Federer hitting the ball boy.

Mr.Lob

Legend
Hadn't seen that one before. Fed has often hit a loose ball to ballkid to speed up play. That ballboy was daydreaming. Fed didn't bat an eyelash though when the kid got clonked in the head.
 

Arak

Hall of Fame
That was not an incident, and it was actually very funny. The boy didn’t seem to mind.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru

Why he wasn't defaulted here?
The USTA statement read:

"In accordance with the Grand Slam rulebook, following his actions of intentionally hitting a ball dangerously or recklessly within the court or hitting a ball with negligent disregard of the consequences, the US Open tournament referee defaulted Novak Djokovic from the 2020 US Open......."

Federer didn't hit the ball negligently it is in the normal course of play.
 
That was not an incident, and it was actually very funny. The boy didn’t seem to mind.
The ball boy being smashed in the head!? You think that's funny? :oops:
But anyway respect for the kid. Instead of lying on the floor, acting like he was just wounded by the gunshot , he just moved on with his job. His only job...
 

MichaelNadal

Bionic Poster
The ball boy being smashed in the head!? You think that's funny? :oops:
But anyway respect for the kid. Instead of lying on the floor, acting like he was just wounded by the gunshot , he just moved on with his job. His only job...
No one knows how it felt for her, why is it so hard to have a BIT of compassion? Damn what's wrong with people o_O had he not done what he did, she'd have been standing up doing her thing like she was supposed to.
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
The ball boy being smashed in the head!? You think that's funny? :oops:
But anyway respect for the kid. Instead of lying on the floor, acting like he was just wounded by the gunshot , he just moved on with his job. His only job...
smashed?
I think you need to watch the video once again.
 
The ball boy being smashed in the head!? You think that's funny? :oops:
But anyway respect for the kid. Instead of lying on the floor, acting like he was just wounded by the gunshot , he just moved on with his job. His only job...
I know you are disappointed. The thing is what Novak did shouldn't be punished IMHO. It was nowhere near his fault.


But then the ball ended up hitting her straight to her throat,which prompted the overreaction and which probably forced the umpire's hand.

If the ball had it her anywhere else, we won't be talking about it.

About the two Federer's video both the ball boys behaved as if it was nothing.

The situation with Djokovic turned upside down when she started to act as if she was being strangulated.

Listen to the commentators in the Djokovic match the very Moment it hits her and she falls they know what this means.
 
It's not the same OP. There's intent here

If you intent to hit someone it's okay clearly
Where do you really stand Rick? I for one can't see how it was Novak's fault. But probably the woman's overreaction, just forced the officials, but they could have avoided going this harsh.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Where do you really stand Rick? I for one can't see how it was Novak's fault. But probably the woman's overreaction, just forced the officials, but they could have avoided going this harsh.
1. Stupid thing to do
2. Players do more reckless stuff all the time. Especially racket throws with people nearby. Even Djokovic has done more reckless himself.
3. I dislike punishing based on end result in stochastic processes.
4. Djokovic literally had the worst case scenario and the line judge could walk it off in the end. I don't know her current status but I really doubt there's gonna be any lasting issues there. This is the biggest thing IMO cause if there's no big harm done in the worst case scenario it's not really dangerous either.
5. It took about 5 minutes to find cases of equally dangerous, stupid actions where someone was hit where there were no disqualifications. Even last week Bedene hit a cameraman and got away witha warning. Tsitsipas literally hit his dad with a tennis racket and didn't get DQd, Ostapenko didn't get DQd for hitting a ballboy with a racket throw.

According to rules, it's a disqualification. According to recent precedent, I don't think it is. Ultimately it mainly comes down to overreaction and I can literally not help to think the fact that it's Djokovic plays a huge role. And with all that is on the line, I think a DQ is way out of proportions.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
the difference fed is giving the ball to the ball boys, if he did the same thing and hit the officials it would have been a different story.

rules are clear, djoko did it out of frustration. drilled her in the throat, no one wants that.

plus, fitting end to his run after his behavior towards manarino's situation and his handling of covid these last few months
 
1. Stupid thing to do
2. Players do more reckless stuff all the time. Especially racket throws with people nearby. Even Djokovic has done more reckless himself.
3. I dislike punishing based on end result in stochastic processes.
4. Djokovic literally had the worst case scenario and the line judge could walk it off in the end. I don't know her current status but I really doubt there's gonna be any lasting issues there.
5. It took about 5 minutes to find cases of equally dangerous, stupid actions where someone was hit where there were no disqualifications. Even last week Bedene hit a cameraman and got away witha warning. Tsitsipas literally hit his dad with a tennis racket and didn't get DQd, Ostapenko didn't get DQd for hitting a ballboy with a racket throw.

According to rules, it's a disqualification. According to recent precedent, I don't think it is. Ultimately it mainly comes down to overreaction and I can literally not help to think the fact that it's Djokovic plays a huge role.
I feel if the ball would have hit anywhere other than the face/neck area, the situation would've cooled down much faster. That ball had to hit the throat,
the small volume probability of the ball going there is simply astounding. It makes one think if this was meant to be
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
I feel if the ball would have hit anywhere other than the face/neck area, the situation would've cooled down much faster. That ball had to hit the throat,
the small volume probability of the ball going there is simply astounding. It makes one thing if this was meant to be
Even in the face it doesn't do that much at that speed lol. I've hit someone in the face way harder than that in mixed doubles and she beat half an hour later smh.
 
Ultimately it mainly comes down to overreaction and I can literally not help to think the fact that it's Djokovic plays a huge role.
Yep they were way too quick to do that. Even in the Federer videos , though he didn't hit them at sensitive areas, he DIDN'T get a warning even.

They were being vindictive.
 

Red Rick

Bionic Poster
Yep they were way too quick to do that. Even in the Federer videos , though he didn't hit them at sensitive areas, he DIDN'T get a warning even.

They were being vindictive.
yeah this video is weird in that a DQ is obviously hilariously over the top but the difference of reception and narrative is just striking.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
1. Stupid thing to do
2. Players do more reckless stuff all the time. Especially racket throws with people nearby. Even Djokovic has done more reckless himself.
3. I dislike punishing based on end result in stochastic processes.
4. Djokovic literally had the worst case scenario and the line judge could walk it off in the end. I don't know her current status but I really doubt there's gonna be any lasting issues there. This is the biggest thing IMO cause if there's no big harm done in the worst case scenario it's not really dangerous either.
5. It took about 5 minutes to find cases of equally dangerous, stupid actions where someone was hit where there were no disqualifications. Even last week Bedene hit a cameraman and got away witha warning. Tsitsipas literally hit his dad with a tennis racket and didn't get DQd, Ostapenko didn't get DQd for hitting a ballboy with a racket throw.

According to rules, it's a disqualification. According to recent precedent, I don't think it is. Ultimately it mainly comes down to overreaction and I can literally not help to think the fact that it's Djokovic plays a huge role. And with all that is on the line, I think a DQ is way out of proportions.
That's one of the fairest posts I've seen all day. First of all, we do judge intent, and we also judge now based on the past. If a player is known to be a hothead - and Djokovic is - then that player's actions are going to be treated more harshly. If for some reason Nadal accidentally hit someone with a ball most likely no one would ever think it was reckless or done in anger because that's never been his MO. Fed, on the other hand, has been enough of a hothead at times that I could actually see that happening to him, what happened to Joker today, but perhaps he has been luckier. Or perhaps he has not gone over the line as often, so his chances of having a really bad outcome are lower just by odds.

I still think he was horribly unlucky today, but I also think he's pushed the odds way too many times, and it just caught up with him.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
Yep they were way too quick to do that. Even in the Federer videos , though he didn't hit them at sensitive areas, he DIDN'T get a warning even.

They were being vindictive.
I think it was the anguish of the line judge that made it a very serious incident. There is no way they could have just given Djokovic a point or game penalty under the circumstances. It had to be a default.

I don't think they were being vindictive because they cheated for him in the Western & Southern by closing the roof when he was losing to Roberto, disrupting Roberto's rhythm.
 

terribleIVAN

Hall of Fame
The moment the lady fell to her knees, Novak's fate was set.

I cannot help thinking this lady milked it for all it's worth, hoping for cash settlement: this was bound to happen sooner or later in a high profile tournament.

The eerie fluke is it happened to a guy who had gotten away with it in the past time and time again.

Ironically at a moment he seemed to better manage his emotions and even work for the betterment of fellow players.

Novak's former bad habits caught up with him at the worst possible time.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
They are not supposed to catch the ball. That's why they always roll the ball or throw it down. It's a mistake to swipe the ball back like Federer given this incident.

because the ball kid is supposed to catch the ball?
while a linesman is supposed to rests between points?

didn't that cross your brain Novak fan?
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
The USTA statement says Djokovic acted with intent.

That's one of the fairest posts I've seen all day. First of all, we do judge intent, and we also judge now based on the past. If a player is known to be a hothead - and Djokovic is - then that player's actions are going to be treated more harshly. If for some reason Nadal accidentally hit someone with a ball most likely no one would ever think it was reckless or done in anger because that's never been his MO. Fed, on the other hand, has been enough of a hothead at times that I could actually see that happening to him, what happened to Joker today, but perhaps he has been luckier. Or perhaps he has not gone over the line as often, so his chances of having a really bad outcome are lower just by odds.

I still think he was horribly unlucky today, but I also think he's pushed the odds way too many times, and it just caught up with him.
 

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
I don't think they were being vindictive because they cheated for him in the Western & Southern by closing the roof when he was losing to Roberto, disrupting Roberto's rhythm.
People don't put things into context. When considering the fairness of any one incident you also have to look at past history. My immediate reaction was:
  • Oh crap, this looks really bad.
  • I know I've seen him break rackets and lose his temper many times in the past.
  • I'm not sure he is one of the worst, because there are so many players who do this.
  • The people in charge are going to look bad no matter what they do. If they DQ him, everyone is going to say that made a mountain out of a molehill. But if they don't, everyone will say that they never enforce the rules for the stars.
  • Was the lady really hurt that bad? (I still don't know...)
You know, adults are not necessarily anything other than older children. Just as children learn from their mistakes, when they get hurt, a lot of adults have to learn hard lessons this way.
 
I think it was the anguish of the line judge that made it a very serious incident. There is no way they could have just given Djokovic a point or game penalty under the circumstances. It had to be a default.
This is what I think. But cmon DQ is too much.

The old woman reacted as if she was dying. I am sure it could not have hurt her *That* much.
 

clayqueen

Talk Tennis Guru
This is what I think. But cmon DQ is too much.

The old woman reacted as if she was dying. I am sure it could not have hurt her *That* much.
I don't think she was just being a drama queen. The impact on her throat would have been great and probably winded her for a short while. It was clear she was having trouble breathing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PDJ

Gary Duane

G.O.A.T.
The USTA statement says Djokovic acted with intent.
How would you define intent? If I lose my temper and hit someone with my fists, did I have to intend to do that before the moment it happened? He certainly did not mean to hit the lady, but they are also not going to wait to punish a player until that player takes aim at someone deliberately with the intent to harm.

I don't think years ago Shapo meant to hurt anyone when he nearly knocked out the ump's eye. It was just an angry impulse. I'd judge Novak's actions far less violent, but he was at least annoyed, and what happened would not have happened had he not been angry.
 

junior74

G.O.A.T.
Federer does this so the ballboys don't have to run as much.
He has been a ballboy and knows what it's like when people like Gasquet is spreading 5 balls in all directions upon service :D

And, of course, here is the best of them all. A moment of sheer brilliance from both Maestro and the talented ballkid:
 
Last edited:
This is what I think. But cmon DQ is too much.

The old woman reacted as if she was dying. I am sure it could not have hurt her *That* much.
Yeah, the lady acting like she was struck by a nuclear missile is what causing a bad taste in the mouth.

As for the DQ, yeah it's in the rules, and he have been DQ rightly. But then we had so many precedents in the past. Weird...
 
Federer does this so the ballboys don't have to run as much.
He has been a ballboy and knows what it's like when people like Gasquet is spreading 5 balls in all directions upon service :D
Djokovic does it so that the lines-people can see the ball more clearly xD

(just kidding, don't take this seriously)
 
If you cant see the difference i really dont think i can help you
But what's the difference. Clear negligence in both situations, not much of velocity on the ball... At least Djokovic jumped immediately showing remorse. Federer didn't even blip, otoh...
 
Yeah, the lady acting like she was struck by a nuclear missile is what causing a bad taste in the mouth.

As for the DQ, yeah it's in the rules, and he have been DQ rightly. But then we had so many precedents in the past. Weird...
PTPA might have been the reason? But then again this is a slam and is organised by ITF.

Whatever be the reason everyone overreacted
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
PTPA might have been the reason? But then again this is a slam and is organised by ITF.

Whatever be the reason everyone overreacted
the PTPA is going right after ITF money.
they said it one statement, that players are unhappy cause prize money in GS is smaller than in the case of ATP tournaments.

what they conveniently ignore is that the French Federation, or US Federation is also sponsoring a bunch of Challengers and Futures tournaments, but that probably doesn't fall into the prize money concern for lower ranked players, at least from PTPA point of view.
Why think of the truly low ranked players if you can ask for more money for top 100 players?
 

Arak

Hall of Fame
To be honest, Djokovic shouting at the ballboy was the most shocking thing I’ve ever seen from him. Hitting the lady was obviously a non intentional mistake but punishable with DQ nonetheless. Shouting at kids is a much worse offense in my opinion. It should have never been tolerated. Anyhow I’m very convinced he must be taking some substances that make him very angry when they kick in.
 
It's fun and games when Roger does it. Can't blame him though, even I didn't feel this was wrong when I see it everytime, Novak's does even though they both did the same thing technically
Seems that everyone is happy when they get shot in the head by the Maestro. Like he is hitting them with fine Swiss chocolate or something. :D
 

Jonas78

Legend
But what's the difference. Clear negligence in both situations, not much of velocity on the ball... At least Djokovic jumped immediately showing remorse. Federer didn't even blip, otoh...
Ok, ill try:)

For me the obvious difference is trying to pass the ball to the ballboy to speed up the game during play. It was no reason to suspect aggression from Federer here, it was just a failed serve and trying to get the ball out of the court.

Djokovic had just lost 3BPs and then lost serve and it was crystal clear an unnecessary action because he was pissed off (of course he didnt try to hit her)

For me it would be like giving someone who falls during play and landing on his racket and breaking it, a warning for racket abuse. Its quite different from deliberately smashing it:)
 

blablavla

G.O.A.T.
Ok, ill try:)

For me the obvious difference is trying to pass the ball to the ballboy to speed up the game during play. It was no reason to suspect aggression from Federer here, it was just a failed serve and trying to get the ball out of the court.

Djokovic had just lost 3BPs and then lost serve and it was crystal clear an unnecessary action because he was pissed off (of course he didnt try to hit her)

For me it would be like giving someone who falls during play and landing on his racket and breaking it, a warning for racket abuse. Its quite different from deliberately smashing it:)
add here:
ball kids are supposed to rest during the point and work in between points, mainly catching the balls and passing them to the kids close to the player who shall serve
linesmen are supposed to work during the point and rest between points, not try to dodge incoming balls from players
 
PTPA might have been the reason? But then again this is a slam and is organised by ITF.

Whatever be the reason everyone overreacted
Immediately after the match I was like, huh, this could leave a mental scars for the rest of his career. No chance he is coming back from this.
Now i'm thinking, this will fuel him even more...
 
Ok, ill try:)

For me the obvious difference is trying to pass the ball to the ballboy to speed up the game during play. It was no reason to suspect aggression from Federer here, it was just a failed serve and trying to get the ball out of the court.

Djokovic had just lost 3BPs and then lost serve and it was crystal clear an unnecessary action because he was pissed off (of course he didnt try to hit her)

For me it would be like giving someone who falls during play and landing on his racket and breaking it, a warning for racket abuse. Its quite different from deliberately smashing it:)
Dude I hear you. But you're talking about the causes. Forget the causes. The only important thing here is the effect. And the effect here is almost identical, bar the reaction of the lady of course.
 
Top