Kyrgios is denied a medical time out and yet Harrison is allowed to leave court to change clothes

[Aussie Darcy]

Spoilers for match result so exit if you don't want to know.

NICK Kyrgios’ displeasure at being denied a medical time-out on an injury he says could threaten his Australian Open campaign while his opponent was granted time to change clothes has been met with widespread support from fans.

On his way to beating Ryan Harrison of the USA to claim his first title on home soil and fourth of his career, Kyrgios stood aghast after tour supervisor Gerry Armstrong denied him the chance to have a medical time-out for treatment on the left knee which he has had taped for all four matches he played this week.

Rules state players are not granted medical time outs for pre-existing injuries, and this infuriated Kyrgios and fans alike.

“How is that a rule? That rule should be changed … it’s getting worse,’’ Kyrgios told Armstrong.

“What about a medical time-out? This is an injury which could keep me out of the Australian Open. Imagine how I feel.’’

After the first set, Kyrgios debated with chair umpire Fergus Murphy suggesting that Harrison should not have been allowed such a long break to go off court, while he waited in his courtside chair.

Harrison left to change his clothes, Kyrgios was unimpressed.

“I can’t take a medical time out for taping but he can have one for getting changed?” he said.

“How long can it possibly take? Eight minutes to get changed? It’s interesting, it doesn’t make sense.”

Fans voiced their support for Kyrgios.

I'm actually with Kyrgios on this one. What an insane rule that you can't get treatment for an existing issue. What would they rather, the player retire in the final or worsen their injury and miss multiple tournaments? Absurd, especially since Ryan was allowed to change off court which he could've done on court. Players can take fake MTO all the time and yet when someone needs it, they get denied? Ridiculous.

 

[BeatlesFan]

Ultimately it doesn't matter. Nick could beat Harrison from a hospital bed. Harrison belongs at the Challenger level.

 

[Sysyphus]

No MTOs for pre-existing injuries is a sensible rule.

Players entering tournaments while injured has clearly been a big problem on tour. This rule provides a small incentive against it, and then there's the issue of prize money.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

They are overdoing it now to be able to show leniency later, when Nadal needs additional rest or wants to play his little gamesmanship.

 

[Zebrev]

The umpires are afraid to give decisions for Kyrgios.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

No MTOs for pre-existing injuries is a sensible rule.

Players entering tournaments while injured has clearly been a big problem on tour. This rule provides a small incentive against it, and then there's the issue of prize money.

Well what if it's an injury sustained in a 1R match? I think it's absurd to deny a MTO yet allow players to change off court or have fake MTO after losing a set,

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Why did Harrison have to leave court to change clothes?

 

[tennisaddict]

Why did Harrison have to leave court to change clothes?

He wanted a full attire change

 

[Aussie Darcy]

He wanted a full attire change

Oh please, more so he could fix his head after being down a set/break. You can leave the court to get changed but can't ask for a medic for a clear injury. Absurd.

 

[SinjinCooper]

Is it a coincidence that Australia devolved from a world sporting powerhouse to a complete non-entity, as they devolved from a nation of rugged individualists into a nation of whiners?

 

[Bukmeikara]

How no one had a problem with changing clothes till now and from all of the people in the world, Kyrgios is the one that suddenly goes against it ... while injuried. Maybe he should try to improve his overall behavior and people would start listening what he is saying. As for now its just another episode byfrom the "little brat" from Australia.

For the record I am not saying that he is not right, more like the way he does it while again playing the injury card

 

[tennisaddict]

Oh please, more so he could fix his head after being down a set/break. You can leave the court to get changed but can't ask for a medic for a clear injury. Absurd.

Relax, I was just answering the question. Didn't say it was right or wrong.

Ultimately the rules have to be clear and consistently enforced. Unfortunately the bigger players get away with nonsense.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

Oh please, more so he could fix his head after being down a set/break. You can leave the court to get changed but can't ask for a medic for a clear injury. Absurd.

To look at this in a positive way Nick didnt make any drama about it.
Maybe he is finally manning up. It got better last year and now he seems as focused as ever. Good sign he doesnt let umpires and stupid rules get under his skin.

 

[Legend of Borg]

the real question is, how did grigolo lose that match...

 

[Aussie Darcy]

How no one had a problem with changing clothes till now and from all of the people in the world, Kyrgios is the one that suddenly goes against it ... while injuried. Maybe he should try to improve his overall behavior and people would start listening what he is saying. As for now its just another episode byfrom the "little brat" from Australia.

For the record I am not saying that he is not right, more like the way he does it while again playing the injury card

Uh..
If you knew anything about Kyrgios then you'd know that his injury is genuine and he's had it taped all week. I don't believe that he had a real big issue with him changing clothes off court, more that Harrison was allowed to do that and yet Kyrgios couldn't call a MTO for a genuine injury.

Not really sure how this is 'an episode'. He didn't swear or kick a fuss. People are quick to judge him and call him a brat. Pathetic really.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Relax, I was just answering the question. Didn't say it was right or wrong.

Ultimately the rules have to be clear and consistently enforced. Unfortunately the bigger players get away with nonsense.

I think we all know that tennis has a real problem with enforcing rules. This seems like one that needs changing anyway, can't believe they would rather a player worsen their injury and retire instead of letting them get treatment. Nobody wants that.

 

[Bukmeikara]

Not really sure how this is 'an episode'. He didn't swear or kick a fuss. People are quick to judge him and call him a brat. Pathetic really.

There is a reason why people think that of him. Every three months or so he is bragging about something while doing stupid things. He needs to get his act together, people need to see him in a different light for more than few months and maybe then they would threat him differently. Nobody like whinners, right or wrong

 

[tennisaddict]

There is a reason why people think that of him. Every three months or so he is bragging about something while doing stupid things. He needs to get his act together, people need to see him in a different light for more than few months and maybe then they would threat him differently. Nobody like whinners, right or wrong

This guy is just different. At 22, he has way more maturity than several other players who are 50, in some other areas.

He understands the concept of giving back more than many.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

There is a reason why people think that of him. Every three months or so he is bragging about something while doing stupid things. He needs to get his act together, people need to see him in a different light for more than few months and maybe then they would threat him differently. Nobody like whinners, right or wrong

None of that has anything to do with the topic on hand. Sure he's whiny whatever, he has a genuine injury and was denied a MTO whilst someone else was given 10 minutes to get changed after only one set. Pretty **** poor for the ATP to endanger the athletes and deny a MTO simply because it's an exisiting problem. No one in the crowd would've wanted him to retire. Makes no sense not to allow it. You can hate him, sure, but this doesn't make any sense.

 

[Sysyphus]

Well what if it's an injury sustained in a 1R match? I think it's absurd to deny a MTO yet allow players to change off court or have fake MTO after losing a set,

Ifs and buts.

In the case you are talking about here, Kyrgios played with a taped knee all week, so it's clearly something he entered the tournament with.

The clothing rule and MTO rule are two separate rules, and their usefulness should be therefore be treated separately as well. Is it reasonable to remove incentives for injured players to still enter tournaments? Yeah. Is it reasonable to allow players to go off court if they're going to change their full attire? Yeah. Can both rules be abused? Sure. But the principles behind both rules are fine, so this particular case seems like a non-issue.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Ifs and buts.

In the case you are talking you are talking about here, Kyrgios played with a taped knee all week, so it's clearly something he entered the tournament with.

The clothing rule and MTO rule are two separate rules, and their usefulness should be therefore be treated separately as well. Is it reasonable to remove incentives for injured players to still enter tournaments? Yeah. Is it reasonable to allow players to go off court if their going to change their full attire? Yeah. Can both rules be abused? Sure. But the principles behind both rules are fine, so this particular case seems like a non-issue.

Is it reasonable to deny someone medical treatment? No.

So they would rather he retires in the final, dissappointing the sold out crowd who paid hundreds of dollars instead of letting him treat it? Yeah, got it. Makes total sense and is definitely a 'non-issue'. All good for someone to go off court and get changed but heaven forbid you treat an injury.

 

[Sysyphus]

So they would rather he retires in the final, dissappointing the sold out crowd who paid hundreds of dollars instead of letting him treat it? Yeah, got it. Makes total sense and is definitely a 'non-issue'. All good for someone to go off court and get changed but heaven forbid you treat an injury. Real clear.

They would rather have a rule that doesn't encourage players into entering tournaments with pre-existing injuries that they're going to need treatment for.

Should they make special exceptions for Kyrgios perhaps?

 

[Deleted member 3771]

an 8 minute change of clothes is effectively a strategic time out. They need to do something about that.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

They would rather have a rule that doesn't encourage players into entering tournaments with pre-existing injuries that they're going to need treatment for.

Should they make special exceptions for Kyrgios perhaps?

You didn't answer the question, do you think it would be better having Kyrgios retire in the final, dissappointing all the paying fans, instead of giving him a medical time out? What do you think?

I'm saying this rule is ludicrous. Perhaps shouldn't be enforced so strongly just like the time spent between serves which players always get away with.

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

So they would rather he retires in the final, dissappointing the sold out crowd who paid hundreds of dollars instead of letting him treat it? Yeah, got it. Makes total sense and is definitely a 'non-issue'. All good for someone to go off court and get changed but heaven forbid you treat an injury. Real clear.

Tennis and all the rules are not perfect and sometimes **** happens. To keep focused through all challenges are so important.
I hope Nick continues doing that and he will win big.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Denying someone medical treatment seems ludicrous. Imagine preferring a player to retire in a final with the injury instead of treating them. Maybe Kyrgios should've claimed he was going to change his clothes and simply meet his physio in the 10 minute time period like Harrison got.

 

[Sysyphus]

You didn't answer the question, do you think it would be better having Kyrgios retire in the final, dissappointing all the paying fans, instead of giving him a medical time out? What do you think?

Because it's not a very interesting question. The rule isn't meant to be tailored to a single incident, but rather what's most sensible on a general basis. If a player has a pre-existing injury that won't let them complete a tournament, then they should perhaps not enter it in the first place.

 

[ADuck]

I don't like the poll options. Ultimately I have to pick no because as you put it - rules are rules. The rule is a rule therefore it must be enforced no matter what. There should be no leniency, however the issue is that the rule is stupid. Either keep it or remove it, there isn't any room for leniency. Having only 1 MTO per match is okay for any injury IMO. I don't see the logic in disallowing a player from treating pre-existing injury yet anything else is fine? Stupid rule.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Because it's not a very interesting question. The rule isn't meant to be tailored to a single incident, but rather what's most sensible on a general basis. If a player has a pre-existing injury that won't let them complete a tournament, then they should perhaps not enter it in the first place.

It's a legitimate question. Would you rather a player retire and dissapoint fans or would you rather they get medical treatment? The sensible option would be the medical treatment. Can't believe anyone would dare choose the player retiring.

Oh and Kyrgios had a pre existing injury, played and won so clearly you can do it.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

I don't like the poll options. Ultimately I have to pick no because as you put it - rules are rules. The rule is a rule therefore it must be enforced no matter what. There should be no leniency, however the issue is that the rule is stupid. Either keep it or remove it, there isn't any room for leniency. Having only 1 MTO per match is okay for any injury IMO. I don't see the logic in disallowing a player from treating pre-existing injury yet anything else is fine? Stupid rule.

Well no, because rules can be changed..
Anyway, Ican't change the poll options but I can add in additional ones. I can simply add 'yes' in if that works?

 

[Sysyphus]

It's a legitimate question. Would you rather a player retire and dissapoint fans or would you rather they get medical treatment? The sensible option would be the medical treatment. Can't believe anyone would dare choose the player retiring.

Oh and Kyrgios had a pre existing injury, played and won so clearly you can do it.

Would you rather have plenty of injured players entering tournaments, stink it up, retire mid-match in front of thousands of paying audience members, as we have seen in numerous slam matches last year; or, would you rather they gave their spots to those who are healthy enough to compete? The fewer incentives for injured players to enter draws, the better. That's the point of the rule.

 

[EloQuent]

why didn't nick just ask for a break to change clothes too, and tape the knee then?

 

[VaporDude95]

Relax, I was just answering the question. Didn't say it was right or wrong.

Ultimately the rules have to be clear and consistently enforced. Unfortunately the bigger players get away with nonsense.

Careful. AussieDarcy triggers easy

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Would you rather have plenty of injured players entering tournaments, stink it up, retire mid-match in front of thousands of paying audience members, as we have seen in numerous slam matches last year; or, would you rather they gave their spots to those who are healthy enough to compete? The fewer incentives for injured players to enter draws, the better. That's the point of the rule.

Or gee i don't know, perhaps don't be so black and white with the enforcement of it as they do with other rules such as time between points. Would've been a disaster if the match ended in his retirement because he couldn't get a MTO. The rule makes zero sense in this instance. As for the retiring rules, I believe the ATP have implemented something where if you retire in the 1R you miss out on half the prize money or something along those lines.

 

[ADuck]

Well no, because rules can be changed..
Anyway, Ican't change the poll options but I can add in additional ones. I can simply add 'yes' in if that works?

It's okay, I won't cry over a poll, I just felt my answer wasn't represented by either option but that's why I decided to comment instead. My point is that leniency cannot be afforded for a rule. If you think it can be, how so? And in what situations are suitable?

 

[Aussie Darcy]

It's okay, I won't cry over a poll, I just felt my answer wasn't represented by either option but that's why I decided to comment instead. My point is that leniency cannot be afforded for a rule. If you think it can be, how so? And in what situations are suitable?

Well I don't see why a player shouldn't be allowed a MTO for an existing injury. I see where Sys is coming from about players entering who are injure and just want prize money but that doesn't quite fit into those who are healthy enough to compete but may need to strap a knee or have something small done. I believe there already are rules about players entering simply for prize money and that's a different issue. Denying medical treatment seems inhumane.

 

[Sysyphus]

Or gee i don't know, perhaps don't be so black and white with the enforcement of it as they do with other rules such as time between points. Would've been a disaster if the match ended in his retirement because he couldn't get a MTO.

Yes. Encourage completely inconsistent application of rules, and make special exemptions for players who are box office. Not like inconsistency isn't the number one critique of the time violation rule as it is.

 

[ADuck]

Well I don't see why a player shouldn't be allowed a MTO for an existing injury. I see where Sys is coming from about players entering who are injure and just want prize money but that doesn't quite fit into those who are healthy enough to compete but may need to strap a knee or have something small done. I believe there already are rules about players entering simply for prize money and that's a different issue. Denying medical treatment seems inhumane.

But to what degree do MTO's treat an injury? Can it be taping at most? I've only ever seen MTO's been used for rubs or tape or minor things that alleviates pain/stress. So if your form of leniency is to allow these minor things, what exactly is disallowed?

 

[ADuck]

Yes. Encourage completely inconsistent application of rules, and make special exemptions for players who are box office. Not like inconsistency isn't the number one critique of the time violation rule as it is.

Dude. Apples and oranges.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Yes. Encourage completely inconsistent application of rules, and make special exemptions for players who are box office. Not like inconsistency isn't the number one critique of the time violation rule as it is.

Or yknow, just scrap the rule and implement a different rule that means players who retire in the 1R just for prize money have it reduced to half which I believe they already have done. This prevents your issue as you said and also means that players aren't denied the basic human right to medical treatment. Seems pretty good hey? Can't believe anyone would think being denied medical treatment is ok. This rule is absurd. Clearly needs to be rectified.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

But to what degree do MTO's treat an injury? Can it be taping at most? I've only ever seen MTO's been used for rubs or tape or minor things that alleviates pain/stress. So if your form of leniency is to allow these minor things, what exactly is disallowed?

I'm not neccesarily suggesting anything be disallowed. Scrap the rule and allow MTO's just like they are for players who get injured during the match. Sure there'll be issues but surely it's better then denying someone medical treatment?

 

[TheGhostOfAgassi]

I'm not neccesarily suggesting anything be disallowed. Scrap the rule and allow MTO's just like they are for players who get injured during the match. Sure there'll be issues but surely it's better then denying someone medical treatment?

Didnt players w excisting injuries get mtos in wimbledon? Thought that happened all the time. Thought fedal done that for back and knee too.

And the changing clothes thing should go.

 

[Sysyphus]

Or yknow, just scrap the rule and implement a different rule that means players who retire in the 1R just for prize money have it reduced to half which I believe they already have done. This prevents your issue as you said and also means that players aren't denied the basic human right to medical treatment. Seems pretty good hey? Can't believe anyone would think being denied medical treatment is ok. This rule is absurd. Clearly needs to be rectified.

LMFAO. No one is denying injured players to not enter tournaments and instead treat their already existing injuries.

Yes. They also have taken other steps to reduce incentives for injured players to enter tournaments. How on earth is that an argument that they should go in the opposite direction with this rule? That'd be nonsensical.

Anyways, I realize I should've left this pointless exercise some 3–4 replies ago, but better late than never.

 

[N01E]

Because it's not a very interesting question. The rule isn't meant to be tailored to a single incident, but rather what's most sensible on a general basis. If a player has a pre-existing injury that won't let them complete a tournament, then they should perhaps not enter it in the first place.

Using this logic, we should ban all MTOs.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

LMFAO. No one is denying injured players to not enter tournaments and instead treat their already existing injuries.

Yes. They also have taken other steps to reduce incentives for injured players to enter tournaments. How on earth is that an argument that they should go in the opposite direction with this rule? That'd be nonsensical.

Anyways, I realize I should've left this pointless exercise some 3–4 replies ago, but better late than never.

They are denying players treatment for an injury simply because it was pre existing... they would rather a player retire instead of offer medical treatment. Isn't your argument that lifting this rule will mean injured players enter draws but pull out? I'm countering that by saying that's untrue, there's rules that already prevent that. The only thing this rule does is stop players from getting medical treatment so getting rid of it will mean players can get treatment and have lesser retirements. Tonight could've gone a lot worse and had Kyrgios retire and a crowd of fans dissapointed all because of this dumb rule.

 

[Sysyphus]

Using this logic, we should ban all MTOs.

That's a non-sequitur if there ever was one.

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Didnt players w excisting injuries get mtos in wimbledon? Thought that happened all the time. Thought fedal done that for back and knee too.

And the changing clothes thing should go.

Not sure. I never knew this was a thing until tonight. Am I meant to believe that Djokovic/Stan/Murray wouldn't be allowed MTO's at upcoming tournaments/slams based on their existing injuries? Yeah right.

 

[The Fedfather]

Or yknow, just scrap the rule and implement a different rule that means players who retire in the 1R just for prize money have it reduced to half which I believe they already have done. This prevents your issue as you said and also means that players aren't denied the basic human right to medical treatment. Seems pretty good hey? Can't believe anyone would think being denied medical treatment is ok. This rule is absurd. Clearly needs to be rectified.

Why ask a question if you've already made up your mind and don't want to hear any opinion that is different from yours?

 

[Aussie Darcy]

Why ask a question if you've already made up your mind and don't want to hear any opinion that is different from yours?

Cause I do want to hear other opinions? Didn't realise I couldn't debate or respond.

This is a discussion forum after all...

 

[Red Rick]

Ultimately it doesn't matter. Nick could beat Harrison from a hospital bed. Harrison belongs at the Challenger level.

The ATP ranking disagrees with you. This just sounds butthurt.

That's not to say Kyrgios isn't 100% right here. He is.