AngieB
Banned
I was unaware that grunting was the leading cause of stabbing in #Europe. Travel to #Europe used to be somewhat enjoyable. I thought those little cars were cute.
#AngiesLyst
LMAO Nadal 100% time violations
- Thread starter SpicyCurry1990
- Start date
I was unaware that grunting was the leading cause of stabbing in #Europe. Travel to #Europe used to be somewhat enjoyable. I thought those little cars were cute.
No he didnt passed the limit every single point ı watched the match was very careful about it. Even what you say show how FİSHY this rule is. So Why did umpire gave the time violation in the critical moments Why wait for that moment if he was over the time before.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
tio... what is this sport they're talking about in da book?
you're just an evil hater !
so... we should remove the umpires... now the rules...... what's next ?
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Before the stabbing somehow grunting was the main discussion among the tennis world. How Seles cheated and distracted her opponents because of the grunt.She couldnt even play a normal match in 1992 Wimbledon final because of that.
AngieB
Banned
I've yet to see the correlation between a player taking his time before points and making the game less enjoyable to watch. If that were the case, then grinding, defensive tennis matches greater than 4 hours shouldn't be allowed. I guess the ATP/WTA/ITF never thought about that before changing court surfaces and the tennis balls.
The only disgruntled fans/players are those from fan bases not allied to #Rafael's. The argument is political in nature with a whif of jealously and fanboyism.
#Rafael isn't and shouldn't change the way he plays tennis based upon whining observers. There are some who will never accept that #Rafael dominated #Roger and #Norvak in ITF-Sanctioned grand slam events and wield "time violations" as a weapon against #Rafael. It won't change history. Nothing can turn back the #timeclock and change the fact #Rafael dominated them went it counted. Yet, we see dozens of these types of threads which provide endless whining and bellowing for naught. Nothing will change. #Nothing.
#AngiesLyst
Boom-Boom
Legend
tio... what is this sport they're talking about in da book?
you're just an evil hater !
so... we should remove the umpires... now the rules...... what's next ?
Where is Carlos Bernardes ???????????!
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I know it because I got really curious about what was really going on a few months back. I started timing from the exact moment the last point was over, not knowing when the ump was starting the clock. Now I'm told that the clock starts when the ump enters the score. So I've tried that. But I've developed a pretty good sense of the interval now, so when it seems obvious that someone is over, I rewind to the point that I hear the score. Better is from the point where you see the ump enter, but we don't always see that.
They all go over a couple times per set at least because they walk up to check marks, question calls (argue), and that takes time. Obviously the umps are not watching the clock when that happens. Then there is crowd noise. Finally really long points, especially on very hot days, need more recovery time. EVERY player will take extra time after them.
As for a grand conspiracy against Nadal, I think realistically he the slowest by far of the top players. But not by as much as people assume. Try timing Novak and Murray on their slow points. They definitely go over.
- Player A should be allowed to serve from anywhere on his side of the court. It is his side afterall - He can do whatever he pleases. Any rules to the contrary are stupid/ridiculous, and should be removed.
- The concept of a ball being "long" should be abolished in case of player A. There is no long or short ball - only a tennis ball. The court dimensions will be automatically adjusted for every point to ensure that player A's balls are never called "long" (repeat rule by replacing "long" with "wide"). This way, we can have good tennis that can extend the point to 1000 rallies. The point stops when the opponent of player A drops dead or concedes the point by hitting to the net.
- If player A adjusts his shorts stuck in his rear, player B should do the same, in the interest of fairness. Otherwise, it may lead to arm chair experts on various tennis boards picking on/expressing outrage on just player A. Might even lead to conspiracy theories aimed against player A.
(keep 'em coming
)
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
That is too funny. Not even once? Wow. To be fair to Rafa, I think the ATP 25 seconds would be more fair to have - but then as a strict rule that's actually enforced
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
tio... what is this sport they're talking about in da book?
you're just an evil hater !
so... we should remove the umpires... now the rules...... what's next ?
Your posts are pure entertainment. Rafa's face there is priceless! LOL
rh310
Hall of Fame
She seems to take a particular, weird pleasure out of attempting to goad people.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
I think ALL foot faults should be called. The problem is that so far there is no challenge for that in the system.
You seem to think a lot of them are not called. That is possible. It's also possible that sometimes a foot fault is called when it just looked like there was one. Not too long ago someone called a foot fault, and the commentators could not see it on replay and said that the person who called it could not possibly have seen the foot touch the line.
I saw the match, but it is recorded. I'll time the serve in the 4th set. If you are right, I'll tell you.
See, you were able to develop a sense of time by just watching the match, with some practice. Why can't Nadal do the same - he's actually playing the match!
In any case, I don't fully understand your position, and it feels we're discussing different aspects of this "incident". I'd like for uniform enforcing of rules, but it is not that important in my opinion. I'd like to believe that umpires already cut a lot of slack, within bounds of reason. Only the worst offenders get called out.
I don't care for the appropriateness of timing either. If you abuse the rule consistently, then you will be penalized more often than others, who don't do it consistently.
Analogous to over speeding consistently - you may not get caught always; but you're more likely to get caught than some one who rarely speeds. I hate the whining that follows if such a rule is enforced because it does not suit beloved Nadal's style of play. Too bad - Nadal shouldn't do the crime if he can't do the time.
rh310
Hall of Fame
Heck, we don't have to imagine it.
He's not taking 40+ seconds after EVERY point any more, and we see the impact: He's a routine top 20 player that loses regularly to guys he owned when he got away with playing "his" way.
Without this bending of the rules to suit his particular strengths, he's got 7-8 GS titles and his H2H ratios are back in the normal range.
AngieB
Banned
It should be:
#welcometomyignorelistuntiligetcuriousaboutwhatyouaresayingaboutme.
I know, #right?
I've never placed anyone on an ignore list because I've never been so #emotionally involved in a discussion group that I felt it would warrant ignoring anyone. I've never been so emotionally damaged that I felt compelled to strike their words from my computer screen. Folks like that I enjoyed playing tennis against. They were beat before they walked onto the court.
I remember during my junior days when Carolyn used to complain a lot about other players on-court habits to me. I never understood why she felt compelled to tell me this information other than common gossip because we were only acquaintances. She was in Margene and Sarah's clique. They were the girls who always talked about everyone else. Knowing this information, anytime I played her, I would always make it a habit of tapping the top of my racquet onto the court three times before she served. Not only was I giving Carolyn something else to gossip about, but it also served as a distraction for her while playing.
Suffice to say, in the spirit of competition and individual sport, it is prudent to seek and search for your opponents weaknesses to give you an advantage. Loose lips sinks ships.
#AngiesLyst
Hollywood401k
Semi-Pro
It's bad for players that there is a difference between how much time Slams and the ATP allow between points.
It's bad for viewers that aces and faults have the same time allowance after the point as 30 shot rallies.
It's bad for everyone that the time rule is quite likely the most inconsistently enforced rule in tennis.
It's bad for viewers that aces and faults have the same time allowance after the point as 30 shot rallies.
It's bad for everyone that the time rule is quite likely the most inconsistently enforced rule in tennis.
Chanwan
G.O.A.T.
this is surely it!
(in all seriousness, I do think it has helped him swing some tight matches in his favor over the years. But 7 slams? Not quite).
Bukmeikara
Legend
Its imposible to measure. For example if Federer didnt win Wimbledon 03 he probably wouldnt had the confidence to do the things he did after that. Bigger the win, bigger the confidence boost. For example if Roger defeated Nadal at Rome in 06 their story could have been a lot different. But there is really no point to disscuss something like that, we shouldnt live in the past.
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
- Player A should be allowed to serve from anywhere on his side of the court. It is his side afterall - He can do whatever he pleases. Any rules to the contrary are stupid/ridiculous, and should be removed.
- The concept of a ball being "long" should be abolished in case of player A. There is no long or short ball - only a tennis ball. The court dimensions will be automatically adjusted for every point to ensure that player A's balls are never called "long" (repeat rule by replacing "long" with "wide"). This way, we can have good tennis that can extend the point to 1000 rallies. The point stops when the opponent of player A drops dead or concedes the point by hitting to the net.
- If player A adjusts his shorts stuck in his rear, player B should do the same, in the interest of fairness. Otherwise, it may lead to arm chair experts on various tennis boards picking on/expressing outrage on just player A. Might even lead to conspiracy theories aimed against player A.
(keep 'em coming
LOLz!!!
This one was too good.
rh310
Hall of Fame
I just don't see him making as many finals, and not winning as many of the ones he did make.
We agree it's nothing like the 14 he has now, I think.
vive le beau jeu !
Talk Tennis Guru
don't worry, don't worry... he's alright: he's "on holidays" on a remote paradisiac island (along with groquick and jar jar binks).
actually, he was graciously invited to spend some time in the "nadal holiday resort" (built by the nadal tax evasion charity foundation to help the poor children of the world).
so as we speak, he's probably having lots of fun there, all this thanks to the generosity of the nadal mafiamily !
i'm sure he'll send us a postcard soon !
D
Deleted member 77403
Guest
don't worry, don't worry... He's alright: He's "on holidays" on a remote paradisiac island (along with groquick and jar jar binks).
actually, he was graciously invited to spend some time in the "nadal holiday resort" (built by the nadal tax evasion charity foundation to help the poor children of the world).
So as we speak, he's probably having lots of fun there, all this thanks to the generosity of the nadal mafiamily !
i'm sure he'll send us a postcard soon !
lol!!!!
chrischris
G.O.A.T.
Perfect idea.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
It totally agree about the game becoming a grinding game. SV players are disappearing faster than quite a few species.
There are a number of players I just can't watch because of the grinding unless they are playing someone with a very contrasting style. I can never feel the same way about Serena as felt about Martina, for instance, and way back when Evert was playing her back court game. I'm fine watching Fed play against Novak, Rafa or Murray because there is a contrast. But watching any of the other three play against each other is less interesting to me.
That's the way it works around here, AngieB. Those of us who are making valid points get confused with the fan fanatics.
I would like to see slow play eliminated in the future. I think it got totally out of control.
But I don't like the way the ATP and ITF are trying to change things, and setting the timing to 5 seconds FASTER in slams is insane. And there are better times to give warnings than on a break point at the end of what could be the deciding set.
My point: I would not like to see ANY champion interrupted this way, losing second serve, break point, potentially at the end of a match. That's why Courier said it is upsetting players and fans. I agree with him.
Nadal is a cheat with no class, always has been. It amazes me how every year his cheating and disrespect gets even more blatant, and he truly believes he deserves special treatment.
Remember this is the same guy who wanted illegal coaching by Uncle Toni to be allowed for him.
Remember this is the same guy who wanted illegal coaching by Uncle Toni to be allowed for him.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
If they were measuring for 25 seconds it would have been different. That's the insanity of it all.
SpicyCurry1990
Hall of Fame
The graphic was posted on the last point of the 3rd set (when Nadal got the penalty) so its possible in the 4th set that 100% could have dipped down, but for the first 3 sets ya 100% lol.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
My position is that I do not trust the motives of people, neither the players nor the umps. I'm very suspicious. I know that Nadal can play faster. I don't know what it would do for his results. He's a very OCD kind of guy. I'm not really good with change myself. I understand comfort in rituals.
So maybe it's a game. Maybe it's gamesmanship. Or maybe it is a purely OCD thing, and he really can't help it.
But I'm sure of one thing: if he is going to change, even a little, the boundaries need to be firm and consistent. No one can be consistent with this rule, as it is.
The reason I don't trust the umps is that we can't see what they are doing. It's the opposite of transparency.
I think what I object to is that things are not making sense. I was mostly OK with the the ATP 25 second rule. I think it needs to be applied more evenly.
But when I saw that Sock was over 66% of the time, that was just wrong, because it implies that he was playing slowly, and I don't think he was.
The Green Mile
Bionic Poster
Yeah, I agree. 100% is quite a lot.
Its the Umps fault for allowing it. They should call him on each point it happens, and that would fix things.
chjtennis
G.O.A.T.
I remember what Courier used to say about what to do as an opponent of Nadal. "Don't step onto the court before Rafa. Take your time and make him wait. Don't play into his game" Maybe Jim gave the same advice to his countrymen.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
And yet you want the whole game interrupted by the noise of a shot clock?
No one set the time faster in Slams. The ATP set the time slower in their events.
Two different organisations have two different sets of rules. Hardly surprising if a little annoying.
At the more crucial times of the match, the more likely slow play will become slower.
If the loss of a point were to effect a player at a crucial time of the match then if it were a serial time violator then who has any right to complain?
No one set the time faster in Slams. The ATP set the time slower in their events.
Two different organisations have two different sets of rules. Hardly surprising if a little annoying.
At the more crucial times of the match, the more likely slow play will become slower.
If the loss of a point were to effect a player at a crucial time of the match then if it were a serial time violator then who has any right to complain?
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
Who said it has to make noise? I want to see the time.
I checked timing in Nadal's game, so for the record: after "the incident" he was around 20 seconds or under when I starting timing the moment the score was announced. That seems reasonable to me. But I never saw the ump start anything at that time. So I still do not know when he was timing from. I'll check later for times earlier than that. I would estimate that Sock was about 5 seconds faster, on average, so to me that makes it ridiculous that he was playing over 20 seconds 66% of the time unless those stats came from the moment the ball hit the court at the end of the previous point.
But that would be absurd because there is at least a difference of up to 10 seconds from point to point for when the score is called out. That is dependent on crowd noise.
When did the ITF set the 20 second limit? When did the ATP set the 25 second limit?
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
The ATP 'crackdown' dates from a September 2012 rule change for 2013, but the 25 second rule is obviously earlier than that.
You want to verify the time taken but most people want what the rule states: continuous play.
A short sharp shock, repeated if necessary, is enough to achieve it.
You want to verify the time taken but most people want what the rule states: continuous play.
A short sharp shock, repeated if necessary, is enough to achieve it.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
There is no such thing as continuous play. It's all about how discontinuous it is, based on the individual style of the player.
Interesting read about vote on 25 second rule in 2013!
http://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2013...res-have-lost-their-value/46743/#.VW0VX0f3arU
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Continuous play is a norm based on a rule, not a fact, so play can indeed be continuous.
If everyone played like Federer and Kokkinakis the rule would be redundant, which it probably was until baseline grinding made its appearance.
A history of the rule would be a useful and interesting thing.
If everyone played like Federer and Kokkinakis the rule would be redundant, which it probably was until baseline grinding made its appearance.
A history of the rule would be a useful and interesting thing.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
The Grand Slams employ a 20-second time-between-points rule, but tell the umpires to be flexible with it; time violations are rarely called.
There's your problem. And I'm sure this flexibility is spelt out even more in private.
Nadal obviously crossed some sort of red line that is never spelt out yesterday.
In any event, the penalty is trivial. Nadal lost one first serve. So there's no injustice here.
Except for the spectators who have to endure this endless delay.
We really don't need transparence, however, we just need 'continuous play'.
There's your problem. And I'm sure this flexibility is spelt out even more in private.
Nadal obviously crossed some sort of red line that is never spelt out yesterday.
In any event, the penalty is trivial. Nadal lost one first serve. So there's no injustice here.
Except for the spectators who have to endure this endless delay.
We really don't need transparence, however, we just need 'continuous play'.
Gary Duane
G.O.A.T.
No, nothing is continuous if there are various things things that stop the action, and there are 100s of tiny things that stop action in every match. Unless each player immediately walks to the line and serves without bouncing a ball, nothing is continuous.
When players play without lines people, they have to retrieve balls after every point. Obviously they have people to do that for them, but the still have to get the balls. Then even people like Fed check marks. That's not continuous. Or they decide something is wrong, tie shoes, adjust things. That's not continuous. Fed walked over to get another racket when his racket was not broken.
Are you that young? There was nothing continuous in tennis in the Connors/McEnroe days.
That I WOULD like to see. I would like to know exactly when a certain number of seconds interval was established as something that could cause a violation. The Aussies in the late 60s all played fast. As I remember it it was the Americans in the 70s who changed it. That's when you started seeing drama, cry babies and serious gamesmanship.
I do look at the pace of Fed and other quicker players as ideal. That's the one thing I think I agree with you about. But I think the pace of Novak, Andy and Nadal went on for so long that it is now very difficult to curb.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
Continuous play is a norm-defined practice, so you confuse norms with facts.
There were no Connors/McEnroe days, this is just your unreliable memory of them.
The rule requires some thought and readjustment from the player, but Nadal refuses to make it.
So he's a cheat.
Djokovic cut his 30 ball bounce routine back to around 13, so he did make an effort to change.
Time violation that is episodic, due to mark checking or noise, is not a problem. Some simply refuse to comply with a well-known rule.
That's the problem.
There were no Connors/McEnroe days, this is just your unreliable memory of them.
The rule requires some thought and readjustment from the player, but Nadal refuses to make it.
So he's a cheat.
Djokovic cut his 30 ball bounce routine back to around 13, so he did make an effort to change.
Time violation that is episodic, due to mark checking or noise, is not a problem. Some simply refuse to comply with a well-known rule.
That's the problem.
The spectators were not booing Nadal over the time he took. In fact they booed the umpire for making the call.
You act like viewers are upset, when they are not, or we would hear the same catcalls that Fans give to those that come late and disrupt a player serving.
Bartelby
Bionic Poster
The umpire always appears as the devil when it comes to this rule, but so what?
Time wasting is not something that is ever appealing to viewers.
It's just not at the forefront of their minds when a time violation warning surprises them.
Nadal is a cheat for the simple reason that he refuses to trim his pre-serve ritual to come within the rule.
Time wasting is not something that is ever appealing to viewers.
It's just not at the forefront of their minds when a time violation warning surprises them.
Nadal is a cheat for the simple reason that he refuses to trim his pre-serve ritual to come within the rule.
winstonplum
Hall of Fame
Truer words have never been spoken. The amount of denial, suppression, transference, and general psychosis amongst the Fed kiddies is truly mind-boggling. The entire lot needs a field trip to a psychiatrist's office and needs to stay there until they can get a grip on themselves.
