Does Rafa have a point about Umps?

[octobrina10]

...Nadal is not above the sport, noone is.

Somebody has put himself above...

 

[Chanwan]

As I said, what he said has been ignored, and the time violation against him is all that folks have responded to. And this far, none have responded to Kei's 44 second violation that got zero comment by the Ump.

Didn't watch the match, so can not comment properly on the 44 seconds. But to give it a try. As far as I've understood from some posters, there might have been an equipment thing or arguing mitigating the 44 seconds though?
Moreover, Nadal took too long (+20 seconds) on something like 50-70 % of his first serves, Nishi did around 15-20 % (according to the stats, I've seen).
So when the umpire is so lenient with Nadal (only taking one first serve away from him), it would be unfair if she punished Nishi for his, relatively speaking, much more minor offense. Had she taken say 3-5 first serves away from Nadal, Nishi should have get warned and subsequently punished as well.

Will get to your OP in the next post.

 

[Chanwan]

"Another thing is she didn't advise me before the second warning that I was still going slow. So normal thing, if the referee, you know, is interesting on help little bit the player, the normal thing is say, Rafa, you are going too slow. So I try to go quicker, before the second warning"..............so he's had one warning but wants a second warning before he gets penalised?

Indeed he does. Even though that the rule change last year - from point penalty to loss of a first serve - is clearly a turn to the milder. And the second warning is still supposed to be an actual penalty, i.e. a loss of a first serve now.

 

[Chanwan]

I am pretty sure hawkeye can be almost instantly called, CPU power is dirt cheap. The fancy computer animation in slow motion is just for show, so the audience can get involved.

And a few KWh worth of cameras and computers energy consumption is a fraction of an umpire's salary (let alone, what are they, nine or eleven umpires if you add the line judges?)

Installation costs are probably very expensive though, although they will decrease with time and mass production.

Not sure if it's correct or not, but I've heard Hawkeye costs in the vicinity of 10.000 dollars per match. Sounds to high though.

 

[Chanwan]

OP - no, I don't think umpires should be made completely obsolete. And I'm unsure about my view on a buzzer/stopwatch on court. If it were, I still think the umpire should have the discretion to start it, when he/she wants to. I.e. - in massive heat, give a couple of extra seconds.

The IFT-rules on that (and recovering after longer points) are fairly clear on that though:
"No extra time shall be given to allow a player to recover condition"

And I think we would see more attacking tennis, which I like, if the game came closer to the actual rules.

 

[octobrina10]

... give a couple of extra seconds.
The IFT-rules on that (and recovering after longer points) are fairly clear on that though:
"No extra time shall be given to allow a player to recover condition"
...

GS tournaments use their own rules.
As for the Australian Open (that is not an ATP event), it has had a time limit of 20 seconds for a number of years but the rule has been rarely enforced.
Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley said last year that players would be afforded some leeway at Melbourne Park, where officials would use "good sense, good judgement" in enforcing the 20-second rule.
"The Australian Open as a grand slam will not be doing anything different to what we've done in the past, we will still enforce the 20-second rule," he told reporters. [Source: Reuters, Jan 12, 2013]

 

[KillerServe]

The point of all of Nadal's post-match rantings had one point and one point only. He was simply sending a veiled threat stating that the same ump will not ref his matches again.

 

[Bartelby]

The ITF should change to the ATP 25 second rule and enforce it more strictly even if with good sense, whereas the norm has been laxly.

 

[sureshs]

I know the knee jerk answer from anyone that hates Rafa could be easily said, as well as die hard Rafa fans.

But, he brought up an interesting and of course controversial thought during his post Kei presser.

http://www.ausopen.com/en_AU/news/interviews/2014-01-20/201401201390210542539.html

I'm referring to the question regarding "After really long points", and in particular, the last sentence of Nadal's response to the question.

Are the referees not needed, and should everything be determined by Hawkeye?
Of course, he does mention that he also thinks there should be more time after longer points in his presser.

He also acknowledges getting penalized for taking to long.

He's pointing out that there's a latitude given to Umps, that he believes is a double edged sword.

What are folks thoughts?

Edited to add, I screwed up and requested this get moved to general section, where it belongs.

Rafa knows the game better than any umpire. These umpires have no idea what it means to play in 107 degrees and can be as self-righteous as they want. They should be replaced by automation as soon as feasible.

 

[octobrina10]

The ITF should change to the ATP 25 second rule and enforce it more strictly even if with good sense, whereas the norm has been laxly.

The ITF rules are used at the ITF tournaments! Who cares what they are doing!

 

[Chanwan]

GS tournaments use their own rules.
As for the Australian Open (that is not an ATP event), it has had a time limit of 20 seconds for a number of years but the rule has been rarely enforced.
Australian Open tournament director Craig Tiley said last year that players would be afforded some leeway at Melbourne Park, where officials would use "good sense, good judgement" in enforcing the 20-second rule.
"The Australian Open as a grand slam will not be doing anything different to what we've done in the past, we will still enforce the 20-second rule," he told reporters. [Source: Reuters, Jan 12, 2013]

Isn't it rather that they are bound by the ITF-rules, but kind of choose to what extent they will be strict about them or not? Kind of like member-states in the EU (that then can be taken to the EU-court though).

You also said

The ITF rules are used at the ITF tournaments!

 

[heninfan99]

He makes one good point. The timing of the call. Don't wait for a critical point to call it. Break points, set points, tie breaks. But then again you do want the rule to have impact without changing the outcome of the match. Not an easy job.

 

[octobrina10]

Isn't it rather that they are bound by the ITF-rules, but kind of choose to what extent they will be strict about them or not? Kind of like member-states in the EU (that then can be taken to the EU-court though).

You also said: The ITF rules are used at the ITF tournaments!

¤ I don't know what kind of agreements there are between the GS tourneys and the ITF.

¤ This is the ITF circuit (includes hundreds of tourneys):
http://www.itftennis.com/procircuit/about-pro-circuit/overview.aspx