How does Serena's behavior during USO Final compare to McEnroe during 1990 AO?

  • Serena's behavior was worse

    Votes: 88 58.3%
  • McEnroe's behavior was worse

    Votes: 38 25.2%
  • Both behaved about the same

    Votes: 25 16.6%

  • Total voters
    151
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deleted member 756486

Guest
Both are a disgrace to the sport imo. Can’t wait until both retire and the woman’s game can move on. WTA will be better off without them.
 
I was screaming with delight and disbelief as Serena completely lost her mind today. She should be ashamed and anyone who continues to be her fan should be ashamed for supporting this nut job. What does having a daughter have to do with ANYTHING? Maybe, Serena, since you have a daughter, you should teach her how to act like a lady! LOL! What A LOSER. Unbelievable. So happy for Osaka!

And for Serena to say this always happens to her because she's a woman... ROFL! What about the other women? Jesus! If her opponent today would have been white, she would have played the race card too! This is just too much.
 
yes, I don't think Serena knew the rule. She could have prevented all the drama by not smashing her racket and accepting that Pat Mo was giving her signals and she definitely saw it because Serena said "he was giving me the thumbs up" which was part of the coaching signals Pat Mo gave.
He was showing her to get more in the court, but Serena was saying he was showing her thumbs up and that she is not a cheater.
At least Patrick was smart enough to admit it knowing we have replays, but Serena started dramatising over losing just 1 point and having all sorts of tantrums.
 
Because? If I was the umpire, I’d have cited her for verbal abuse about two tirades earlier. She has absolutely no right to call an umpire a thief or demand apologies.

And the ref was entirely consistent with the rules. Just because a different ref wasn’t is no argument.

Please find a rule that states verbal abuse doesn’t include name calling. Only then can you call the third warning “atrocious”.
Two tirades earlier. Where she was explaining to Ramos that she wasn't getting coached and that she had never received off court coaching in her career (which she hasn't). How would that be fair. Saying the umpire stole a point from you is NOT name calling. A thief is someone who steals. So how is explaining the term thief by initially saying that you stole from me count as verbal abuse.

Ramos was way to trigger happy pulling out the code violations. The game penalty was an absolute farce. When has anybody received a game penalty after receiving a point penalty.

Well done to Naomi, she won and played well and keep her cool but the match was soured by Ramos being too power hungry, giving a game penalty in a GS final. Absolutely atrocious
 
I understand it's currently against the rules to receive on court coaching in tennis, but is that a rule that improves the sport or detracts from it. The commentators are now having an argument about whether it should be legal.

Chris Evert is saying that she thinks tennis is an individual sport and she likes the mental strength it requires for a player to be able to figure it out on their own. Her argument is that's part of what makes a great champion and coaches take something away from that. She says that the best players (Serena, Venus, Sharapova) never call for on court coaching and that's part of what makes them the best players.
Mary Jo Fernandez was saying that coaching adds intrigue and strategy, and actually improves the overall quality of the match since players can adjust their games to things they don't see.

One the one hand, all of the coaches do it anyway and nobody is really following the rule as intended, yet it is only very rarely and very inconsistently charged against players. So it's kind of like what's the point. I'm split on the issue because while I see Chris Evert's point, I also think that coaching would make the game more competitive for the lower ranked or junior players to challenge the top players. There is coaching in boxing which is also an individual sport and people seem to like that. So I'm not really sure what the difference is.

What do you guys think? How would it affect the men's game?
 
Whatever you think of Serena and Naomi (and I adore Naomi), there is no doubt in my mind that the chair acted improperly.

I think there was gender bias at work. The first coaching violation? Deserved. The second violation? Deserved.

But I cannot begin to count the number of times men have sat in their chairs on changeovers and had heated discussions with umpires, and nothing whatever happens. But when it is Serena, it is a game penalty in the final. Insane. Her words were actually civil -- saying she deserved an apology, no profanity, no threats.

Need more proof?

In this same tournament, we had a chair umpire come out of his chair to basically coach Kirios in front of God and everyone. The proper response would have been to enforce the code of conduct, but no. Ump goes easy on the man, and USTA backs up the umpire.

By that standard, Ramos should have come out of his chair and talked to Serena, calm her nerves, tell her he wants to help her. Nope -- game penalty (when the tirade was over and he could have let it go) to put Serena's opponent a game away from the championship.

Congratulations to Naomi, but what happened today was rooted in disparate treatment and sexism.
I honestly can't say if you're trolling... o_O Ramos did the right thing, and calling it sexist is social justice warrior crap... Just stop it!
 

JJGUY

Hall of Fame
To be fair, it's natural to root for the American there (despite Osaka also being raised in America.)

The booing at the ceremony is crossing the line.
Osaka's dad is Haitian, she may look black or half black, but there is a difference to some, especially among black people (African American for generations ) how they view other black people from Caribbean (Afro-Caribbean) or new immigrants from Africa.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
Since everyone violates the rule and many times it's the over-zealous coach that's at fault. Yeah.. just make it legal and stop the foolishness.
 
Literally. Holy ****. She called the ref a theif and tbe ref penalized her a game. Then she started crying about how she was getting horrible treatment bc she was a woman.
Maybe this is karma for sjws censoring/blocking discussion of mens vs womens level of tennis?
It's always going to be entertaining (for some reason or another) when Serena Williams is playing a grand slam final. I mean, that was like it's own show!
 
This was not sexism.
Please don’t go there. If Naomi was not half black, then are we going to say racism?
Common. Let it go.
Serena had a chance to regroup but she is one who blew the match.

Ramos is human. He might have a bad memory with “thief”.
He can be patient with any words but “thief”.
Probably no one can say the word “thief” to him hahahahaha
 

Colin

Professional
The solution isn't to take it easy on Serena — it's to crack down on everyone. ESPN commentators say you can't do anything about from-the-box coaching because everyone does it. Well, then the first time you see each coach do it, it's a warning. When they do it again, it's a point penalty. If you do that every match, then it won't happen anymore. The same idea as having a shot clock (though it's not being deployed well because of issues with ball catches and second serves, it's a start).

Serena makes a feminist argument that she should be able to behave as badly as the men, basically saying she did nothing wrong. If she wanted to make a principled stand, she should have admitted that what she did was wrong then ask for men to be treated the same way. I'm all for that. Her coach used as an example Rafa and Toni.

Imagine how many fewer slams Nadal would have now if umpires had treated him the same way — the correct way, as in enforcing rules — over the years.
 
Just out of interest, I have never known anyone refer to themselves as a "social-justice warrior." It seems entirely a pejorative term deployed by the right, and especially the far right, to criticize liberal and left positions without bothering to engage with them. I don't even think that either moderate or thoughtful conservatives use the term. It's basically an ad hominem, and so a logical fallacy that should be avoided by anyone engaged in serious discourse or who wants to persuade someone with whom they disagree.

There is a character in the TV show "One Day at a Time" who refers to herself as a social-justice warrior, so perhaps some young people do self-describe in that way. But I'm a professor and I have never heard a student self-describe as a social-justice warrior.
 
Coaching outside of matches is already a big differentiator and favors the resource-rich. Allowing it during match is exacerbated the problem, IMO. That people do it anyway is equivalent to officially allowing performance enhancing drugs.
 

Ann

Hall of Fame
As long as the coaches are in the stands, the coaching from the stands will continue. Maybe coaches should be banned from the stadium, because it's not going to stop.
 
No coaching.

The simplest solution would be to ban coaches from the stands during matches. Do the prep on the practice court, then leave the player to it. If they can’t work it out for themselves, they don’t deserve to be playing on the world stage.
I agree with your proposal. At least, coaches who continue to coach their player during the match could be asked to leave the stadium. It is also the fairest solution to punish the perpetrator of the crime rather than the intended beneficiary. Some coaches probably coach players even if the players ask them not to do so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top