Nadal unhappy over Wimbledon roof closure

[Federer and Del Potro]

Yes, like that. Does that mean Nadal loses the right to feel upset over being disadvantaged at any given match at Wimbledon/USO? What standards are you holding him to? He's not a robot.

And BTW, when I say he was disadvantaged I don't mean that it was unfair to close the roof. Just that as Djokovic is a better indoors player, Nadal was, in fact, disadvantaged in these conditions.

Roof was only closed for lack of light though, correct? And the rules have been floated around here already, that it finishes how it starts unless both players agree to change it (I believe).

It all balances out in my opinion. Maybe RAFA was due for some bad luck after all of the fortunate rain delays he got whenever he was pushed in the CC season.

 

[The Fedfather]

Anything else is just sour grapes. Fed/Nadal can be pretty sore losers...we don't have to pretend they aren't/don't act petty sometimes.

I agree if you complain about court conditions then you can't complain about Nadal complaining about them. But you can still call him a sour loser. I'll call him one, because I can't recall a single time I've blamed court conditions for why Federer lost a match. And they weren't why Nadal lost today. He got out-clutched, especially in the 3rd and 5th sets.

Explaining why he thinks the roof shouldn't have been closed is not complaining.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Explaining why he thinks the roof shouldn't have been closed is not complaining.

Sure it is, he's complaining about a rule already well established. It wasn't like something was abused.

Even if his points are valid, which a lot of Federer's are when he complains post losses, it's always going to come off as sour grapes.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

If Federer had said "I should have been on CC" I'd have called him a complainer too.

 

[The Fedfather]

Roof was only closed for lack of light though, correct? And the rules have been floated around here already, that it finishes how it starts unless both players agree to change it (I believe).

It all balances out in my opinion. Maybe RAFA was due for some bad luck after all of the fortunate rain delays he got whenever he was pushed in the CC season.

I just agree with Rafa that it wasn't logical to close the roof the next day. The rule doesn't make much sense for a match that stretches over 2 days.

Yes, I think so too. I was rooting for Djokovic and glad that he's won. My problem is people vilifying Nadal for experiencing emotions.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

I just agree with Rafa that it wasn't logical to close the roof the next day. The rule doesn't make much sense for a match that stretches over 2 days.

Yes, I think so too. I was rooting for Djokovic and glad that he's won. My problem is people vilifying Nadal for experiencing emotions.

Think it's about the timing more than anything. Kind of like Federer post 2011 USO. Most of what he said was true, but in that context and the timing it just came off as sour grapes.

Nadal definitely had his chances to win either Set 3 or 5 and thus the match. His serve was helped out by the roof (so was Djokers) and his ball striking was super clean.

It just gets a little weird when people try to use the roof as the end all be all of how matches are decided. Yes, it helped Djokovic. But there are plenty of surfaces that help Nadal too. And the next major is one such one.

He has a great chance of winning the USO.

 

[mellowyellow]

I just agree with Rafa that it wasn't logical to close the roof the next day. The rule doesn't make much sense for a match that stretches over 2 days.

Yes, I think so too. I was rooting for Djokovic and glad that he's won. My problem is people vilifying Nadal for experiencing emotions.

Interested, did they actually open it last night even though they would close it first thing? Or did it stay closed?

 

[The Fedfather]

Think it's about the timing more than anything. Kind of like Federer post 2011 USO. Most of what he said was true, but in that context and the timing it just came off as sour grapes.

Nadal definitely had his chances to win either Set 3 or 5 and thus the match. His serve was helped out by the roof (so was Djokers) and his ball striking was super clean.

It just gets a little weird when people try to use the roof as the end all be all of how matches are decided. Yes, it helped Djokovic. But there are plenty of surfaces that help Nadal too. And the next major is one such one.

He has a great chance of winning the USO.

Now that weird when you consider how close the match was and how much Djokovic is better than Nadal indoors.

Nope, this one is for Roger.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Now that weird when you consider how close the match was and how much Djokovic is better than Nadal indoors.

Nope, this one is for Roger.

Old Djokovic yes, but this is still the Djokovic trying to recapture his best self. Old Djokovic probably wins this match in 3-4 sets given his million BP's he squandered.

This is the biggest win Djokovic has had in yrs and the most mentally tough he has been in yrs as well.

I honestly thought Nadal had it in the 5th

 

[The Fedfather]

Interested, did they actually open it last night even though they would close it first thing? Or did it stay closed?

No idea.

 

[The Fedfather]

Old Djokovic yes, but this is still the Djokovic trying to recapture his best self. Old Djokovic probably wins this match in 3-4 sets given his million BP's he squandered.

This is the biggest win Djokovic has had in yrs and the most mentally tough he has been in yrs as well.

I honestly thought Nadal had it in the 5th

That's probably why he feels that with the roof open he would've won.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

That's probably why he feels that with the roof open he would've won.

Fair point, and probably true. You'll drive yourself crazy with the what ifs though . Like what if Federer had won that BP in the 5th in 08 or 14 Wimby finals

Slam race is still very much online. Still feels like Federer needs more if he wants to put Nadal away for good.

So still a net positive for Nadal fans. Nadal didn't win, but neither did Fed.

 

[Poisoned Slice]

Nadal better vote democrat.

 

[Federer and Del Potro]

Nadal better vote democrat.

Federer needs to vote Democrat on BP's and MP's

 

[The Fedfather]

Fair point, and probably true. You'll drive yourself crazy with the what ifs though . Like what if Federer had won that BP in the 5th in 08 or 14 Wimby finals

Slam race is still very much online. Still feels like Federer needs more if he wants to put Nadal away for good.

So still a net positive for Nadal fans. Nadal didn't win, but neither did Fed.

Yep, agree with everything you said.

It's nice to have convo's like these instead of the constant fighting over whose GOAT is bigger. Though I enjoy that too.

 

[DRII]

Oh like how they slowed down Wimbledon/USO already which favored guys like RAFA?

Even Laver said RAFA would struggle on the old Wimbledon grass.


He had innumerable chances to win, roof or not. Just like Federer should have won on Court 1 (Which I didn't complain about).

Anything else is just sour grapes. Fed/Nadal can be pretty sore losers...we don't have to pretend they aren't/don't act petty sometimes.

I agree if you complain about court conditions then you can't complain about Nadal complaining about them. But you can still call him a sour loser. I'll call him one, because I can't recall a single time I've blamed court conditions for why Federer lost a match. And they weren't why Nadal lost today. He got out-clutched, especially in the 3rd and 5th sets.

Federer never won Wimbledon on old grass!

thus he 'struggled' on it!

get it straight, and don't forget it.

 

[DRII]

Nadal better vote democrat.

stupidest post ever...

 

[Bartelby]

They slowed Wimbledon grass because it became a serve-fest, as we saw on Friday, and its slowing has certainly favoured clay-courters.

I think though that the official reason they give for the change is durability.

 

[Deleted member 756486]

stupidest post ever...

That’s ironic coming from you.

 

[Sentinel]

13 reasons why Nadal lost ...

1. Roof: He doesn't want to talk about it to distract from Novak's victory, but will tell you he doesn't want to talk about it so you'll talk about it instead.
2. Schedulers having the audacity to put the boring match on first as opening act.
3. Injuries probably, but we can talk about that later once Nadal's camp decides what they are to pull out of summer hard-court events.
4. Draw fixed to put Djokovic on his side. Diego Schwartzmann would have been more fair semifinal opponent for Rafa since they are both clay specialists.
5. Grass: Not fair world's most prestigious tennis tournament is always played on grass. Mix up with clay sometimes, no?
6. Novak's ball-bouncing: His time-wasting interfered with Rafa's strategy of time-wasting.
7. Stupid neighbors: Curfew means they had to stop playing at 11 last night. Rafa was ready to play and win all night.
8. British taxes: Nadal distracted wondering about his unfair tax bill if he wins the tournament.
9. Octobrina not in his box to cheer him on properly. Uncle Toni didn't bring enough energy.
10. Carlos Bernades: Rafa heard he was still at Wimbledon, sending bad vibes his way.
11. Nike clothing: Brand is cursed now that Fed has gone to Uniqlo.
12. Head to head: Rafa worried too much about tying up head to head, which is unfairly skewed by not having more matches on clay.
13. Lingering sadness over Federer losing in quarters. It was his turn for a major, so does that mean U.S. Open is no longer in the bag for Rafa? Only a cakewalk draw will tell.

epic , sir !!!

Hats off !

 

[Sentinel]

London -Rafael Nadal believes it was an error to keep the Centre Court roof closed as he lost an epic Wimbledon semi-final to old rival Novak Djokovic on Saturday.

Why is Nadal always unhappy ?

Do conditions always have to suit him ? Can't play with roof. Can't play on low bouncing court. Cant play in light rain on clay. Blue clay. Fast court. Shot clock. Second match of the day.

 

[Mr.Lob]

I voted "Fedr" . Whatever that means. Silliness?

 

[Sudacafan]

.
"No. But I will not talk more about this.
"If I talk about it, then you are going to write about this, and I don't want you to write about this today."

Translation: “Please write about it.”

 

[stringertom]

13 reasons why Nadal lost ...

1. Roof: He doesn't want to talk about it to distract from Novak's victory, but will tell you he doesn't want to talk about it so you'll talk about it instead.
2. Schedulers having the audacity to put the boring match on first as opening act.
3. Injuries probably, but we can talk about that later once Nadal's camp decides what they are to pull out of summer hard-court events.
4. Draw fixed to put Djokovic on his side. Diego Schwartzmann would have been more fair semifinal opponent for Rafa since they are both clay specialists.
5. Grass: Not fair world's most prestigious tennis tournament is always played on grass. Mix up with clay sometimes, no?
6. Novak's ball-bouncing: His time-wasting interfered with Rafa's strategy of time-wasting.
7. Stupid neighbors: Curfew means they had to stop playing at 11 last night. Rafa was ready to play and win all night.
8. British taxes: Nadal distracted wondering about his unfair tax bill if he wins the tournament.
9. Octobrina not in his box to cheer him on properly. Uncle Toni didn't bring enough energy.
10. Carlos Bernades: Rafa heard he was still at Wimbledon, sending bad vibes his way.
11. Nike clothing: Brand is cursed now that Fed has gone to Uniqlo.
12. Head to head: Rafa worried too much about tying up head to head, which is unfairly skewed by not having more matches on clay.
13. Lingering sadness over Federer losing in quarters. It was his turn for a major, so does that mean U.S. Open is no longer in the bag for Rafa? Only a cakewalk draw will tell.

14. Roofies...someone spiked his recovery drink; rumored to be a female VB member upset that Xisca was there in the box.

 

[Jonas78]

A rule is rule. The rule might be stupid but It can't be changed during a match.

 

[Sudacafan]

A rule is rule. The rule might be stupid but It can't be changed during a match.

Nadal has issues with rules. We should already know that by now.

 

[donquijote]

Best player in the world but can't play under a roof.

 

[Tshooter]

Best player in the world but can't play under a roof.

 

[stringertom]

If Federer had said "I should have been on CC" I'd have called him a complainer too.

Just imagine if he had played on CC, Roger Shankerer would have hit a blistering return winner on MP, then beaten Isner in straight set TBs and The Nadal would have had his precious outdoor match for probably three sets before the roof would have been needed and Joe Kovic would have then Rosolized him 9-7 in the fifth. But no, Camps Djokodal had to play CC so the defending champion and 8-time titleist was trundled off to #1.

Its a digrace, its an scandal, its a outrage.

Just saying.

 

[True Fanerer]

Anytime Rafa is asked about anything that falls in the excuse category always starts with " I don't want to complain/talk/blame

Then fills the blank in with excuses.

But he didn't WANT to is the difference here. We have to remember that

 

[Mainad]

Anytime Rafa is asked about anything that falls in the excuse category always starts with " I don't want to complain/talk/blame

Then fills the blank in with excuses.

But he didn't WANT to is the difference here. We have to remember that

He mentioned it only because he was asked about it and he answered honestly. Should he have lied and said that it made no difference to him at all?

He is right to be unhappy about it. The weather was fine so there was no logical reason for the roof to have stayed closed just because, out of necessity, that is how their match started. Whenever possible, matches at Wimbledon are meant to be played in the open air!

 

[Bartelby]

He should have deflected the question politely, as people who do not want to be labelled 'excuse-makers' would do.

The rule makes sense in terms of the continuity of the match and its initial conditions, but its possible to argue that it could be otherwise.

But that discussion is for another day and both you and Nadal are excuse-making today.

He mentioned it only because he was asked about it and he answered honestly. Should he have lied and said that it made no difference to him at all?

He is right to be unhappy about it. The weather was fine so there was no logical reason for the roof to have stayed closed just because, out of necessity, that is how their match started. Whenever possible, matches at Wimbledon are meant to be played in the open air!

 

[Mainad]

He should have deflected the question politely, as people who do not want to be labelled 'excuse-makers' would do.

The rule makes sense in terms of the continuity of the match and its initial conditions, but its possible to argue that it could be otherwise.

But that discussion is for another day and both you and Nadal are excuse-making today.

How does one deflect a question politely without reporters drawing the obvious conclusion that is what he was doing and the reason why he was doing it. The only way to have adequately 'deflected' it would have been to have lied and why should he do that? He was asked an honest question and he answered honestly. He didn't bring the subject up, they did and when they did so he politely deflected from having to comment on it anymore than he wished to.

I've heard this excuse for keeping the roof closed because of the necessity to maintain continuity of conditions and it's really just illogical bullcrap. After all, they break the continuity of conditions all the time by closing the roof when it rains or when the light is fading. If continuity of conditions is such a sacred cow they would halt rain-interrupted matches and call the players back when the weather had cleared. The roof is only there to maintain continuity of play, not continuity of conditions. When the weather permits it should remain open always. Wimbledon is an open air tournament and all matches should be played that way if the conditions permit it.

 

[Colin]

14. Roofies...someone spiked his recovery drink; rumored to be a female VB member upset that Xisca was there in the box.

So many reasons! A few more ...

15. Revenge for last year's unfair scheduling, where he got beat on Court 1 by Mueller. To make sure he's never scheduled off Center Court again, Rafa lost in the semis to deny organizers the tantalizing prospect of a Nadal-Anderson rematch of the sizzling U.S. Open final. He encourages Roger to take the same tack next year in the semis.
16.Carlos Moya's MTO: His coach had a leg cramp from sitting for an epic fifth set and had to leave the box to walk around to improve circulation, therefore not allowing any from-the-box coaching signals.
17. Mentally planning his upcoming appearance on "Running Wild with Bear Grylls" to compete with Roger's episode. But instead of climbing mountains and crossing rivers in the Alps, he will take Bear fishing off Mallorja, where death lurks below the surface as a Great White Shark was recently spotted in the area.
18. Djokovic was the better player on the day and more clutch in the final games. Ha! I make a crazy joke, no?!

 

[True Fanerer]

He mentioned it only because he was asked about it and he answered honestly. Should he have lied and said that it made no difference to him at all?

He is right to be unhappy about it. The weather was fine so there was no logical reason for the roof to have stayed closed just because, out of necessity, that is how their match started. Whenever possible, matches at Wimbledon are meant to be played in the open air!

It should've been open yes. But, it's a catch 22 with Nadal. He wouldn't like for the roof to be closed in bad weather either but would have to deal with it and use the exact same sentence leading into an excuse, but with a slightly different ending mentioning that the weather was unfortunate. In that moment he wishes it hadn't rained and the roof was closed. He's justified is what you're saying and that is correct, but he doesn't want the roof either way.

 

[zagor]

I just agree with Rafa that it wasn't logical to close the roof the next day. The rule doesn't make much sense for a match that stretches over 2 days.

Yes, I think so too. I was rooting for Djokovic and glad that he's won. My problem is people vilifying Nadal for experiencing emotions.

There's no need to villify him, he's human. On the whole he was pretty gracious/at peace with the loss in the interview and his critique of the roof protocole has some logic in it. However it's also fair that for once he had to adapt to non-favourable conditions for him in a big match. This era has been very friendly to him in that regard with all the slower, higher bouncing surfaces. It's a luxury that for example a guy like Lendl didn't have so need to keep that in mind.

 

[victorcruz]

Imagine being this obsessed with someone you don't like that you will write 700 words to insult him. The rent is free buddy

 

[True Fanerer]

Imagine being this obsessed with someone you don't like that you will write 700 words to insult him. The rent is free buddy

Have to wait for #18 a little longer

 

[smash hit]

A rule is rule. The rule might be stupid but It can't be changed during a match.

And therein lies the problem. There is no rule that states that a match carried over to the next day must continue in the conditions under which it started.
https://www.elconfidencial.com/amp/...ales-techo_1592827/?__twitter_impression=true

@genny_ss




As per this piece, upon query, Wimbledon's referee office have acknowledged there is NO SPECIFIC RULE or PROTOCOL to manage a situation like the one arose in the past 2 days. Starting the match indoors before it was dark was a decision taken on the fly.


La postura de Wimbledon
Este diario acudió a la Oficina del Referee, situada en la fachada exterior de la Centre Court, para recabar un postura oficial acerca de lo ocurrido. Al ser consultados por un protocolo que especifique cómo actuar en ese tipo de situaciones, el torneo reconoce no poseer una normativa específica. “No hay ninguna norma al respecto”. Es decir, no hay un método preestablecido para gestionar una situación en la que el transcurso de un encuentro vaya a verse interrumpido por falta de luz y, en previsión de esa circunstancia, se pueda utilizar la iluminación del techo para iniciar el juego. En este sentido, y atendiendo a las afirmaciones del evento, comenzar un partido a cubierto por la inminencia de la oscuridad fue una medida ideada sobre la marcha.

This newspaper went to the Office of the Referee, located on the outer facade of the Center Court, to seek an official position about what happened. When consulted by a protocol that specifies how to act in such situations, the tournament recognizes that it does not have specific regulations. "There is no rule about it." That is to say, there is no pre-established method to manage a situation in which the course of a meeting will be interrupted by lack of light and, in anticipation of that circumstance, ceiling lighting can be used to start the game. In this sense, and attending to the affirmations of the event, to begin a covered party by the imminence of the darkness was a measure devised on the march

In an outdoor tournament it is nonsensical to talk about continuing in the same conditions. As we all know conditions can and do change as a match progresses. The sun can come or go, the same with the wind. Those changes are the very essence of an outdoor tournament, consequently any talk of having to continue in he same conditions is nonsense.

The only rule that is specif is this,

Protocol for use of the roof

These basic principles will govern the use of the roof:

(a) The Championships is an outdoor daytime event. Therefore, in good weather, the roof will only be used if it is too dark to play on without it.

 

[victorcruz]

Have to wait for #18 a little longer

I don't think he's stopping at 18. Hope you'll be ok when he retires with 21+

 

[SQA333]

To be fair to Rafa I think his butt hurt fans made a bigger deal out of this than he did

 

[TennisBro]

Traditions seem to develop as nowadays there's money to build roofs.

 

[roysid]

I think the closed roof also benefited Nadal in the sense that his backhand and forehand were going like tracer bullets

 

[stringertom]

So many reasons! A few more ...

15. Revenge for last year's unfair scheduling, where he got beat on Court 1 by Mueller. To make sure he's never scheduled off Center Court again, Rafa lost in the semis to deny organizers the tantalizing prospect of a Nadal-Anderson rematch of the sizzling U.S. Open final. He encourages Roger to take the same tack next year in the semis.
16.Carlos Moya's MTO: His coach had a leg cramp from sitting for an epic fifth set and had to leave the box to walk around to improve circulation, therefore not allowing any from-the-box coaching signals.
17. Mentally planning his upcoming appearance on "Running Wild with Bear Grylls" to compete with Roger's episode. But instead of climbing mountains and crossing rivers in the Alps, he will take Bear fishing off Mallorja, where death lurks below the surface as a Great White Shark was recently spotted in the area.
18. Djokovic was the better player on the day and more clutch in the final games. Ha! I make a crazy joke, no?!

19. Roger, he loose on Court #1 bcoz I got high (and mighty). If he plays Isner, I play regular time outdoors.
20. Too many Red Bulls while waiting forever. Made me so schweddy even triple wide pulseras couldn't help my grip.
21. I am gentleman: women always first. Was not ready so early.

 

[True Fanerer]

I don't think he's stopping at 18. Hope you'll be ok when he retires with 21+

Have you not noticed that Djokovic is back? All Federer is going to do now is prepare for slams and come in rested. Zverev and Thiem will sooner or later take the clay away or atleast make it hard for him. Wimbledon was his chance since next FO is probably his already. Whenever the gap is three he always finds a way to miss decreasing it down to 2.

 

[Colin]

19. Roger, he loose on Court #1 bcoz I got high (and mighty). If he plays Isner, I play regular time outdoors.
20. Too many Red Bulls while waiting forever. Made me so schweddy even triple wide pulseras couldn't help my grip.
21. I am gentleman: women always first. Was not ready so early.

22. I always planned to lose in the semifinal because I wanted to watch the World Cup final on Sunday as football is my favorite sport of all time. To make up for my expected presence in the final, I played a long five-set semi to give people their money's worth.
23. My boycott of the final is a protest of equal pay for women in tennis. They should not get paid the same as men since male models get paid less than their female counterparts. Look at Verdasco and his underwear ads. He make way less than Naomi Campbell and Cindy Crawford. Very unfair to Fernando!
24. Too much humidity with the roof closed and I sweat like a pig so I have no more shirts to change into and they will not let me play shirtless. I asked!
25. I saw Pam Shriver waiting for an interview with the winner, and I just couldn't.
26. Since Andy Murray could not play Wimbledon, I promised him I would not win this year, so we would both have two titles. As a show of support, I'm going to play video games while Novak and Kevin play in the final. Andy said he didn't care one way or the other if I come, but I know he's very excited. Judy Murray promises chips and dips.
27. Novak doesn't know this yet, but he's terminally ill. Pepe Imaz told me this, so I do a Make a Wish situation and let him go to a final final. Pepe said that when Novak wins — and he will, no? — that when he give his symbolic hearts to the crowd that his own heart might actually go out and he will drop dead on the grass. Which would it easier for me and Roger at U.S. Open to have dream final, no?

 

[vive le beau jeu !]

A rule is rule. The rule might be stupid but It can't be changed during a match.

Nadal has issues with rules. We should already know that by now.

 

[stringertom]

22. I always planned to lose in the semifinal because I wanted to watch the World Cup final on Sunday as football is my favorite sport of all time. To make up for my expected presence in the final, I played a long five-set semi to give people their money's worth.
23. My boycott of the final is a protest of equal pay for women in tennis. They should not get paid the same as men since male models get paid less than their female counterparts. Look at Verdasco and his underwear ads. He make way less than Naomi Campbell and Cindy Crawford. Very unfair to Fernando!
24. Too much humidity with the roof closed and I sweat like a pig so I have no more shirts to change into and they will not let me play shirtless. I asked!
25. I saw Pam Shriver waiting for an interview with the winner, and I just couldn't.
26. Since Andy Murray could not play Wimbledon, I promised him I would not win this year, so we would both have two titles. As a show of support, I'm going to play video games while Novak and Kevin play in the final. Andy said he didn't care one way or the other if I come, but I know he's very excited. Judy Murray promises chips and dips.
27. Novak doesn't know this yet, but he's terminally ill. Pepe Imaz told me this, so I do a Make a Wish situation and let him go to a final final. Pepe said that when Novak wins — and he will, no? — that when he give his symbolic hearts to the crowd that his own heart might actually go out and he will drop dead on the grass. Which would it easier for me and Roger at U.S. Open to have dream final, no?

Over halfway to 50 Ways To Keep Sureshs PeRFect!

 

[Sentinel]

In other news, Nadal also unhappy about low height of net, large size of service box, second serves. And of course not enough time given between points for washing up and changing shirts and adjusting whatever hair is left on head.

 

[stringertom]

Have you not noticed that Djokovic is back? All Federer is going to do now is prepare for slams and come in rested. Zverev and Thiem will sooner or later take the clay away or atleast make it hard for him. Wimbledon was his chance since next FO is probably his already. Whenever the gap is three he always finds a way to miss decreasing it down to 2.

You had me until the third sentence. RG'19 denadal is dependent on a healthy and lengthy continuation of the Joe Kovic resurrection, perhaps a resurgent Wawrinka or some serious maturation of a NextGen star without the scar tissue of Thiemrev, the equivalent of the Ozzian Scarecrow and Cowardly Lion with one lacking a brain and the other missing a heart.

One of these kids has to produce on clay sooner or later. I was hoping it was Kuhn by 2020 but his ankle injury just wasted a whole season on the dirt. Tsitsipas is now on the edge of Top 30 but that lopsided Nadal final in Barca put him in a tailspin. Maybe just the one mauling doesn't leave a mark. I'm pressed to mention any others...flaws, flaws everywhere flaws.