Finally Some Justice: Nadal engages in gamesmanship

[dudeski]

100% agree. Nadal is just pathetic.

QFT.
10nadalisapatheticcheater

 

[dudeski]

What Nadal does is fine. The blame goes for the umpires and tennis associations for not enforcing their own rules. None of the players have any obligation to uphold the rules of some hegemony if they aren't called for violating them.

I see, so if in some country police doesn't care if you kill your sister to protect family honour after she had an afair then there is nothing wrong with that. Got it.

 

[dudeski]

why do men pee on trees or wherever they can in public? Do you expect them to wait to get to a bathroom? Sometimes it is quite simply, not possible. Men should know it and understand that nature calls and when it does, you often can't wait. Let's please move on from this inane topic.

Do you actually believe that Nadal had to pee? Are you joking? This was obviously time delaying to break Feds momentum. It happens every time Fed has a big lead in a match vs Nadal. Especially on clay, time delaying MTO every time. I think Nadal only doesn't even bother cheating when they play indoors because he know he is toast.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

I see, so if in some country police doesn't care if you kill your sister to protect family honour after she had an afair then there is nothing wrong with that. Got it.

There are some religions where this would be viewed as correct. If that's how the society functions, that's how it functions. To judge everything via your own values and morals is borderline racist. But that's a conversation for a different board.

I think umpires should call time wasting more often. But if they don't, then players aren't really in the wrong if they squeeze a few extra seconds out of it. If I were in charge, I would put a hard clock and penalize anyone who goes over it. That would stop the time wasting real quick.

 

[pvaudio]

Do you actually believe that Nadal had to pee? Are you joking? This was obviously time delaying to break Feds momentum. It happens every time Fed has a big lead in a match vs Nadal. Especially on clay, time delaying MTO every time. I think Nadal only doesn't even bother cheating when they play indoors because he know he is toast.

Wrong. It happens every time ANYONE has a big lead in a match vs. Nadal.

 

[pvaudio]

There are some religions where this would be viewed as correct. If that's how the society functions, that's how it functions. To judge everything via your own values and morals is borderline racist. But that's a conversation for a different board.

I think umpires should call time wasting more often. But if they don't, then players aren't really in the wrong if they squeeze a few extra seconds out of it. If I were in charge, I would put a hard clock and penalize anyone who goes over it. That would stop the time wasting real quick.

How the word racism is even remotely related to this discussion is beyond me. Try to think of a better term to use next time.

Back to the point: your logic is ridiculous. If you're going 70 in a 65, you're still speeding even if a cop chooses not to pull you over. If you're going 80 in a 65, you're just lucky if you don't get pulled over. Nadal is effectively going 85, but he doesn't get pulled over because it's for some reason well known that he simply drives that way. So therefore, his speeding is okay (it's preposterous I'm using speeding as an analogy for slowness) because he knows he won't get pulled over? No, it's not. Federer obeys the speed limit, hell, Roddick would be going 50 in a 65 using this analogy. He never even uses the entire changeover.

 

[TMF]

Umpire is part of the blame for not taking action. However it's still a gamesmanship by Nadal since he abuses the rule when fully aware that it's a violation.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

How the word racism is even remotely related to this discussion is beyond me. Try to think of a better term to use next time.

Back to the point: your logic is ridiculous. If you're going 70 in a 65, you're still speeding even if a cop chooses not to pull you over. If you're going 80 in a 65, you're just lucky if you don't get pulled over. Nadal is effectively going 85, but he doesn't get pulled over because it's for some reason well known that he simply drives that way. So therefore, his speeding is okay (it's preposterous I'm using speeding as an analogy for slowness) because he knows he won't get pulled over? No, it's not. Federer obeys the speed limit, hell, Roddick would be going 50 in a 65 using this analogy. He never even uses the entire changeover.

It is a form of racism if you expect an outgroup (see the ingroup vs outgroup theory for racism) to conform to your ingroup standards, morals, and values. You have to judge situations based on how their cultural standards hold up.

If you're speeding on the highway and pull you over, you're breaking the law. Okay? I didn't say that Nadal wasn't breaking the rules, so you either like building straw men or talking to hear yourself talk. From a sociological perspective, what keeps you from going 85 mph in a 65 mph zone at 3 in the morning? Hegemony of the rules themselves. You respect the rules because of the possibility of being caught, even if that possibility is incredibly low. The nature of hegemony is that it can be very fluid. That is, if cops start cracking down on speeding, you'll see fewer and fewer people willing to go 85 mph in a 65 mph zone even at 3 in the morning.

Go on a major interstate highway and note the average speed. I'm willing to bet it's over the speed limit. Does that mean all of them should be hauled into jail? Of course not. Going over the speed limit means nothing unless there are police officers who are willing to pull you over for it. Until there are umpires willing to call out Nadal on his BS, he's going to continue to do it because it's a smart economic (more marginal utility vs less marginal cost) decision for him to do it. If your argument is that the umpires should be calling out time-wasting, then I agree with you. That's the problem. Not Nadal.

Anything else you like to mention is just gobbledygook.

 

[mellowyellow]

It was sweet to see Fed punish this crap with that resounding ace.

My buddy and I were texting back and forth. I told him I guarantee if this gets close again, Nadal is calling the trainer or taking a bathroom break. And he did not disappoint. It was patently obvious he was hoping to buy time to get the rain delay. He knew Fed was tightening up. The begging for the delay at 40-30 after Fed won the brutal 30-30 point at 5-4 was merely the cherry on top. Pathetic. Any man finishes that point.

I think the best solution is to allow mid-set bathroom breaks, injury TOs etc only before your own service game. Good solution whoever posted that earlier.

Its funny, because i remember a womens match where they would not allow a break because of the time frame of the second set. I thought they were against bathroom breaks at the end of sets especially when down a break of serve.

 

[Biscuitmcgriddleson]

Doesn't Roger take bathroom breaks in the middle of sets too?

In-between sets. A little bit different.

 

[OddJack]

How does this topic has anything to do with Justice, or Race?

Nadal didnt look like Nadal at all though, I have to say. But everytime he loses to Rodge he is not Nadal.
So, he was injured, right?
I wouldnt be surprised if he announces some injury tomorrow.

 

[dudeski]

There are some religions where this would be viewed as correct. If that's how the society functions, that's how it functions. To judge everything via your own values and morals is borderline racist. But that's a conversation for a different board.

I think umpires should call time wasting more often. But if they don't, then players aren't really in the wrong if they squeeze a few extra seconds out of it. If I were in charge, I would put a hard clock and penalize anyone who goes over it. That would stop the time wasting real quick.

I see, so cheating is part of Nadals moral and/or religious values. Nothing wrong with that just like there is nothing wrong with murdering your own sister to protect family honour as long it is in your moral and/or religious values. You make perfect sense. Thank you for enlightening me.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

How does this topic has anything to do with Justice, or Race?

It really doesn't, until someone made this asinine argument:

I see, so if in some country police doesn't care if you kill your sister to protect family honour after she had an afair then there is nothing wrong with that. Got it.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

I see, so cheating is part of Nadals moral and/or religious values. Nothing wrong with that just like there is nothing wrong with murdering your own sister to protect family honour as long it is in your moral and/or religious values. You make perfect sense. Thank you for enlightening me.

You're not the brightest crayon in the box, are you?

Yes, because I said Nadal's religion and moral values condone cheating. Yes, that's exactly what I said...

Straw man more, please. It's quite entertaining.

 

[DjokovicForTheWin]

Nadal might read this board and just invent an injury to make the Fed fans go crazy, no?

 

[TMF]

How does this topic has anything to do with Justice, or Race?

Nadal didnt look like Nadal at all though, I have to say. But everytime he loses to Rodge he is not Nadal.
So, he was injured, right?

I wouldnt be surprised if he announces some injury tomorrow.

It would be funny if he say he was sick, throw up, had a flu because of the virus.

 

[dudeski]

You're not the brightest crayon in the box, are you?

Yes, because I said Nadal's religion and moral values condone cheating. Yes, that's exactly what I said...

Straw man more, please. It's quite entertaining.

I know exactly what you meant. I am saying that just because the law enforcement decides to turn a blind eye it doesn't mean it's right to do something. My example with honour killing is that it is against the law in those countries but they turn a blind eye to it. It was an extreme example obviously but the point is valid. Also, stop being a nut defending people doing terrible things just because you feel like turning political correctness on its head.

 

[Talker]

It's not how long the break was but when he did it.
Nadal knows it can irritate a player and take him out of his game at times.

I've noticed Nadal will do whatever he can get away with to win.

Each time can be explained away by itself but when looking at all the times together the reasons are very clear that it's poor gamemanship.

 

[pvaudio]

It is a form of racism if you expect an outgroup (see the ingroup vs outgroup theory for racism) to conform to your ingroup standards, morals, and values. You have to judge situations based on how their cultural standards hold up.

If you're speeding on the highway and pull you over, you're breaking the law. Okay? I didn't say that Nadal wasn't breaking the rules, so you either like building straw men or talking to hear yourself talk. From a sociological perspective, what keeps you from going 85 mph in a 65 mph zone at 3 in the morning? Hegemony of the rules themselves. You respect the rules because of the possibility of being caught, even if that possibility is incredibly low. The nature of hegemony is that it can be very fluid. That is, if cops start cracking down on speeding, you'll see fewer and fewer people willing to go 85 mph in a 65 mph zone even at 3 in the morning.

Go on a major interstate highway and note the average speed. I'm willing to bet it's over the speed limit. Does that mean all of them should be hauled into jail? Of course not. Going over the speed limit means nothing unless there are police officers who are willing to pull you over for it. Until there are umpires willing to call out Nadal on his BS, he's going to continue to do it because it's a smart economic (more marginal utility vs less marginal cost) decision for him to do it. If your argument is that the umpires should be calling out time-wasting, then I agree with you. That's the problem. Not Nadal.

Anything else you like to mention is just gobbledygook.

You have the audacity to accuse me of using a straw man argument when your entire stance is based on something that you admit is fundamentally wrong. Should the umpires be calling it? Yes, we've established that. You're wrong, the problem is Nadal. Nadal is the problem because he's blatantly breaking the rules to his own benefit because he knows he won't get caught. This isn't about logic or rules: it's about character and respect for the game. In the doubles final at the USO, Petzchner got hit by a ball which went back over and won the point. He never owned up to it and the umpire did not call it. Clearly though, he was hit, and everyone saw it. Because the umpire did not notice or chose not to call it, it's okay to cheat then?

Do you realize that's what you're saying? It's okay to bend the rules to your advantage if you won't be caught? In many circles, that is known as cheating. It has nothing to do with right or wrong: it's obviously wrong. Whether you're caught or not has nothing to do with it either. It's the fact that you exploit the lax enforcement for personal gain that's wrong, and that's on the player. I honestly don't know what you're arguing here. Are you saying that it's okay for Nadal to blatantly break the rules simply because he's not being called on it?

 

[ChanceEncounter]

I know exactly what you meant. I am saying that just because the law enforcement decides to turn a blind eye it doesn't mean it's right to do something. My example with honour killing is that it is against the law in those countries but they turn a blind eye to it. It was an extreme example obviously but the point is valid.

Because the argument has nothing to do with what is "right" or "wrong." If it was truly a gentlemanly issue of what is "right" or "wrong" we would replay net cords because the point was decided by luck rather than skill.

Whether or not Nadal is "right" or "wrong" has nothing to do with whether or not Nadal benefits from doing it. He does. Why? Because the umpires never call him for it. That's the only reason he benefits from time-wasting. If the umpires called him for it, he would no longer benefit and I'd bet he stops doing it.

 

[abmk]

Why this urban legend being propagated by Fed fans themselves about that legal , non-disruptive bathroom break taken between sets in the Davy match is beyond me. Fed was back before the umpire called time so it is dumb to compare it with disruptive breaks taken *between* games in the middle of a set.

I agree. Fed was just joking about the break in his interview to Courier, but many took it seriously ..... Really ?

 

[ChanceEncounter]

You have the audacity to accuse me of using a straw man argument when your entire stance is based on something that you admit is fundamentally wrong. Should the umpires be calling it? Yes, we've established that. You're wrong, the problem is Nadal. Nadal is the problem because he's blatantly breaking the rules to his own benefit because he knows he won't get caught. This isn't about logic or rules: it's about character and respect for the game. In the doubles final at the USO, Petzchner got hit by a ball which went back over and won the point. He never owned up to it because the umpire did not call it. Clearly though, he was hit, and everyone saw it. Because the umpire did not notice or chose not to call it, it's okay to cheat then?

Do you realize that's what you're saying? It's okay to bend the rules to your advantage if you won't be caught? In many circles, that is known as cheating. It has nothing to do with right or wrong: it's obviously wrong. Whether you're caught or not has nothing to do with it either. It's the fact that you exploit the lax enforcement for personal gain that's wrong, and that's on the player. I honestly don't know what you're arguing here. Are you saying that it's okay for Nadal to blatantly break the rules simply because he's not being called on it?

I'm saying the blame doesn't lie with Nadal precisely because the umpires do a bad job enforcing the rule.

Whether or not you think it's "okay" to cheat is irrelevant. No one said Nadal was a golden boy or that he's of perfectly upright moral character. But the bottom line is, who's more at fault for the current environment where cheaters are not punished? Nadal, for being a cheater, or the umpires, for not punishing cheaters?

Obviously the latter is more to blame.

 

[pvaudio]

I'm saying the blame doesn't lie with Nadal precisely because the umpires do a bad job enforcing the rule.

Whether or not you think it's "okay" to cheat is irrelevant. No one said Nadal was a golden boy or that he's of perfectly upright moral character. But the bottom line is, who's more at fault for the current environment where cheaters are not punished? Nadal, for being a cheater, or the umpires, for not punishing cheaters?

Obviously the latter is more to blame.

Can you just not admit that your argument is ridiculous? I mean really, you're just arguing for the sake of it now. Who is more at fault? The cheater. How is there an argument? While it is the umpire's job to enforce the rules, it is the player's responsibility to adhere to the rules. I don't sit here and blame the umpire for Nadal's gamesmanship because he doesn't get called on it. I blame Nadal because he's so pathetic to do it in the first place.

 

[cork_screw]

Man, I don't know why I dislike Nadal so much. I think I have just more respect for roger's game maybe it has something to do with knowing that this guy is doing what nobody else is doing by winning more majors than anyone else, having 800+ career wins and going strong at the age of 30 while doing it with a 90 inch frame and hitting a one handed backhand. I mean I busted out the k90 the other day and felt like if somebody didn't tell me it was possible to compete on the pro tour with that challenging racquet and playing the old classic to modern style that I wouldn't believe it would be possible. I feel like it's like fighting with a wooden sword and still Federer uses that and a 1hbh and beats a beast like Nadal. Man, people need to give him more credit for a 30 year old to be beating all these younger guys. Watching him play looks like it takes so much precision and natural talent, whereas I just don't feel the same with Nadal.

 

[dudeski]

Man, I don't know why I dislike Nadal so much. I think I have just more respect for roger's game maybe it has something to do with knowing that this guy is doing what nobody else is doing by winning more majors than anyone else, having 800+ career wins and going strong at the age of 30 while doing it with a 90 inch frame and hitting a one handed backhand. I mean I busted out the k90 the other day and felt like if somebody didn't tell me it was possible to compete on the pro tour with that challenging racquet and playing the old classic to modern style that I wouldn't believe it would be possible. I feel like it's like fighting with a wooden sword and still Federer uses that and a 1hbh and beats a beast like Nadal. Man, people need to give him more credit for a 30 year old to be beating all these younger guys. Watching him play looks like it takes so much precision and natural talent, whereas I just don't feel the same with Nadal.

It's the butt picking, as well other OCDs with touch of creative cheating.

 

[ChanceEncounter]

Can you just not admit that your argument is ridiculous? I mean really, you're just arguing for the sake of it now. Who is more at fault? The cheater. How is there an argument? While it is the umpire's job to enforce the rules, it is the player's responsibility to adhere to the rules. I don't sit here and blame the umpire for Nadal's gamesmanship because he doesn't get called on it. I blame Nadal because he's so pathetic to do it in the first place.

Then you'd be blaming the vast majority of the tour, since there's a lot of time wasting. In fact, there's so much time wasting that you're actually at a disadvantage when you adhere to the 20/25 second rule.

There's nothing 'ridiculous' about pointing out that the umpires are more to blame for this epidemic. I'm sorry that you can't get that through your head.

 

[CMM]

I didn't see the match but from what I've read he didn't delay the play. If that's true, I don't see what's the problem.

 

[IvanisevicServe]

Nadal plays mind games, but I don't really care. That's not why Federer loses to him.

It's the frickin moon balls. Seriously, I think the reason it rained so much is the way Nadal was hitting the ball...think he hit the stratosphere a few times.

 

[Lsmkenpo]

I didn't see the match but from what I've read he didn't delay the play. If that's true, I don't see what's the problem.

His intent was to delay the the play but the umpire told him he had to make it fast. If the umpire didn't say that, he would still be in the can.

 

[Lsmkenpo]

I am pretty sure the warrior Nadal, was afflicted by the dreaded IW virus during the match, this is the only explanation for the loss.

The warrior reborn never loses a match unless he is playing on one leg or deathly ill.

 

[dh003i]

Football players don't get to say, "hold the play, I have to take a pee".

 

[dh003i]

It is a form of racism if you expect an outgroup (see the ingroup vs outgroup theory for racism) to conform to your ingroup standards, morals, and values. You have to judge situations based on how their cultural standards hold up.

Just shut up and stop bringing multi-cultural relativist garbage to a tennis discussion. I don't care what some multi-culturalist relativist says, murdering your sister because she "dishonored" your family is not ok, nor is stuff like female genital mutilation.`

 

[dh003i]

I see, so cheating is part of Nadals moral and/or religious values. Nothing wrong with that just like there is nothing wrong with murdering your own sister to protect family honour as long it is in your moral and/or religious values. You make perfect sense. Thank you for enlightening me.

His point is idiotic from top to bottom, which is to be expected because he is some kind of cultural relativists who apparently thinks ethical behaviour is a matter of opinion and is relative.

 

[dh003i]

Because the argument has nothing to do with what is "right" or "wrong." If it was truly a gentlemanly issue of what is "right" or "wrong" we would replay net cords because the point was decided by luck rather than skill.

Whether or not Nadal is "right" or "wrong" has nothing to do with whether or not Nadal benefits from doing it. He does. Why? Because the umpires never call him for it. That's the only reason he benefits from time-wasting. If the umpires called him for it, he would no longer benefit and I'd bet he stops doing it.

There are players who don't cheat even if the umpires wouldn't punish them for it.

 

[CMM]

I guess this was similar to RG last year when he called the trainer to remove the tape from his foot or something like that.
It had no effect on the match and it didn't delay the play, yet people (mostly Fetards) would start whining. Such sensitive people. :lol:

 

[Rozroz]

i don't remember ANY player taking toilet break between games.
BUT- if it's unbearable, either pipi or diarrhea, there's simply no other way.
if Nadal faked this though, he's a fu^&%ng arshole loser .

 

[Rozroz]

I guess this was similar to RG last year when he called the trainer to remove the tape from his foot or something like that.
It had no effect on the match and it didn't delay the play, yet people (mostly Fetards) would start whining. Such sensitive people. :lol:

Fed would Never do this on a 5-4 struggle 2nd set with almost raining conditions. it's called dignity (if you're talking about removing a tape).

 

[joeri888]

His point is idiotic from top to bottom, which is to be expected because he is some kind of cultural relativists who apparently thinks ethical behaviour is a matter of opinion and is relative.

You can call cultural relativism idiotic, but it just looks bad on yourself. While I wouldnt throw it into this discussion if I was that *******, and wont defend Nadal on the matter, cultural relativism is a fair and very defendable basic perspective on culture. It actually shows some unegocentrism (sorry for my english), and the ability to see things from another's point of view.

Many philosopher's, politicians and other great thinkers have taken a somewhat cultural relative view. That is not idiotic. At least not as idiotic as a totalitarian western perspective on the world and how other groups and cultures should shape their world. I wouldnt take a full cultural relativism approach myself, but understand the thoughts and appreciate its merits. You could do with a bit more balance in your view, you call a perspective idiotic very easily.

Anyway, this has nothing to do with Nadal. Nadal being a cheater is not unethical. He just plays a sport we all agreed rules upon. Nadal has committed himself to keep to them and to be a fair sport. If he isn't that's not unethical, but just unclassy and a cheater (because he decided to play this game and thus needs to follow its rules.

 

[monfed]

Gamesmanship? If anything, I must laud the Nadal for not spending too long on the throne, it was a pleasant surprise.

 

[SLD76]

Gamesmanship? If anything, I must laud the Nadal for not spending too long on the throne, it was a pleasant surprise.

Hmmm...I believe what he said:

His intent was to delay the the play but the umpire told him he had to make it fast. If the umpire didn't say that, he would still be in the can.

I think the umpire is the one to thank that the break was so quick.

 

[FlamEnemY]

Can you just not admit that your argument is ridiculous? I mean really, you're just arguing for the sake of it now. Who is more at fault? The cheater. How is there an argument? While it is the umpire's job to enforce the rules, it is the player's responsibility to adhere to the rules. I don't sit here and blame the umpire for Nadal's gamesmanship because he doesn't get called on it. I blame Nadal because he's so pathetic to do it in the first place.

There is a saying in my native language, it goes (kinda) like this:

It's not the one who steals the cake that is crazy, crazy is the one who lets him have it.

It is not exactly Nadal's fault that the rules aren't being enforced. He acts the exact same way other people would act. This doesn't make his... "tactics" any less questionable of course, but it's not a clear black-and-white situation.

 

[FlamEnemY]

Football players don't get to say, "hold the play, I have to take a pee".

But they dive like ballet dancers.

Unless you speak of American Football.

 

[monfed]

Hmmm...I believe what he said:



I think the umpire is the one to thank that the break was so quick.

I was being sarcastic.

 

[Magnus]

Nadal has ruined the sport. Yes, he can play great tennis alright, but he's a shamful figure and the biggest cheater in the history of tennis. Quite frankly, I don't understand how this guy isn't banned from the sport.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

He acts the exact same way other people would act. This doesn't make his... "tactics" any less questionable of course, but it's not a clear black-and-white situation.

The question is, would people with dignity und proper respect for the game do it on a regular basis, like he does? You chose your words very carefully, by not saying "the same way the other people would act".

 

[Magnus]

Doesn't Roger take bathroom breaks in the middle of sets too?

No, he took once AFTER the set was OVER, not in the middle of a set.

 

[Magnus]

Do you know how anti-Nadal this board is? This is just another lynch mob party.

Have you ever thought of why so many are anti-Nadal? Don't you think its possible that maybe, just maybe, people have a point about him being a cheater? Liking his game is one thing which I can get. But being blind to his shameful behavior is something I can't get. Even the commentators, which are the biggest Rafa ****s on earth, are starting to admit something very wrong is going on with this guy.

I mean, the guy got like, what, a 100 time warnings in his career? And he still doesn't care, he basically pi$$es on the umpire, the fans, and his opponent time after time. He's gotten to such a big place in his career that he allows himself to disrespect others and get away with that. Nadal is a horrible figure for kids who want to play tennis. They will think disrespecting others is fine, and crapping over the umpire is fine too.

 

[Magnus]

There is a saying in my native language, it goes (kinda) like this:

It's not the one who steals the cake that is crazy, crazy is the one who lets him have it.

It is not exactly Nadal's fault that the rules aren't being enforced. He acts the exact same way other people would act. This doesn't make his... "tactics" any less questionable of course, but it's not a clear black-and-white situation.

I'd agree with that if it wasn't for the fact Nadal gets plenty of warnings, almost in every match. Does he seem to care? No. He pi$$es on everyone else on his way to glory. He's pathetic, and his fans are even more pathetic for being so blind to this.

 

[Magnus]

Umpire is part of the blame for not taking action. However it's still a gamesmanship by Nadal since he abuses the rule when fully aware that it's a violation.

They are probably afraid of his stare. Who knows, the guy might be threatning them off court, I won't be surprised (for real). I'd like to see a umpire grow some balls and give him a point penalty.

 

[Rozroz]

oops, sorry Magnus. i think a confused you with Mustard, thinking you dig Nadal.