that might paint me as a anti-Nadal guy. That, however doesn't make my opinion on that matter invalid, based solely on that.

8)

 

[okdude1992]

Tennis is a top heavy sport. These boards are proof as to why. Those top 4 guys sell EVERYTHING. How much those guys SELL, is directly related to how much they WIN. How much they sell/win also dictates how many corporate sponsors pay the tournaments/advertisement/tv time.

So of course there are double standards. Of course there is unfair catering. Draw differences, and I have for quite some time seriously suspected PED/doping blind eye stuff too. That's beyond just their own individual benefits; having more money buys better well everything. Food, trainers, doctors, traveling. It's no wonder why someone ranked 144 in the world gets destroyed by number one or two. The top guys get all those on court/tournament benefits, but also spend 100x as much money in preparation to be as fit and sharp as possible.

It's starting to become more clear to the conscious public what the "edege" top competitors truely have in the game. It's kind of sickening to be perfectly honest. And it's definitely not just mental.

Interesting you quoted my post. I actually agree with you about the preferential treatment of the big names. (and even the potential of PEDS in tennis, although that is a totally different discussion). That saddens me, but it is what it is.

What I was actually insinuating is that Nadal is scapegoated. He is probably the worst offender on tour, but many others are almost equally as bad, yet we hear no talk about them. In this very thread, a few pages up, someone said Nadal is the only one who abuses the rule! Laughable. Anyway point being, I think the rule should be enforced uniformly and fairly, or just done away with. My $.002

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Interesting you quoted my post. I actually agree with you about the preferential treatment of the big names. (and even the potential of PEDS in tennis, although that is a totally different discussion). That saddens me, but it is what it is.

What I was actually insinuating is that Nadal is scapegoated. He is probably the worst offender on tour, but many others are almost equally as bad, yet we hear no talk about them. In this very thread, a few pages up, someone said Nadal is the only one who abuses the rule! Laughable. Anyway point being, I think the rule should be enforced uniformly and fairly, or just done away with. My $.002

This is a sensitive one.

Nadal IS the greatest offender of the rule by some margin.

He is also the player with the highest profile, who does it.

Even if he didn't start the practice (surely, there have been enough examples in the past of breaking rules to one and other extend) he is the player who helps the most for this practice to spread.

A parallel could be made with the shrieking and Sharapova.

She didn't start the practice, but she used it the most and made it popular to an extend, where it is unbearable and represents the most significant problem.

And there is also the issue whether it is made on purpose, which, although cannot be stated with 100% certainty, is pretty much clear that it is (in both cases).

 

[The Green Mile]

No. I believe the rule should be enforced much more but i dont believe an actual shot clock would be good for tennis. It would detract from the actual sport and i could see it becoming a farce with people paying more attention to the shot than the game.

This. I'm all for the idea of maybe adding on a few seconds onto the 20 second rule as well.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

I would venture to say that after Nadal is gone from the game the practice will be abandoned in no time, given that the umpires decide to follow the rulebook.

A sort of what is going to happen after the generation Sharapova hangs it.

The sad thing is that we do not need to wait that long for this to happen, but we will.

Unfortunatelly, there is no political will for that to happen now.

 

[oberyn]

Personally, I think this is much ado about nothing. What I would support, isn't a shot clock, but rather the equivalent of the "play clock" used in the NFL. Generally speaking, in the NFL, the team on offense has 40 seconds timed from the end of the previous down to snap the ball and start the next play. There's an actual clock/timer, and a back judge situated behind the defense and in view of the quarterback manages the play clock. When it gets down to 5 seconds, the back judge can raise his arm or give some sort of signal so the quarterback is aware he's only got 5 seconds left to initiate play. Enforcing the rule is not up to the discretion of the referee. It's not 40 seconds during the regular season, but 35 seconds during the playoffs. The penalty for not snapping the ball in time is always the same.

Either institute something like this, or, go the golf route and leave it completely up to the discretion of rules officials to warn players when they're playing too slowly.

As it is, the middle ground (i.e., set time limit, no clock, and selective enforcement) that the ATP and ITF have taken on this issue seems pretty silly to me. Just imagine if the NFL had the 40 second rule, no visible play clock, and left it solely up to the discretion of the referee whether and how to enforce it.

 

[Sentinel]

I am all for shot-clock if it reduces this ...

Joker seems to have reduced his ball-bouncing when it was regularly criticised.

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

by shot clock, do you mean a sort of device, not requiring any human interaction, that automatically shoots the players who go over the limit, right ?

(they thought about the changeovers, didn't they ? oh crap...)