Fergus Murphy should be suspended.

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
It is almost like, but it is not. If he had a psychosis, he would not respond to events around him or actions towards him - and his mood swings are a direct response to evironment. It is something else - NK is a relatively low intellect person with (most likely) a borderline personality disorder (BPD) being exploited for profit. Free market and all.
The psychosis is among the fans that support him because of his talent and the train wreck entertainment value regardless of how treats people, denigrates the sport and is an overall dispicable person.
 

smash hit

Professional
He certainly does have a point. Nadal gets special treatment and yes, Kyrgios was correct about that. I know that doesn't excuse his bad behavior, but I watched the match and it seemed to me that Fergus Murphy was definitely goading him.

I wrote this in reply to someone way back in April, 2014,

I accept that there is a time rule, but I cannot accept that it is fairly imlemented. When does the timing start? Is it when the ball is dead or when the umpire calls the point? There is quite a lot of discrepancy between the two. How can we ensure that every umpire uses the same criteria for starting the timing? Some umpires call the point very quickly, others not so fast. I have observed that Fergus Murphy usually calls the point as soon as the ball is dead, but especially when Nadal is playing. A shot clock wouldn't make any difference because each umpire could start it at a different time. I don't know what the answer is, but IMO if there is a rule for the players then there should also be a standard rule for umpires. one that is explicit, unambiguous, and clear for all to see.

Nick Kyrgios was absolutely wrong in that assumption. Nadal does not get special treatment from Fergus Murphy and I make that point from years of observation.
 

reaper

Legend
I wrote this in reply to someone way back in April, 2014,

I accept that there is a time rule, but I cannot accept that it is fairly imlemented. When does the timing start? Is it when the ball is dead or when the umpire calls the point? There is quite a lot of discrepancy between the two. How can we ensure that every umpire uses the same criteria for starting the timing? Some umpires call the point very quickly, others not so fast. I have observed that Fergus Murphy usually calls the point as soon as the ball is dead, but especially when Nadal is playing. A shot clock wouldn't make any difference because each umpire could start it at a different time. I don't know what the answer is, but IMO if there is a rule for the players then there should also be a standard rule for umpires. one that is explicit, unambiguous, and clear for all to see.

Nick Kyrgios was absolutely wrong in that assumption. Nadal does not get special treatment from Fergus Murphy and I make that point from years of observation.
Was Kyrgios even serious in making the point about Nadal as per Murphy's timing in announcing the score? He was just being an obtuse wanker trying to rationalise his behaviour by running a red herring about Nadal. $113k is a touch light in terms of the sanction, but at least it's a start.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
I wrote this in reply to someone way back in April, 2014,

I accept that there is a time rule, but I cannot accept that it is fairly imlemented. When does the timing start? Is it when the ball is dead or when the umpire calls the point? There is quite a lot of discrepancy between the two. How can we ensure that every umpire uses the same criteria for starting the timing? Some umpires call the point very quickly, others not so fast. I have observed that Fergus Murphy usually calls the point as soon as the ball is dead, but especially when Nadal is playing. A shot clock wouldn't make any difference because each umpire could start it at a different time. I don't know what the answer is, but IMO if there is a rule for the players then there should also be a standard rule for umpires. one that is explicit, unambiguous, and clear for all to see.

Nick Kyrgios was absolutely wrong in that assumption. Nadal does not get special treatment from Fergus Murphy and I make that point from years of observation.
Do you think that players are closer to being within the 25 second rule now that we have a time clock or no? The rule is that the 25 second begins as soon as the ball is out of play and the point is over. The umpires calls the score and then starts the clock. The delay can happen at the end of the point when the crowd is cheering loudly and the delay is so the players can hear the score before they prepare for the next point. Not a perfect system but close enough that professional tennis players should be able to function.
Kyrgios got upset that the rule was being followed with him and also that the umpire paused the 25 second clock when the crowd was moving behind him. That is customary and Kyrgios’ complaints were about the rules being followed by this umpire.
What would be the solution, let Kyrgios do whatever he wants? Think about it?
If the players have a problem with Nadal or Djokovic on the 25 second rule there is an ATP meeting for the players at every event. ***** and complain there but attacking an umpire for actually following the rule is misplaced and quite frankly stupid on Kyrgios’ part. $113 worth of stupid. Needs a coach and needs to listen.
 
Last edited:

upchuck

Professional
In fact, Fergus should be suspended for not enforcing the rules and giving Kyrgios the penalties he warranted. It was disgracefully lenient officiating.
 
The psychosis is among the fans that support him because of his talent and the train wreck entertainment value regardless of how treats people, denigrates the sport and is an overall dispicable person.
Nick Kyrgios was absolutely wrong in that assumption. Nadal does not get special treatment from Fergus Murphy and I make that point from years of observation.
He was just being an obtuse wanker trying to rationalise his behaviour by running a red herring about Nadal.
Not a perfect system but close enough that professional tennis players should be able to function.
Likee these (y)--BRING BACK THE LIKE BUTTON--and MODS, quit expunging ANY thread here that has sirena's name in it, erase a "bad" post but NOT a whole thread, or you'll be killing the forum.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Have you guys played a tennis event where there are officials? Ever gotten a warning? I sure have and it means absolutely nothing accept reel in whatever you are doing. Not a big deal.
Have a test for you, stand at the net as if a point just ended. Set your watch for 25 seconds and walk to the back of the baseline and towel off. Remember, someone is running toward you with the towel and the balls. Getting set up and serving within 25 seconds is easy. That’s why the majority ATP and WTA players have no issue.
 
Last edited:

thrust

Hall of Fame
Kyrgios already had a problem with Fergus Murphy this year at Queens. ATP should not have put Fergus and Kyrgios on the court together again. Fergus clearly wanted to get back at Nick from Queens.
NONSENSE! Fergus was much too lenient with Nick, who deserves NO special treatment from the chair umpires.
 

aer0pr0

Rookie
If murphy was purposely forcing kyrgios to go crazy, why didnt he give him the warnings kyrgios should have got??
Nonsense topic, murphy did everything allright, if something he wasnt as strict as he should have been, kyrgios was being a scumbag since beginning of match
 

smash hit

Professional
Was Kyrgios even serious in making the point about Nadal as per Murphy's timing in announcing the score? He was just being an obtuse wanker trying to rationalise his behaviour by running a red herring about Nadal. $113k is a touch light in terms of the sanction, but at least it's a start.

I agree. Who could know what Kyrgios is serious about, he certainly seems to have an obsession.with Nadal. As for the fine, I don't think paying a fine will have any effect on the behaviour of Kyrgios. He is a millionaire, thanks to tennis which he says he doesn't enjoy.$113k is small change to him, he will pay up and come back and do it all over again. It's a start, as you say but for any sanction to be effective, it has to hit him where it hurts.
 
The key is if his mommy quits doing his laundry for him--as she does written in an article about him--and he has to start changing his own diapers--with all those tweeners he likes hitting, things could get nasty for him fast!--first a warning like for dropping a hat or a bead, and then point penalties--ewh! :eek::sick:
 

Raiden

Hall of Fame
Murphy should be banned for his sardonic telephone call to announce that Kyrgios has gone away with two rackets and came back with two broken rackets.

As if Nick was a homeless dude busy sniffing rubbish bins & picking broken items out of them.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Murphy should be banned for his sardonic telephone call to announce that Kyrgios has gone away with two rackets and returned with two broken rackets.

Almost suggests he went inside to fetch broken rackets out of a rubbish bin or something.
Player leaves the court without it being legal the chair umpire has to radio the referee. Has to do with player security as well. You guys are searching for a way that Kyrgios has no responsibility.
 
Last edited:

True Fanerer

G.O.A.T.
I agree. Who could know what Kyrgios is serious about, he certainly seems to have an obsession.with Nadal. As for the fine, I don't think paying a fine will have any effect on the behaviour of Kyrgios. He is a millionaire, thanks to tennis which he says he doesn't enjoy.$113k is small change to him, he will pay up and come back and do it all over again. It's a start, as you say but for any sanction to be effective, it has to hit him where it hurts.
I disagree. 100 K is a hefty fine for him. He's only made a million bucks this year and has expenses like everyone else.
 
As if Nick was a homeless dude busy sniffing rubbish bins & picking broken items out of them.
At the rate he's going, he'll blow through his wad of millions, lose his job at the car wash for pilfering quarters from under seats, and living in L.A.'s squid row--maybe he could hand out towels at a club if he sees the light and reforms.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
That is probably how he is taking all of this..chillin’ If he doesn’t come up with a press conference or a press release apology he is probably going to be suspended. Trouble with that is he is his own worst enemy. Could arguably make things worst.
 
Last edited:

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Saw where Federer and Djokovic had..no comment..they would let the authorities, the tournament and the ATP handle his behavior.
Wonder why they didn’t comment on the time clock and the umpiring which are apparently such a travesty on the ATP Tour. This was all of Nick’s making.
 
Last edited:

Slimerer

Rookie
Saw where Federer and Djokovic had..no comment..they would let the authorities, the tournament and the ATP handle his behavior.
Wonder why they didn’t comment on the time clock and the umpiring which are apparently such a travesty on the ATP Tour. This was all of Nick’s making.
Maybe because Djokovic is benefiting from unfair application of the rules and privilege as well as Nadal? And Federer was asked directly after the Rublev loss...
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Maybe because Djokovic is benefiting from unfair application of the rules and privilege as well as Nadal? And Federer was asked directly after the Rublev loss...
You have drunk the Kyrgios cool aid. I hope you don’t apply this line of thinking to your own life. Bringing a serious consequence on yourself and then blame other people. Kyrgios is not a victim.
 
Last edited:

Slimerer

Rookie
You have drunk the Kyrgios cool aid. I hope you don’t apply this line of thinking to your own life.
United States Professional Tennis Association Roger Federer 97, please come run my life for me. I’m in dire need of someone to tell me how to think.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
United States Professional Tennis Association Roger Federer 97, please come run my life for me. I’m in dire need of someone to tell me how to think.
Your thinking is wrong about this for sure.We can start there. It’s a good start.
 
Last edited:

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
United States Professional Tennis Association Roger Federer 97, can we please respectfully disagree? My brain cannot take anymore thinking for today.
That’s funny, this is why they have ESPN Sports Desks. Polarizing topics. Kyrgios may be the most polarizing topic that has come around in tennis.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Nick is about the only thing that doesn't suck about the current state of tennis.
In time you may realize that we were witnessing the three greatest male players to ever play the game and the greatest woman athlete and tennis player that has ever existed. Nick will only be remembered for his stupid antics and that he was a wasted talent.
 
Last edited:

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
In time you may realize that we were witnessing the three greatest male players to ever play the game
Laver - TWO GRAND SLAMS!
Borg - Changed the Sport by introducing Topspin as a weapon.
Sampras - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Serve as a weapon. (With respect to Pancho Gonzalez)
Agassi - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Return of Serve as a weapon.

As great as Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are, none of them have introduced anything new to the Sport. They have just taken what came before and used modern sports science and equipment to take it to higher levels on more sanitised tennis courts and more controlled playing conditions.

When all the "Recency Bias" is removed. Djokovic will probably go on to be remembered as the greatest of the Big 3 with the superior H2H over the other two, a Dual Career Grand Slam, and the greatest number of Major Titles. (If Novak were to win another couple of French Open Titles, he certainly challenges Laver for GOAT status.)

Kyrgios will be remembered as a middle of the road player with great hand-eye co-ordination and a temper that results from white line fever. The only difference between Kygrios and McEnroe is that McEnroe won a few Major Titles and their accents.
 

Slimerer

Rookie
Laver - TWO GRAND SLAMS!
Borg - Changed the Sport by introducing Topspin as a weapon.
Sampras - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Serve as a weapon. (With respect to Pancho Gonzalez)
Agassi - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Return of Serve as a weapon.

As great as Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are, none of them have introduced anything new to the Sport. They have just taken what came before and used modern sports science and equipment to take it to higher levels on more sanitised tennis courts and more controlled playing conditions.

When all the "Recency Bias" is removed. Djokovic will probably go on to be remembered as the greatest of the Big 3 with the superior H2H over the other two, a Dual Career Grand Slam, and the greatest number of Major Titles. (If Novak were to win another couple of French Open Titles, he certainly challenges Laver for GOAT status.)

Kyrgios will be remembered as a middle of the road player with great hand-eye co-ordination and a temper that results from white line fever. The only difference between Kygrios and McEnroe is that McEnroe won a few Major Titles and their accents.
The ignorance is strong in this one.
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
Laver - TWO GRAND SLAMS!
Borg - Changed the Sport by introducing Topspin as a weapon.
Sampras - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Serve as a weapon. (With respect to Pancho Gonzalez)
Agassi - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Return of Serve as a weapon.

As great as Federer, Nadal and Djokovic are, none of them have introduced anything new to the Sport. They have just taken what came before and used modern sports science and equipment to take it to higher levels on more sanitised tennis courts and more controlled playing conditions.

When all the "Recency Bias" is removed. Djokovic will probably go on to be remembered as the greatest of the Big 3 with the superior H2H over the other two, a Dual Career Grand Slam, and the greatest number of Major Titles. (If Novak were to win another couple of French Open Titles, he certainly challenges Laver for GOAT status.)

Kyrgios will be remembered as a middle of the road player with great hand-eye co-ordination and a temper that results from white line fever. The only difference between Kygrios and McEnroe is that McEnroe won a few Major Titles and their accents.
Have been blessed to see Borg, Agassi, Sampras, Nadal, Federer and Djokovic throughout their entire careers. Laver was a completely different era and hard to measure and compare today’s players with him. Federer has the most complete game of any player that has existed.
My point was that if someone thinks the only good thing about tennis today is Kyrgios they are missing the forest for the trees.
The games of the big three are more complete than the games of any of the previous players. Have watched them all up close besides Laver but have seen video and it is tennis at an entirely different level. Laver watches Federer in amazement. Anyone who can’t see what Federer brings to the court, now at even 38 years old, has no idea what they are seeing.
Serena is absolutely the greatest woman athlete and tennis player that has ever lived. Here she is under scrutiny playing at the end of her career through many injuries and health problems. Might want to take notice because seeing that again probably won’t happen again in many of our lifetimes. History is being played out in front of us and for people to think Kyrgios is the highlight of professional tennis..bizarre.
 
Last edited:

Slimerer

Rookie
I have been blessed to see Borg, Agassi, Sampras, Nadal, Federer and Djokovic throughout their entire careers. Laver was a completely different era and hard to measure and compare today’s players with him. Federer has the most complete game of any player that has existed. My point was that if someone thinks the only good think about tennis today is Kyrgios they are missing the forsescforcthe trees.
The games of the big three are more complete than the games of any of the previous players. Have watched them all up close besides Laver but have seen video. and it is tennis at an entirely different level. Laver watches Federer in amazement. Anyone who can’t see what Federer brings to the court doesn’t know what they are looking at. He is 38 years old now. Think about it.
So we can agree on something, United States Professional Tennis Association Roger Federer 97.
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
I guess you two guys are Americans :unsure:

You cannot really compare players from different eras for a host of reasons (different Sports Science, Playing Conditions, Equipment Technology)

IMO (!) On that basis, you can only really compare players using the following criteria ...

1/ Mental Prowess
2/ Achievements during their own Era based on the level of Competition in that Era.
3/ Achievements at the Extreme ends of the spectrum ... (Fast Natural Grass and Slow Red Clay.)

On that basis, no one really comes close to Laver. He was the dominant player of his own era.

(As for Serena? Name one player that has been at Serena's level in the past 20 years? I can't think of any. She is a great player for sure. But the Greatest? I don't think so. She didn't have a Margaret, Chrissie, Martina, or Steffi to have to deal with Week In Week Out over several years.)

Like I said .. "Recency Bias" is a very strong thing.

Nick won Washington DC. Most people were praising him. Two weeks later, he crashes out. Many of those same people who praised him two weeks ago are now attacking him.

How about just letting the Players play the game? Leave it to the officials to sort out.

Like he has said countless times ... if you don't like the way he goes about his Tennis ... DON'T WATCH HIM !!!
 

USPTARF97

Hall of Fame
I guess you two guys are Americans :unsure:

You cannot really compare players from different eras for a host of reasons (different Sports Science, Playing Conditions, Equipment Technology)

IMO (!) On that basis, you can only really compare players using the following criteria ...

1/ Mental Prowess
2/ Achievements during their own Era based on the level of Competition in that Era.
3/ Achievements at the Extreme ends of the spectrum ... (Fast Natural Grass and Slow Red Clay.)

On that basis, no one really comes close to Laver. He was the dominant player of his own era.

(As for Serena? Name one player that has been at Serena's level in the past 20 years? I can't think of any. She is a great player for sure. But the Greatest? I don't think so. She didn't have a Margaret, Chrissie, Martina, or Steffi to have to deal with Week In Week Out over several years.)

Like I said .. "Recency Bias" is a very strong thing.

Nick won Washington DC. Most people were praising him. Two weeks later, he crashes out. Many of those same people who praised him two weeks ago are now attacking him.

How about just letting the Players play the game? Leave it to the officials to sort out.

Like he has said countless times ... if you don't like the way he goes about his Tennis ... DON'T WATCH HIM !!!
I guess you two guys are Americans :unsure:

You cannot really compare players from different eras for a host of reasons (different Sports Science, Playing Conditions, Equipment Technology)

IMO (!) On that basis, you can only really compare players using the following criteria ...

1/ Mental Prowess
2/ Achievements during their own Era based on the level of Competition in that Era.
3/ Achievements at the Extreme ends of the spectrum ... (Fast Natural Grass and Slow Red Clay.)

On that basis, no one really comes close to Laver. He was the dominant player of his own era.

(As for Serena? Name one player that has been at Serena's level in the past 20 years? I can't think of any. She is a great player for sure. But the Greatest? I don't think so. She didn't have a Margaret, Chrissie, Martina, or Steffi to have to deal with Week In Week Out over several years.)

Like I said .. "Recency Bias" is a very strong thing.

Nick won Washington DC. Most people were praising him. Two weeks later, he crashes out. Many of those same people who praised him two weeks ago are now attacking him.

How about just letting the Players play the game? Leave it to the officials to sort out.

Like he has said countless times ... if you don't like the way he goes about his Tennis ... DON'T WATCH HIM !!!
No woman has ever been the level of Serena in her prime.
Again my point was that if the poster is thinking that Kyrgios is the only thing good about tennis there are things going now that we may not see again.
Don’t care if people think Andrea Jaeger and Aaron Krickstein are the two greatest players ever.
I am fairly sure that the void will be obvious when Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Serena are retired.
 
Last edited:

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Sampras - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Serve as a weapon. (With respect to Pancho Gonzalez)
Agassi - Changed the Sport by emphasising the importance of the Return of Serve as a weapon.
:unsure: :-D:-D:-D

This is the meatspin of tennis opinions.
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
No woman has ever been the level of Serena in her prime.
Again my point was that if the poster is thinking that Kyrgios is the only thing good about tennis there are things going now that we may not see again.
Don’t care if people think Andrea Jaeger and Aaron Krickstein are the two greatest players ever.
I am fairly sure that the void will be obvious when Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Serena are retired.
Serena is pretty much already Retired. She is a spent force.

Roger is pretty much already Retired. He is also a spent force. By his own admission, he has said that if he is not being scheduled to play in front of big crowds on the big courts he will leave the game pretty quickly. IMO, if the Olympics were three years away, he would be done by the end of this year.

Nadal and Rafa have several more years to play if they want to and their bodies hold up. In that period we should be entertained with many matches that involve them against each other and other decent players.

There will be no void. The Game is much greater than any individual player. The Void pretty much occurred during the period Lleyton was #1. Sampras was on the way out. Agassi was in the process of finding himself. And Roger began to start his rise.

The Sport's biggest problem going forward will be participation rates. The sport is way too expensive for most people now. Team sports are much more attractive to most junior players or more importantly the parents of the junior players. The sport appears to be becoming very "Elitist" again.

Guys like Kyrgios keep the Media engaged which is good for the Sport. If tennis turns into a bunch of Robots endlessly hitting balls back and forward across a net, juniors will get bored with it and look to other things ... if they have not already. The ITF / ATP / WTA could change this by regulating the equipment the players can use in order to bring variety back to the game and give a larger range of players a chance to be successful. Alas that will not suit the Racquet or String manufacturers.

There is also the issue of money in tennis. Most other sports return around 50% of their revenues to the Players as Prize Money. Tennis returns 15%. That is a huge joke. People are starting to wake up to that.
 

Tennease

Hall of Fame
Murphy clearly, intentionally pushed Kyrgios' buttons last night. Kyrgios was playing a good match, but Fergus just couldn't have that apparently. And so he decided to begin starting the serve clock early. When Nick complained, Fergus just grinned back at him as he knew he had accomplished his goal of angering Kyrgios. Fergus pushed Kyrgios to the tipping point and then sat back and admired his handiwork. Fergus refused to default Kyrgios as he should have, instead letting Kyrgios continue as it ultimately gets more attention for himself as well. It is disgusting for an umpire to love to be the center of attention this much. This isn't the first time the dreaded Fergus has pissed off the best players. Djokovic, Federer, and Roddick are among them just to name a few. He truly is the worst umpire on the tour.
I remember watching Roddick playing in ATP Brisbane against Soderling. Roddick was arguing constantly with Fergus. It went on and on and on. Maybe there is something in Fergus that players don't like.
 

van_Loederen

Professional
The Serve Clock is one of the most ridiculous things ever introduced into the Sport.
I'm certainly not a fan of Nick's behaviour the other day but the Serve Clock rule is just plain Dumb!
There was nothing wrong with the Old Rule ... only the Officials who did not have the intestinal fortitude to tell Players to hurry up ... especially the so called "Special" players who always seem to get preferential treatment from the Officals because they are the players that pull in the crowds and the $$$.
without serve clock, players don't know exactly how much time they have left, so the rule couldn't be enforced strictly and thus really effectively.

afaik, Nadal and DJ are not getting preferential treatment anymore since the introduction of the clock.
it's just that after long rallies or when the audience is sheering, umpires will wait with starting the clock. Kyrgios deliberately ignored that fact (with his comparison).

aside from a few players sometimes abusing their time for the second serve, so far the clock didn't cause problems that i'm aware of.
 

bitcoinoperated

Professional
Murphy clearly, intentionally pushed Kyrgios' buttons last night. Kyrgios was playing a good match, but Fergus just couldn't have that apparently. And so he decided to begin starting the serve clock early. When Nick complained, Fergus just grinned back at him as he knew he had accomplished his goal of angering Kyrgios. Fergus pushed Kyrgios to the tipping point and then sat back and admired his handiwork. Fergus refused to default Kyrgios as he should have, instead letting Kyrgios continue as it ultimately gets more attention for himself as well. It is disgusting for an umpire to love to be the center of attention this much. This isn't the first time the dreaded Fergus has pissed off the best players. Djokovic, Federer, and Roddick are among them just to name a few. He truly is the worst umpire on the tour.
So you're saying the master troll got trolled?
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
without serve clock, players don't know exactly how much time they have left, so the rule couldn't be enforced strictly and thus really effectively.
You would be correct if every Umpire called the score at exactly the same moment after a point ended AND then started the Serve Clock as soon as they called the score.

Or,

If every Umpire started the Serve Clock at the exactly the same moment after a point ended.

But they don't. There is a lot of variation between Umpires.

afaik, Nadal and DJ are not getting preferential treatment anymore since the introduction of the clock.
If you consider what I said above, it could be construed either way.
 
Top