Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic lead complaints over shot clock plan

edberg volleys

edberg volleys

Hall of Fame
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...n/news-story/95088e06ff8db702d922acddc66a6132

Rafael Nadal insists that plans by Wimbledon to introduce a 25-second shot clock will kill off the sport’s capacity for epic Grand Slam confrontations.

The US Open will have a shot clock for this year’s tournament with Wimbledon poised to follow suit.

World number one Nadal is routinely warned for slow play between points. However, he believes players need time to compose themselves between points and to ponder tactics over five sets.

“If you want to see a quick game without thinking, well done,” said Nadal. “If you want to keep playing in a sport that you need to think, you need to play with more tactics, you want to have long and good rallies, then of course you are going the wrong way.

“But seems like sometimes it is only about the business, so … I can’t support this because I don’t feel the matches that stay for the history of our sport went that quick.”

Nadal has been involved in epic confrontations down the years as he amassed 17 Grand Slam titles.

He famously defeated Roger Federer in 2008 for the first of his two Wimbledon titles in a final which took the best part of five hours and ended in near-darkness.

In 2012, he lost the longest final at a major to Novak Djokovic in Australia, a five-setter which stretched to five hours and 53 minutes.

“I don’t remember any emotional match that the total time was two hours,” added the 32-year-old Nadal.

“All the matches that have been important in the history of our sport have been four hours, five hours.

“To play these kind of matches you need time between points because you cannot play points in a row with long rallies, with emotional points, having only 25 seconds between points.” Despite his objections, the All England Club insist that a shot clock is on the agenda.

“There’s a general feeling that we should speed up when a match begins and ends,” said the tournament’s chief executive Richard Lewis.

“The shot clock isn’t a rule change, that’s just something visible.”

Nadal had no cause to worry about getting caught up in a marathon match on Tuesday as he opened his Wimbledon campaign with a 6-3, 6-3, 6-2 win over Israel’s Dudi Sela, the world 127.

Fresh from an 11th French Open title, Nadal was playing on grass for the first time this season.

But there was no lack of competitive edge from the 2008 and 2010 champion who comfortably avoided being beaten at the tournament by a player ranked outside the top 100 for what would have been the fifth time in his last six visits.

“I had a long clay court season, a lot of matches,” said Nadal as he explained why he sat out the grass court build-up to Wimbledon.

“After playing the final of Roland Garros and playing so many matches on clay, for my knees, the drastic changes are not good.

“So we decided to stop a couple of days, then to start step by step on grass. I did the same last year.”

Djokovic also weighed in on the shot clock debate, claiming the full opinion of the players has yet to be sought.

“I understand what they are trying to do with the shot clock,” said Djokovic after making the second round with a 6-3, 6-1, 6-2 win over Tennys Sandgren.

“Everybody is trying to get this new generation of people and the attention span is not maybe as it used to be, except if you’re a real, real tennis fan.

“But it has to be in line with the respect towards the tradition of the game.”
 
icedevil0289 said:
i truly do not get why they, especially nadal or choosing this hill to die on. for the love of god, this is an actual written rule. What does tradition or short attention span have to do with anything?

not even going to comment on what nadal said b/c it is all absurd and he's always been self serving
Click to expand...
seriously. make it more clear that you think the rule should be changed to 35-40 seconds. saying "let us keep breaking the rules" is not a great stance.
 
edberg volleys said:
https://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/...n/news-story/95088e06ff8db702d922acddc66a6132

Rafael Nadal insists that plans by Wimbledon to introduce a 25-second shot clock will kill off the sport’s capacity for epic Grand Slam confrontations.

The US Open will have a shot clock for this year’s tournament with Wimbledon poised to follow suit.

World number one Nadal is routinely warned for slow play between points. However, he believes players need time to compose themselves between points and to ponder tactics over five sets.

“If you want to see a quick game without thinking, well done,” said Nadal. “If you want to keep playing in a sport that you need to think, you need to play with more tactics, you want to have long and good rallies, then of course you are going the wrong way.

“But seems like sometimes it is only about the business, so … I can’t support this because I don’t feel the matches that stay for the history of our sport went that quick.”

Nadal has been involved in epic confrontations down the years as he amassed 17 Grand Slam titles.

He famously defeated Roger Federer in 2008 for the first of his two Wimbledon titles in a final which took the best part of five hours and ended in near-darkness.

In 2012, he lost the longest final at a major to Novak Djokovic in Australia, a five-setter which stretched to five hours and 53 minutes.

“I don’t remember any emotional match that the total time was two hours,” added the 32-year-old Nadal.

“All the matches that have been important in the history of our sport have been four hours, five hours.

“To play these kind of matches you need time between points because you cannot play points in a row with long rallies, with emotional points, having only 25 seconds between points.” Despite his objections, the All England Club insist that a shot clock is on the agenda.

“There’s a general feeling that we should speed up when a match begins and ends,” said the tournament’s chief executive Richard Lewis.

“The shot clock isn’t a rule change, that’s just something visible.”

Nadal had no cause to worry about getting caught up in a marathon match on Tuesday as he opened his Wimbledon campaign with a 6-3, 6-3, 6-2 win over Israel’s Dudi Sela, the world 127.

Fresh from an 11th French Open title, Nadal was playing on grass for the first time this season.

But there was no lack of competitive edge from the 2008 and 2010 champion who comfortably avoided being beaten at the tournament by a player ranked outside the top 100 for what would have been the fifth time in his last six visits.

“I had a long clay court season, a lot of matches,” said Nadal as he explained why he sat out the grass court build-up to Wimbledon.

“After playing the final of Roland Garros and playing so many matches on clay, for my knees, the drastic changes are not good.

“So we decided to stop a couple of days, then to start step by step on grass. I did the same last year.”

Djokovic also weighed in on the shot clock debate, claiming the full opinion of the players has yet to be sought.

“I understand what they are trying to do with the shot clock,” said Djokovic after making the second round with a 6-3, 6-1, 6-2 win over Tennys Sandgren.

“Everybody is trying to get this new generation of people and the attention span is not maybe as it used to be, except if you’re a real, real tennis fan.

“But it has to be in line with the respect towards the tradition of the game.”
Click to expand...

OP's title is fake news. Where is Novak's "complaint"?
 
Considering how great the big 4 era has been for tennis, you'd think the authorities would listen to the opinions of the biggest players who have played such a vital part in its success, but no, corporate interests are more important and they want long rallies but with 25 or less seconds between points, which is an impossibility. I bet the big business people involved in tennis thought the 2012 Australian Open final was a failure because it went on so long. For the fans, it was epic.

I personally would get rid of the time between points rule altogether. I think it should be a completely legitimate tactic for the server to slow down play between points, or speed up play between points.
 
Mustard said:
Considering how great the big 4 era has been for tennis, you'd think the authorities would listen to the opinions of the biggest players who have played such a vital part in its success, but no, corporate interests are more important and they want long rallies but with 25 or less seconds between points, which is an impossibility. I bet the big business people involved in tennis thought the 2012 Australian Open final was a failure because it went on so long. For the fans, it was epic.

I personally would get rid of the time between points rule altogether. I think it should be a completely legitimate tactic for the server to slow down play between points, or speed up play between points.
Click to expand...
Ok let's allow RAFA to wait an hour between points.
 
junior74 said:
Rafa sounds like a child here.
Open defiance, like: I don't want to follow the rules. I am more important.
Click to expand...
Carlos_Bernardes.jpg
 
zagor said:
He didn't, he said that he wants the players to be consulted before making significant changes to the game. It's a clickbait title.
Click to expand...

he didnt express the same disdain as nadal and i can somewhat understand wanting the players to be aware of it first, although he did say something about respecting tradition, not entirely sure what that had to do with shot clocks since time limits are in the rule book. funny enough i think novak has actually improved quite a bit with his ball bouncing.
 
icedevil0289 said:
he didnt express the same disdain as nadal and i can somewhat understand wanting the players to be aware of it first, although he did say something about respecting tradition, not entirely sure what that had to do with shot clocks since time limits are in the rule book. funny enough i think novak has actually improved quite a bit with his ball bouncing.
Click to expand...

He did tone down his ball bouncing over the years but recently at Queens both him and Cilic were taking a lot of time. I'm not getting the respect the tradition part either but he's open to discussion and change which I think is the best way to approach the situation, have a dialogue and reach the agreement both sides can be happy with.
 
I am one of the people who aren't bothered if a player takes longer than 25 seconds to serve unless it's taken to the extreme. Rafa's comments about emotional matches are a strawman, of course. It's not like by introducing shot clock they're going to limit the time of entire matches, so why is he talking about two-hour matches all of a sudden?

However, Nadal's comments just made me realize that players don't just recover physically when they get ready to serve, but they are actually thinking through their tactics for the next point . From this angle, I can definitely understand why he, in particular, takes that much time. He likes to have everything in order so he feels most comfortable when he has a clear picture of what he's going to do. That in contrast to Federer who is a very intuitive player, or Kyrgios who just does things. I know it will fall on deaf ears and those who dislike Nadal will be just as annoyed by his timewasting as they were, but it's really the case of his OCD personality and something he has little control over. Not saying he can't control how much time he spends getting ready to serve, but that he wouldn't feel at ease if he doesn't take his time.
 
zagor said:
He did tone down his ball bouncing over the years but recently at Queens both him and Cilic were taking a lot of time. I'm not getting the respect the tradition part either but he's open to discussion and change which I think is the best way to approach the situation, have a dialogue and reach the agreement both sides can be happy with.
Click to expand...

yeah, idt novak has ever whined about things teh way nadal has or basically argued for changes in a game that are self serving but the thing about the both sides to me doesn't make much sense since it is an actual rule. if they wanted to argue that more time is needed for big points that is one thing.


lord cilic and his ball bouncing as well...
 
The Fedfather said:
I am one of the people who aren't bothered if a player takes longer than 25 seconds to serve unless it's taken to the extreme. Rafa's comments about emotional matches are a strawman, of course. It's not like by introducing shot clock they're going to limit the time of entire matches, so why is he talking about two-hour matches all of a sudden?

However, Nadal's comments just made me realize that players don't just recover physically when they get ready to serve, but they are actually thinking through their tactics for the next point . From this angle, I can definitely understand why he, in particular, takes that much time. He likes to have everything in order so he feels most comfortable when he has a clear picture of what he's going to do. That in contrast to Federer who is a very intuitive player, or Kyrgios who just does things. I know it will fall on deaf ears and those who dislike Nadal will be just as annoyed by his timewasting as they were, but it's really the case of his OCD personality and something he has little control over. Not saying he can't control how much time he spends getting ready to serve, but that he wouldn't feel at ease if he doesn't take his time.
Click to expand...

i dont know if nadal actually has ocd or has been diagnosed, tbh a lot of people who are particular or anal get called ocd but in reading stories about people with actual OCD it can be quite crippling so I'm never quick to assume if someone who is just particular has it.

with that being said, nadal can ask for more time in between points, but its comments like if people want quick tennis that requires no thinking or tactics this is fine, but those who want long good rallies, this is not good. or making it seem like shot clocks that influence the rules are detrimental to the sport. this is the same guy iirc who called for a two year ranking system, heavier balls, longer clay court season, less hardcourts, iirc grass was too fast etc and he says it is all about the betterment of the sport when in reality it serves him best.
 
icedevil0289 said:
yeah, idt novak has ever whined about things teh way nadal has or basically argued for changes in a game that are self serving but the thing about the both sides to me doesn't make much sense since it is an actual rule. if they wanted to argue that more time is needed for big points that is one thing.


lord cilic and his ball bouncing as well...
Click to expand...

It's a rule but it doesn't work, not in the current climate where umpires don't enforce it with any regularity and not sure shotclock is changing anything in that regard. Better to have a talk with the players, get to the time limit they can agree with (say 35 seconds) and then enforce it consistently. Bring some order to the whole thing, right now ITF/ATP come off as very indecisive to me.
 
zagor said:
It's a rule but it doesn't work, not in the current climate where umpires don't enforce it with any regularity and not sure shotclock is changing anything in that regard. Better to have a talk with the players, get to the time limit they can agree with (say 35 seconds) and then enforce it consistently. Bring some order to the whole thing, right now ITF/ATP come off as very indecisive to me.
Click to expand...
My problem is when do you start the clock? If a guy makes a run to a drop shot and is all the way by the net and the point ends do you start it as soon as the point is over? or if the crowd is going nuts after a long rally when do they start the clock. I think 35 seconds and start as soon as the point ends would be reasonable. otherwise I think there has to be some discretion on when the clock starts.
 
zagor said:
It's a rule but it doesn't work, not in the current climate where umpires don't enforce it with any regularity and not sure shotclock is changing anything in that regard. Better to have a talk with the players, get to the time limit they can agree with (say 35 seconds) and then enforce it consistently. Bring some order to the whole thing, right now ITF/ATP come off as very indecisive to me.
Click to expand...

they want to pander to the biggest names in sport imo, personally i think it just a product of the game at the moment. i mean i don't blame umpires for being too scared in teh event they get banned from calling matches in the future.

overall if people think the time limit is too little, that's fine. plenty of players stay within the limit and have no issue getting on with their play even after big points. you can;t expect every player to do the same because they are all different yet I'm expected to be okay with the surfaces blending together and players with the same style and well that is apparently great for the sport. overall my opinion on this is that nadal whines a lot and I'm petty to the point that I hope shot clocks are there for every match of his. its one thing for him to not feel comfortabl and not want to be rushed, another for him to whine and just shade anything that is not within his comfort zone and the worst his his fanbase eats it up and parrots it like gospel truth
 
icedevil0289 said:
i dont know if nadal actually has ocd or has been diagnosed, tbh a lot of people who are particular or anal get called ocd but in reading stories about people with actual OCD it can be quite crippling so I'm never quick to assume if someone who is just particular has it.

with that being said, nadal can ask for more time in between points, but its comments like if people want quick tennis that requires no thinking or tactics this is fine, but those who want long good rallies, this is not good. or making it seem like shot clocks that influence the rules are detrimental to the sport. this is the same guy iirc who called for a two year ranking system, heavier balls, longer clay court season, less hardcourts, iirc grass was too fast etc and he says it is all about the betterment of the sport when in reality it serves him best.
Click to expand...
Yeah, some of his suggestions were pretty WTF. I was super pissed at Nadal, like really angry, when he suggested a two-year ranking and then made Federer a villain because Roger didn't support his genius idea.:rolleyes:
 
The Fedfather said:
Yeah, some of his suggestions were pretty WTF. I was super pissed at Nadal, like really angry, when he suggested a two-year ranking and then made Federer a villain because Roger didn't support his genius idea.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

nadal has had a habit of calling for things that he thinks are for the betterment of the sport when in actuality it benefits him the most and despite this idea that he is quite adaptable (which i do think he is to an extent) he is actually quite stubborn and if something isn't to his liking or not beneficial to him he will shade it and act like its the worst thing ever, ie fast grass, wtf not being played on clay etc. yet no word on the fact that he basically won Us open by returning on the v.i.p box. nope that stuff is okay. I don't hate nadal by any means but things like this make it hard for me to take him seriously.
 
Rafa24 said:
My problem is when do you start the clock? If a guy makes a run to a drop shot and is all the way by the net and the point ends do you start it as soon as the point is over? or if the crowd is going nuts after a long rally when do they start the clock. I think 35 seconds and start as soon as the point ends would be reasonable. otherwise I think there has to be some discretion on when the clock starts.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how the shotclock works to be honest, think it will be implemented at USO this year? I just want to see some consistency in this whole matter, if 25 seconds is too short then increase it to what is comfortable but then apply it consistently. The way things stand right now, players will take as much as they want and will get a warning at some random point of the match, it's chaos.
 
icedevil0289 said:
nadal has had a habit of calling for things that he thinks are for the betterment of the sport when in actuality it benefits him the most and despite this idea that he is quite adaptable (which i do think he is to an extent) he is actually quite stubborn and if something isn't to his liking or not beneficial to him he will shade it and act like its the worst thing ever, ie fast grass, wtf not being played on clay etc. yet no word on the fact that he basically won Us open by returning on the v.i.p box. nope that stuff is okay. I don't hate nadal by any means but things like this make it hard for me to take him seriously.
Click to expand...
See, maybe I'm a bit naive but I tend to not pay that much attention to these bad moments because everyone has them. I like Rafa because he seems like a chill guy most of the time. He's great with fans, has many friends on tour and usually people who know him personally like him. He does have this selfish side that shows from time to time, but from what I can see there are more good qualities in him.
 
icedevil0289 said:
also to counter nadal's lovely argument quantity does not =quality. longer matches don't necessarily mean they are great.
Click to expand...

Well remember when he years ago said Sampras-Ivanisevic on grass wasn't real tennis? I get the impression that Nadal has a rather rigid view on how the sport is supposed to be played. Funny thing is I don't remember Sampras for example complaining that the clay is too slow and high bouncing back in the day.
 
zagor said:
Well remember when he years ago said Sampras-Ivanisevic on grass wasn't real tennis? I get the impression that Nadal has a rather rigid view on how the sport is supposed to be played. Funny thing is I don't remember Sampras for example complaining that the clay is too slow and high bouncing back in the day.
Click to expand...

yeah his view his sport should be played how he plays it. I'm fully convinced that if he had his way tennis would just be slow, high bouncing courts with heavy balls
 
Nadal being annoying as usual. Seriously, does he need wipe his forearms, forehead, and face after every point even when it was HE that just scored an ace (very rare, btw)?

What's there to think about?

What's there to wipe off?

25 seconds is still way too much imo. Basketball has a 24-second shot clock in REAL-PLAY and yet Nadal thinks 25 seconds of doing nothing is not pointless enough? It seems to be all of the bad servers that waste time the most.
 
The Fedfather said:
See, maybe I'm a bit naive but I tend to not pay that much attention to these bad moments because everyone has them. I like Rafa because he seems like a chill guy most of the time. He's great with fans, has many friends on tour and usually people who know him personally like him. He does have this selfish side that shows from time to time, but from what I can see there's more good qualities in him.
Click to expand...

maybe, he seems to have a conservative view on quite a few things
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Z
Shot clock observation
3 4 5
Replies
221
Views
15K
clayqueen
clayqueen
junior74
Shot clock - the point isn't over until the umpire has spoken?
2
Replies
74
Views
4K
Tennis_Hands
T
marc45
Rafa's First Post At Talk Tennis
2 3 4
Replies
160
Views
9K
Deleted member 742196
D
Frenchy-Player
John McEnroe seething over shot-clock drama: ‘Rafael Nadal should be penalised. It’s a joke’
3 4 5
Replies
225
Views
11K
Bubcay
Bubcay
OrangePower
Shot clock rules
Replies
38
Views
4K
diggler
diggler
Back
Top