chrischris
G.O.A.T.
A Shot Clock Ala The Nba.
Federer on time violations (With a little dig at Rafa).
- Thread starter Paul Murphy
- Start date
TTMR
Hall of Fame
So Nadal is as bad as Rios, Nastase, Connors and McEnroe because...he, like many others, sometimes goes over the unenforced time limit?
I'm glad you and DjokovicForTheWin also consider Djokovic, Del Potro, Isner and innumerable others as cheaters and gamesmen as well, as to not specifically single out one player you have a particular dislike for. It's good to see such fair, balanced and non-agenda driven beliefs presented on TW.
DjokovicForTheWin said:
Suppose some jurisdiction put up a law saying 30 MPH is the maximum speed limit, even on eight lane free ways. Should those that exceed this absurd limit be punished? After all, a rule is a rule, so it must be right.
And again, it's a good thing you also vociferously lambaste Djokovic for toweling off after an ace and his taking an average of 29 seconds to serve. It's good you don't just target one particular player due to an almost clinical level of hatred, while ignoring the many others who commit the same acts of "cheating" and "gamesmanship". We wouldn't want you to be a hypocrite, after all.
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
TTMR
Hall of Fame
Hard to check your 5000 posts, so please, point me towards the one that says "Djokovic's time-wasting and MTOs show he is nothing but a cheater and gamesman".
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
abmk
Bionic Poster
+1. I don't know what the hell Mustard was thinking when he posted that ...
TTMR
Hall of Fame
DjokovicForTheWin said:
'Shape up'? Damn, that was harsh. Give the guy a break.
I'm glad you're not so hard on Nadal.
Last edited:
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
You women folk are never satisfied. Can't you just say sorry and that you were wrong?
Mustard
Bionic Poster
Rios? I doubt most people even know who Rios is, and those who do remember him will recall him being number 1 while never winning a major in his career (which the history books will mention), and also for hating grass-courts. As for Nastase and Connors, their bad behaviour got overshadowed by McEnroe's emergence and are now painted as lovable rogues, one with genius talent who never won Wimbledon (but still won 2 majors) and the other with a big never-say-die spirit (won 8 majors and played into his 40s). This is what the history books will pay attention to.
When Nadal has long since retired, history will mention his major wins and phenomenal clay-court records, not the time violations he occasionally got from umpires.
Last edited:
TennisLovaLova
Hall of Fame
Mustard is right. And history books will also tell that fed h2h vs nadal is bad.
A shot clock violation rule wont change a thing. Federer need to beat him on the court, not outside tennis
A shot clock violation rule wont change a thing. Federer need to beat him on the court, not outside tennis
jamesblakefan#1
G.O.A.T.
It's obvious you can't see this without your Nadal colored glasses, but to a degree you're right. History remembers the winners. But people also remember Connors calling a linesperson an abortion and Nastase's wild rantings of course. The good always goes with a degree of bad, so to say that only wins are remembered and people don't remember the flaws in players is selling it short. As someone who wasn't around back then I only remember Nastase for his angry tirades, so that right there partially disproves your point about him being remembered as a magician or whatever other flowery language you want to use.
If anything Nadal will be remembered negatively more for his constant injury excuses after losses than anything. Of course he'll be remembered greatly for his slams and such, but don't act as if history ignores the bad about people just because you do (or want to with Nadal). Nadal's a great player of course but his slams shouldn't excuse the fact that time wasting is annoying and by the spirit against the rule, even if it isn't strictly enforced.
jackson vile
G.O.A.T.
He just could not stop crying after that AO or what?
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Is this a hypotetical situation, that you present us with? I can confidently say, that the supermajority :twisted: of the people, who drive over the speed limit, doesn't know jack about setting speed limits. They think, that they can judge the situation on the road well enough, but they don't.
Nadal is being singled out, because he is one of the few high profile players, that break the rules, because of gamesmanship (now Djokovic joined him in that aspect). But, gamesmanship or not, everybody should stop with the time wasting.
TTMR
Hall of Fame
I brought up the speed limit example because a 30 MPH limit would be an extreme and arbitrary inconvenience for modern drivers, much like the 20 second rule is in many cases arbitrary and inconvenient for modern players. However, people on the side of "20 seconds or gtfo" should support any rule created by a higher authority, because it is a rule and all rules are good.
Or maybe Nadal, Djokovic, Del Potro, Isner and many others play at a slower pace because that is what they are comfortable with. Maybe it is not gamesmanship.
Maybe Federer and Roddick rushing to the next serve is gamesmanship. But of course, gamesmanship that's "within the rules", regardless of the modern suitability of that rule, is irrelevant.
The reason why Nadal is singled out is not just because he is a high profile player. It's because people will grasp at anything to discredit his wins. The delusional mentality goes as follows: if Nadal weren't allowed to "cheat" by going over the limit, he'd be rushed into playing faster, and Federer would win those matches. It's a fantasy, but it's one that preserves the mythical idea that Nadal is not just another tennis player trying to be successful, but a punk whose success came through incremental cheating, gamesmanship, steroids, capitalizing on slower surfaces, etc., repeatedly robbing the eminently graceful Federer of the complete grand slam to which he was entitled. Not that I expect anyone to own up and admit to it.
Last edited:
mellowyellow
Legend
It is clear that guys like Nadal/Murray and whoever else has a bad and predictable second serve get into trouble routinely, are allowed to take way too much time then come up with a great serve or two in a row to get their game back under control along with their heart rate. It also gets under an opponents skin, and breaks the rhythm of a match/play. I don't think anyone thinks that individually a point here or a point there is a problem or is going to make or break a match. It most definitely is about on what points these extra seconds are being taken on. History does not lie. It is always when these guys are in trouble the rhythm of the serve is completely changed. It is also a fact that anyone whose game's foundation is on running everything down, that this laxness on the rule going to favor. This lack of enforcement may not change every match outcome but don't underestimate the importance of when this lack of enforcement has occurred is a key time in the match..... When you start to add up how many sets this may save a certain player in a tourney, and that may have an effect on the level of play in a quarter/semi/final. Its not just illegal and unfair to the opponent it happens to, but also to all players played in a tourney down the line.
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
N . B . A. shot clock. ASAP.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
In this case your example is not relevant to the situation. The majority of the high profile matches in the past years where played in accordance with the rules. Even nowadays most of the players, including the grinders, manage to stay within those rules. Should the rules be changed, just because 2 (or even 5) of the best tennis players in the world cannot abide to them, for whatever reason? Even if they are to be changed that should happen in a suitable way. Not by breaking them all the time.
What on earth is that? Comfortable? If I am comfortable with a lot higher payment than my qualifications and position suggest am I going to get it?
Maybe not, maybe so. On this matter I have a firm belief, that in Nadal's case it is gamesmanship. There have been too many examples, that do not go well with the situation, to believe otherwise. In Djokovic's case I am not decided as of yet. He seems to have routines, but, other than them, he is pretty straightforward in his game approach. Of course, this doesn't excuse him one bit. He should stop wasting time too. My comment in this case is only about the possibility, that he is abusing the rules for his own benefit.
You are making assumptions, that do not go well with the well established practices within the game. Normally a receiver should give a sign, when he is not ready to play and the umpire will consider it. However, the receiver cannot do this without a good reason. Otherwise he would be in a position to dictate the pace on the service game of his opponent, which is well outside of the established understanding. Though, I would gladly hear, what woodrow1029 has to say about that.
While I do not deny, that there are people, who just want to discredit Nadal, I certainly do not agree, that the time wasting does not affect the play of the opponent. Have you ever played a player, whose preparation on his serve is extremely long and erratic on top of that? I have. With such opponents I have to stay concentrated for prolonged periods of time and my physical readiness has to be on its max level, to be able to play well.
Nadal is a player of immence skill and mental fortitude. That doesn't mean, that he cannot benefit from a gamesmanship (as I believe he has done many times). I was never (and will never be) in the shoes of those top ranked players, but I can imagine, that winning/losing the mental battle could be the difference between winning and losing the match.
I certainly do not agree with you, when you say, that there is no way the outcome of the matches between Nadal and Federer could have been different, should Nadal have played within the rules. There is not knowing that, but IF we assume, that there was gamesmanship (on which I agree to disagree with anyone, who says otherwise), there must be a good reason for it to happen.
Last edited:
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
The irony is that if Nadal played faster, a lot of players would be in even more trouble, lol.
Your analysis is spot on, and I agree with your last line completely. There is no way this 20 second rule is this important, especially considering the physicality of the modern game.
Polaris
Hall of Fame
This contradicts the laws of physics, chemistry and biology, i.e., reality. Even with the current slow pace that Nadal sets between points, he is an injury-prone player who beats his body up during a match. If you take away 10 seconds of his recovery time per point, it is logical to conclude that he will suffer even more. Other players, such as Federer, by contrast, are used to shorter (legal) breaks.
It is probably wishful thinking to suggest that Nadal would lose more often, if he adhered to the rules. But it is laughably stupid to claim that he would trouble other players even more often, i.e., win more if he followed the rules.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Too many insults in here to even consider discussing anything with you. I don't deal with people like you who lace their posts in such a manner.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Disagree here.
There is no way of proving your first statement at all, since I doubt Nadal will every play as quickly as others.
Secondly, his analysis is heavily biased, based on this statement:
"The delusional mentality goes as follows: if Nadal weren't allowed to "cheat" by going over the limit, he'd be rushed into playing faster, and Federer would win those matches."
Coming from this poster, who, in 90% of his posts tries to make Federer fans look like delusional idiots through passive-aggressive posts, this is no surprise. Fact is, not one person has said this and he is making this up to further his own beliefs.
Nadal is not "singled out" only because he is a high profile player, but because he is very deliberate in his routine. Going by your suggestions, this, to me, seems like another attempt to have the rules change to the player (like the 2-year ranking system). When you come onto the tour, you change yourself to adapt to the rules. When there are other players on the tour who can stay within the rules, why can't the others. Suggesting Federer is guilty of gamesmanship because he is within the rules by playing to the time allotted for servers is laughable.
The rules have been there long before Nadal was on the tour. Why should they change just because he can't follow them?
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
how was anything in he said a personal insult? He underlined certain words and phrases for emphasis. How is that an insult??
Polaris
Hall of Fame
Other than "laughably stupid", nothing insulting was intended. And even that was intended to convey that it was worse than the wishful thinking of people who think Nadal would lose more often if he played quicker. Everything else consists of a refutation of an obviously specious argument. If those two words are too much for you, then that's too bad.
Last edited:
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
ladies'n'gentlemen, welcome to the wonderful and paranoid world of...... *drumroll* TheTruffle !!!
TheTruffle airlines sincerely hope you'll enjoy your stay and will be happy to welcome you again soon onboard one of her double standards.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
you can insult someone's argument without insulting them directly which is how I read what you wrote.
talk about kid gloves with some people.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
I've been watching tennis for a long time and never has there been such a furor over the time limit on a continual basis. I think it has to do with commentator bias and carefully constructed snippets leaked to the press. I don't agree with this argument, don't consider it cheating, and believe the poster had it right.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Go back and read it then. Maybe you don't view it as an insult, but when you put in words like laughable, delusional, "reality." Yep, I consider it an insult.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Thats because players didnt blatantly violate it until recent years. Some more noticeable than others.
As to the second bolded...so its an outside conspiracy? So people are completely hallucinating when they notice certain players playing exceedingly slowly?
Cup8489
G.O.A.T.
actually, it has to do with the fact that people followed the rule in past seasons. LOL.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, but what gives you the right to tell someone their opinion on a matter is "laughably stupid?" Why would anyone want to discuss an issue with someone who starts out that way? Chances are, the dialogue will become much worse.
Too bad? Not really, I just don't like talking to people who can't be reasonable in their conversation. It's not too bad for me, because the powers that be recognized that some people would cross the line in their efforts to communicate.
TTMR
Hall of Fame
Woodrow has said on more than one occasion 20 seconds is not nearly enough time in today's game, and that most umpires agree, which is why it is not rigidly enforced. His expertise, though, is always soundly dismissed because it does not accord with the prevailing "wisdom" of TW's armchair legalists.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Actually, it has to do with the fact that in past seasons no one was sitting around counting seconds in order to discredit their competition.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Please.
If you make a statement which sounds utterly ridiculous to someone else, they are going to let you know about it.
Not that Im saying this is so, but its called a discussion.
Honestly, he didnt say you personally were laughingly stupid, just your position.
And if you think this is rude you may want to avoid other forums.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Hmm, but the issue seems to be that not even 25 or 30 seconds are enough for some players.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
wait..so you are saying there was no 20 second rule til 2004?
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Not so much a conspiracy, as is it following others. Once someone says something, true or not, many blindly follow. I'm not in power to change anything so I go with the flow. But there are many players who go over the time limit and not one word is uttered.
Exceedingly slowly is an exaggeration. We're talking about less than 5-10 seconds in most cases. Another example of people blowing it out of proportion.
Personally, I can't recall how many times Federer has "leaked" this to the press. You don't think there's a motivation for this?
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
No one paid any attention to it. They just played within the lines. I never heard of people talking about this ad nauseum when Pete and Andre played. Did you?
TTMR
Hall of Fame
I believe during the AO final the commentators showed the average time between points and it was something like 27 seconds for Djokovic and 29 for Nadal, or vice-versa.
Again, I'll take the moaning seriously when the purists start attacking Del Potro as a cheater and gamesman. But they don't and won't, because he "plays the game the right way", even if he is the slowest of them all between points.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Im sorry but that is ridiculous. I dont need a commentator to tell me that Djoker takes exceedingly long with the ball bounces.
I dont need a commentator to know that Nadal's service routine slows down to a crawl during a pressure point.
Its not a top down conspiracy. People i.e. fans, viewers, notice and that is why commentators speak about it. Not the other way around.
It probably seems exceedingly slow compared to the normal pace of play, which is noticeably broken.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Everything Del Potro does is slow. I get peeved at him taking 2 years to decide if he wants to challenge.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
they didnt take forever between points, hence nobody talked about it.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
People make opinions that I think are utterly ridiculous all the time. That doesn't make me insult them or their positions. I guess that's the difference. I believe in using restraint rather than blurting out whatever I think.
I don't need to avoid forums as I enjoy them and the majority of different views.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
They don't take forever now. Since when did a few seconds become forever?
I'm done with this. You can either accept a difference of opinion or move on.
I'm moving on.
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
I'm sure there were always player offending the time rules, even in the 90s and before. But when the top 2 players in the world do it habitually, people are gonna notice and call it out. Why not after all.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
I can understand that in the latter stages of a physical match, a few more seconds couldn't hurt.
The problem is that Nadal and Djokovic play at a very slow pace from the very first point. There is no excuse for that at all.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
why bother being on a forum if you cant deal with a difference of opinion?
Fare the well.
Tennis_Hands
Banned
Please, go back and reread the part of my post, that asks for woodrow1029's opinion! It has NOTHING to do with the 20 second rule, but with your assumption, that serving quick can be viewed as gamesmanship, and my response, that that is well in control of the chair umpire.
And while I am inclined to agree, that at some points the 20 second should not be the ultimate factor, I do not agree, that the players should be allowed to break the rule at will. Which they do, in order to achieve competitive advantage in many situations.
Last edited:
