Federer on time violations (With a little dig at Rafa).
- Thread starter Paul Murphy
- Start date
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Exactly. So we're talking about 2-3 seconds being a crime. And it is funny how del Potro is not considered a "cheater" around here, only Nadal and sometimes Djokovic.
Ridiculous.
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
29-20= 9
27-20=7
so, if on average, djokdal are nearly 10 seconds above the allotted time, then one can assume that there are many points where they are well over 10 seconds above the allotted time.
how is that 2-3 seconds again?
And I agree, Del Po is slow as molasses.
then again, guy is 7 ft tall, he can move but so fast I guess?
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
Anyone who has an average time over the limit is a cheater. Not just Nadal.
DragonBlaze
Hall of Fame
Na it was 31 and 34 seconds on average. Don't remember if Nadal or Djoker was the slower one (I think it was Djokovic).
To me that's way too long. I mean obviously 30 seconds + is understandable with a 20-30 shot rally. Heck even 40-50 seconds is fine in those cases. But when one player is taking 34 seconds on average, and the other one isn't much better, it DOES slow it down considerably. Let me make it clear though, I don't think the match result would change if either of them went faster, it just wouldn't take so damn long and break the momentum for me. That's why I would like the umpires to be more strict.
Also Delpo annoys me as well with how long he can take. They all do. I wouldn't call any of them cheaters though (including Nadal or Djokovic).
Last edited:
Polaris
Hall of Fame
I don't have the right, actually, just the privilege to post on these boards. I try not to misuse it.
But, the deeper point is this. It is all fine and dandy to respect other people's opinions, but when opinions conflict with basic reality, then it amounts to respecting a delusion. See, if someone says that, "In my opinion, the sun goes around the earth?", you would say that the idea is completely bonkers. You wouldn't give such a preposterous notion a fair chance, I hope. Why is this so? Because it contradicts reality.
Now, the point that you are making is similar: "Take away time from Nadal, and that makes him even more dangerous to other players who are used to keeping good time". What you are claiming goes against everything we know about human physiology, which in turn is based on what we know of biology, which in turn is based on what we know of chemistry, which in turn is based on what we know of physics, ... you know where I'm going with this.
In my mind, such a preposterous opinion - with no basis in reality - does not deserve respect. Hence, my characterization of your opinion as "laughably stupid." If you play tennis against someone who is already faster than you between points, and then try to increase your own pace, you will not become a more dangerous player. Chances are that you will become less dangerous. It is only logical.
This, exactly.SLD76 said:
Last edited:
Tennis_Hands
Banned
That is not The Truth:???: The truth is, that time and time again the people said that the rules should be enforced. Not that the rules should be enforced just in the case of Nadal or Djokovic. The said players are being singled out, because they are at the top of the game and notorious for their time wasting.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
You just can't seem to restrain yourself. Your opinion is no better than mine's to me, so we need to agree to disagree. This 20-second rule does not warrant the sciences of biology, physiology, chemistry, and physics. To me, it's preposterous to drag all of these sciences in there for the sake of a few
seconds.
We disagree, Polaris. That's all there is to it. I vote we let it go, because I'm not changing my position and I doubt you will either, so no point in going on and on about it. Going on and on about it, to me, is laughably stupid.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Exaclty. The rule is only enforced some of the time. Nadal has gotten the time warning plenty of times, yet he doesn't change and he's not regularly penalized for it. It doesn't matter if people "feel" they need the time, the rules are the rules. Again, a few extra seconds in a physical match is understandable. Taking excessive amounts of time in the very first few games of a match? No excuse.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
A recent transgression in the tennis world, and a petty one imo.
Still no talk of the slow moving del Potro, though.
I don't buy your position. Is that okay?
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Polaris
Hall of Fame
Okies, we can agree to disagree. You can continue to disregard basic science in favor of your opinions. I'll continue to regard it while forming mine.
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
Okies, we can agree to disagree. You can continue to disregard basic science in favor of your opinions. I'll continue to regard it while forming mine.
You must be in the science field, or do something in that capacity, because you always seem to post on scientific matters (from what I remember). It's cool. I enjoy reading your posts anyway, and don't take it personal.
roddick and federer used to rush to serve and you could see opponents waving their hand to slow them down during break points. ljubicic very publicly gave an interview about the "other guys not liking roddick". he rolled his eyes when roddick didn't even hold the ball up to get the opponent ready for serves.
abmk
Bionic Poster
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.
indeed ...
10 double standards !
Sid_Vicious
G.O.A.T.
Rigidly using a 20 second rule will be awful because even the fast-paced players would be screwed. Federer was taking 23 seconds on average against Nadal, who was taking 30, at the AO this year.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Yeah, true. 25 is the limit at a Grand Slam, I think. Besides, like I said, the more physical a match is, the more time players need between points. The rallies between Federer and Nadal were long, so I'm not surprised that Federer averaged 23 seconds (for the whole match, right?). But I don't think Federer started the match with around 23-30 seconds between points on his serve. Nadal and Djokovic take similar amounts of time between the first ball struck to the last.
DjokovicForTheWin
Banned
I think slams are 20 seconds. ATP matches are 25 seconds.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
You're probably right. 23 seconds in a physical match is reasonable. 30-40 seconds is kind of excessive.
TTMR
Hall of Fame
Sid Vicious said:
FlashFare11 said:
20 seconds is the ITF rule.
I'm sorry. It doesn't matter if people 'feel' they need the time, the rules are the rules. Federer is a cheater and a gamesman. People like Roddick can presumably play within the allotted time, so there is no reason why Federer cannot except to gain a competitive advantage. The rule should be enforced and Federer should develop a style of play less taxing on his body if he feels 20 seconds is insufficient time.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Did you read? I said in a physical match, 23 seconds is nothing. 30 is kind of excessive. 40 is really pushing it. In most matches, Federer doesn't go over the time limit (his service games stay within just over a minute many times), and since the average was 23 for that one, very physical match, he didn't go over the limit too often. If Nadal stayed between 20 and 25, that would be fine too. But he deliberately goes over the limit FROM THE VERY FIRST POINT.
Didn't you say this was up to the umpire's discretion? Are you trying to say that when the match gets very physical, 23 seconds is the same as 30 seconds between points?
Last edited:
Bender
G.O.A.T.
Am I the only one who doesn't really mind ~35 seconds because then I can watch the replays and listen to the commentary?
(except say, when Rafa takes like 40 seconds then double faults and takes another 40 seconds...I hate that almost as much as when Djokovic bounces the ball 20 times only to double fault and bounce the ball another 20 times)
(except say, when Rafa takes like 40 seconds then double faults and takes another 40 seconds...I hate that almost as much as when Djokovic bounces the ball 20 times only to double fault and bounce the ball another 20 times)
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Replays are nice when the points are interesting or long. But replays after every point are pretty annoying, in my opinion, especially when the point isn't really remarkable.
A
aprilfool
Guest
Well I know that you would not want to kill it off. You certainly got a lot out of the Melbourne affair! Kept the thread alive until Federer finally lost, if I recall. Then you vanished...
Astute public relations student that you are, you picked the losing horse in this battle. Let's keep this one alive right through the year.
And if you think time-wasting is trivial, try doing against the people you play with and see how long you last.
A
aprilfool
Guest
Do you play tennis? Please have someone video tape you performing Nadal/Djoker antics wherever you play and post it here.
With all due respect to Woodrow, that is his opinion and he is entitled to it. He is not Federer and he is not waiting at the other end of the net for Mind Games 1 and 2 to finish their..."gamemenship".
Oh, and fyi, Andre was quite demonstrative in his revulsion of Nadal's time wasting when they played in Canada. And he played at a fairly brisk pace himself. Stop trying to reinvent history.
Last edited by a moderator:
A
aprilfool
Guest
Claims that this is a Federer forum are greatly unproven.
Last edited by a moderator:
Raiden
Hall of Fame
O'rly?
What did that ever happen? Lemme guess, when your beloved started averaging beyond 30 seconds and you wanted to search for a justification? LMAO
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRXrjdTPso8
Raiden
Hall of Fame
Raiden
Hall of Fame
What talk should there be, oh wise *********? That he takes too much time cuz he serves TWICE within 20 seconds? LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRXrjdTPso8
woodrow1029
Hall of Fame
25 is the limit at ATP events. 20 seconds at ITF (Grand Slam, Olympics, Davis Cup)
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Thanks for clearing that up! (Sorry, you've probably repeated that countless times)
Crisstti
Legend
People just dislike umpires using their own discretion and not and not the posters'. All the claims that the rule should be applied as in the book are BS.
Had no idea about that.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
Was watching the Nadal match on Sky Sports in the UK. Fleming mentioned that he thinks Federer was just being too polite about the whole time violations thing. That if Federer was more vocal that the rule should be enforced, and not allow it to get abused...perhaps that would have helped him in his battles with Nadal. Nadal wouldn't have as much time to recover, compose himself, and would play at a pace that Federer prefers.
He also stated, that while Djokodal matches are great, they often do become slugfests. And if the time was reinforced, it could force them to end points more quickly with more shot making, moving up the court, since they would have less time to get ready for the next shot.
Interesting thoughts.
He also stated, that while Djokodal matches are great, they often do become slugfests. And if the time was reinforced, it could force them to end points more quickly with more shot making, moving up the court, since they would have less time to get ready for the next shot.
Interesting thoughts.
Clarky21
Banned
What hogwash. So now every player is supposed to play the game as Fed sees fit? What kind of pure bs is that?
I do think they could speed it up a bit,I just don't like the way that was worded. It sounds as if everyone should just do as Fed asks because it gives him an advantage. That is just absolute nonsense.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Maybe they're easily grappled by the bait? The press is obviously looking for something to report on, since there hasn't been much tennis news in a month or so.
Crisstti
Legend
But the press has always tried that.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
Yeah, true. At least they're not going after each other's throats. Just little digs. It's not too surprising considering that they're so different from each other.
mellowyellow
Legend
You are looking at it from the wrong point of view, as though this is Feds rule, it is THE RULE in the books, not Feds rule. Fed is asking for players and official to adhere to the rules, how dare he? If applied as it is written, then no player can ***** about an umpires discretion, it is not a gray area to argue about.
FlashFlare11
Hall of Fame
I don't think that's the reason she's upset. The commentators' remarks she was responding to made it sound like it was Federer's rule and not a universal rule. What you say is true, and she knows it too.
Clarky21
Banned
If you read the comment that I quoted,I was referring to the commentators remarks about playing at Fed's preferred pace. I know there is a time limit rule,and I think they could speed it up a bit myself. I just didn't like the way the commentator made it sound as if players should do it for Fed's sake.
M
monfed
Guest
What a pathetic statement. Props for frankness but still downright pathetic.
Crisstti
Legend
It's BS because it's not what people actually mean. What they want is that the umpires use their (the poster's) discretion.
I've been over this already, not going into it at length again.
M
monfed
Guest
On the contrary people WANT umpires to enforce rules(they weren't written by Federer). Rules are rules,enforce them or drop them altogether.
Again, drop the ******* shades!!
Crisstti
Legend
Sure. Except when there's too much noise from the audience, or the previous point was too long, etc, etc.
M
monfed
Guest
The-Champ
Legend
Time limit between points = a multilateral international treaty.
The ATP = International System.
Rafa, Fed, Djokovic etc = individual states.
It seems to me that Djokovic, federer and Nadal have all signed the treaty, but only Federer had ratified it. It means that only Federer gave consent to be bound by this treaty. Nadal and Djokovic on the other hand have no objection to the treaty but are not bound by it because they never ratified it.
The ATP = International System.
Rafa, Fed, Djokovic etc = individual states.
It seems to me that Djokovic, federer and Nadal have all signed the treaty, but only Federer had ratified it. It means that only Federer gave consent to be bound by this treaty. Nadal and Djokovic on the other hand have no objection to the treaty but are not bound by it because they never ratified it.
Last edited:
TheTruth
G.O.A.T.
That's what I was thinking. Federer is one man, with one style of play. He is not the standard for everyone else's game, nor should everyone be judged by it.
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
SLD76
G.O.A.T.
Hmm..it was curious yesterday watching the Delpo Maktosevic(???) match from IW.
The american commentators covering the match for TC discussed the time limit rule at one point:
For Jerry- they remarked how in that match, Delpo avg 27 secs between points. Not criminal time abuse but not the greased lightening
you claimed he was either. Doubtless he needed the time to recover between pts from his epic match with a qualifier
They remarked how if certain players are going to blatantly disregard the rule repeatedly, why bother having a written rule?
One commentator asked that if after a long 30+ stroke rally should the umpire have the discretion to let the players take a little extra time, and his colleague replied vehemently 'no, it is a hard and fast rule, enforce it', to which the other commentator replied that he actually agreed.
FWIW.
Doubtless, Im sure the *******s will say its a conspiracy and the commentators are secret *******s
The american commentators covering the match for TC discussed the time limit rule at one point:
For Jerry- they remarked how in that match, Delpo avg 27 secs between points. Not criminal time abuse but not the greased lightening
you claimed he was either. Doubtless he needed the time to recover between pts from his epic match with a qualifier
They remarked how if certain players are going to blatantly disregard the rule repeatedly, why bother having a written rule?
One commentator asked that if after a long 30+ stroke rally should the umpire have the discretion to let the players take a little extra time, and his colleague replied vehemently 'no, it is a hard and fast rule, enforce it', to which the other commentator replied that he actually agreed.
FWIW.
Doubtless, Im sure the *******s will say its a conspiracy and the commentators are secret *******s
Last edited:
