The *correct* sequence of events.

Topaz

Legend
^^^Aw crap, should say 'sequence'. Really, I can spell, just not so much with the typing.

In reading all of these threads (ok, not all of them, I don't have that kind of time), it is apparent many didn't actually see what happened, and/or didn't know the events prior that led up to Serena's default.

So, here it is:

1. Earlier in the tournament (I believe during a doubles match) Serena was called on FF. After one, she decided to stare down the line judge who called it, glaring at them for a good long time. She continues to FF and get called on it.

1a. Serena is called for a FF during first set, by a different linesperson than in the 'incident'.

2. After first set, Serena smashes her racquet, receives a code violation.

3. At 15-30 Serena hits her first serve and it is a fault. The second serve she FFs.

4. Score is now 15-40. THIS IS AFTER THE FF. Serena could have just did her glaring, and then step up and serve (it isn't like she can't serve herself out of trouble).

5. Serena has tirade #1 toward line judge. Has a bit of a tantrum. You can even hear, in the replays, the chair ump saying 'Serena' to calm her down.

6. Serena walks back to baseline, looking like she's going to serve.

7. Then she changes her mind, and walks back to mouth off to the line judge *again*.

8. At this point, the chair ump asks the line judge to tell her what was said.

9. Referee is called, Serena is assessed another code violation, which results in a point penalty. Game, set, match to Clijsters.

So, a couple of important things here:

*Serena's FF did not cost her the match.

*Serena's behavior did cost her the match.

*Serena knew she'd been FFing earlier in the tournament.

These are all *facts*. Not in dispute.

Now, I'm curious as to why she walked back and mouthed off a second time. That is what really cost her IMO. It almost seemed like she wanted to see what would happen, and wanted to push. Or, she knew she was getting out played and wanted to further throw Kim off during match point.

Any of that, of course, is conjecture.

The real shame, IMO, is that it was a very good match up until then. It won't be remembered for the high quality and beautiful ball striking and movement, but instead for Serena's behavior.

IMO, what happened was right. She broke the rules (code of conduct) and paid the penalty.
 
Last edited:

Lionheart392

Professional
I fully agree with your post, one thing I would change though is where you say 'Serena's behavior did cost her the match.', more like 'cost her the point'. Kim's outstanding play cost Serena the match. :)
 

ebm

New User
She wasn't defaulted. Her ROID-RAGE got her a point penalty and that happen to be on match point.

I think default is different.
 

benasp

Semi-Pro
And for what have been said, here what i think

-after the foot fault serena said ''I'm gonna shove this ball down you troath''

-the judge go to the umpire and point her troath when repeating what have been said, so Serena think she was talking about killing... and Serena said '' I never said I will kill you, you are crazy!''

someone have A better version ?
 

Crusher10s

Rookie
Yes she WAS defaulted...on a penalty point that was assessed due to a Code violation....


Get your facts straight.
 

Topaz

Legend
I fully agree with your post, one thing I would change though is where you say 'Serena's behavior did cost her the match.', more like 'cost her the point'. Kim's outstanding play cost Serena the match. :)

Well, again, it seems many missed it, and there's a lot of incorrect stuff out there.

See, that's another thing...Kim was playing so *awesome*! And she got a bit robbed, too, by what happened.

Yes, Serena's behavior cost her the point, which was match point! Just seems many people don't realize that Serena still had a chance after the FF was called.

She wasn't defaulted. Her ROID-RAGE got her a point penalty and that happen to be on match point.

I think default is different.

Grow up.

Actually, they are calling it a default, at least that is what Pam Shriver just reported. You can get defaulted after too many code violations, or, even your behavior is bad enough (and I think they were considering her's to be bad enough) they can default you outright. Like McEnroe was once, but then they 'changed their minds'. (can't remember his opponent, but I think it was USOpen as well)
 

Crusher10s

Rookie
And for what have been said, here what i think

-after the foot fault serena said ''I'm gonna shove this ball down you troath''

-the judge go to the umpire and point her troath when repeating what have been said, so Serena think she was talking about killing... and Serena said '' I never said I will kill you, you are crazy!''

someone have A better version ?



Yeah...anyone who actually saw what happened and can spell.
 

kingdaddy41788

Hall of Fame
Yeah...anyone who actually saw what happened and can spell.

Yeah. You can see what happened here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_jlXjgxN8&feature=related

It's pretty obvious she says something about the ball going down the line judges throat. And then gets in her face.

As for being defaulted: No, she wasn't. She was given a point penalty on match point, so she lost the match by default because she didn't get to play a match point. But she was not defaulted, she was just given a point penalty on match point.
 
..................................................................................................................................

Now, I'm curious as to why she walked back and mouthed off a second time. That is what really cost her IMO. It almost seemed like she wanted to see what would happen, and wanted to push. Or, she knew she was getting out played and wanted to further throw Kim off during match point.
...quote]
....................................................................................................................................................................

Maybe. But I ''beleive'' it has something to do with her large ego and her sense of entitlement*. Or the fact that she has a world-class temper problem and she belongs with NFL players. Or the whole us against them thing she's been brought up on.

*sense of entitlement...Mac was once defaulted (he did not know about the shortening of the violations sequence) at the Oz Oipen. Agassi had a similar thing in San Jose. Both defaulted. Neither was for a FF, though, but it was similar: huge star, britches as big as the game itself, rules are enforced, huge star is incredulous and feels oppressed, huge star acts out. Dre's and Mac's tirades had more to do with sexual acts and family members. Serena's was on the violent side.
 

kanamit

Hall of Fame
Receiving a point penalty on match point is completely different than being defaulted. Serena was NOT defaulted last night, though officials are considering whether she should be retroactively defaulted which would also disqualify her from the doubles final.
 

Crusher10s

Rookie
Slice I like your Michelle Oudin version of believe but some of your post doesn't fly.

I agree big egos equal big tantrums but Serena was NOT defaulted because of a FF. It was a penalty point assessed for a Code violation.

And threatening to do sexual things to one's mother is in my opinion just as violent as threatening to shove a ball down a line judge's f**ng throat.
 

Speranza

Hall of Fame
I'd agree with the OP in how it occurred, and ultimately that Serena was to blame as Topaz has stated.
 

Topaz

Legend
Receiving a point penalty on match point is completely different than being defaulted. Serena was NOT defaulted last night, though officials are considering whether she should be retroactively defaulted which would also disqualify her from the doubles final.

Hmmm, so this seems to be a sticking point for us, a bit confusing. We all agree...she had one code violation, then received a second, which resulted in the point penalty *on match point*, which effectively ended the match. I was under the belief (<--spelled correctly!) that that is then called a 'default'. But I'm not certain on that...maybe we can get Woodrow in here, but I also know he has addressed it on his thread.

Maybe that is what Pam Shriver is talking about...that they may still default her retroactively? They did mention that they are going over things, whatever that means.

PS...this thread was gone, then reappeared in this forum (which is fine with me), with my spelling goof in the title corrected! LOL I'm guessing the mods are a bit busy today!
 

Topaz

Legend
The chair umpire did call the supervisor onto the court to make the decision to default/point penalty. Which is why the line umpire was called back to the chair a second time. The thing with a default is that it has to be 100% clear to the supervisor/referee that it is a default. The chair umpire probably could not hear what Serena was saying. With the crowd noise, it is very difficult to hear in that stadium. The other thing is that the line umpire does not speak english as a first language, and there is a language barrier there. It was definitely clear that it was a code violation, based on the ACTION alone. The words didn't even really matter. If the line umpire is having trouble remembering exactly what was said because of the language barrier or being nervous, and can't get it exactly across to the referee as it was said, then the correct decision is to not default her. So yes she does keep her money and points, but will most likely receive a VERY LARGE fine.


Some interesting stuff from Woodrow's thread...
 

jeansain

New User
^^^Aw crap, should say 'sequence'. Really, I can spell, just not so much with the typing.

In reading all of these threads (ok, not all of them, I don't have that kind of time), it is apparent many didn't actually see what happened, and/or didn't know the events prior that led up to Serena's default.

So, here it is:

1. Earlier in the tournament (I believe during a doubles match) Serena was called on FF. After one, she decided to stare down the line judge who called it, glaring at them for a good long time. She continues to FF and get called on it.

2. After first set, Serena smashes her racquet, receives a code violation.

3. At 15-30 Serena hits her first serve and it is a fault. The second serve she FFs.

4. Score is now 15-40. THIS IS AFTER THE FF. Serena could have just did her glaring, and then step up and serve (it isn't like she can't serve herself out of trouble).

5. Serena has tirade #1 toward line judge. Has a bit of a tantrum. You can even hear, in the replays, the chair ump saying 'Serena' to calm her down.

6. Serena walks back to baseline, looking like she's going to serve.

7. Then she changes her mind, and walks back to mouth off to the line judge *again*.

8. At this point, the chair ump asks the line judge to tell her what was said.

9. Referee is called, Serena is defaulted.

So, a couple of important things here:

*Serena's FF did not cost her the match.

*Serena's behavior did cost her the match.

*Serena knew she'd been FFing earlier in the tournament.

These are all *facts*. Not in dispute.

Now, I'm curious as to why she walked back and mouthed off a second time. That is what really cost her IMO. It almost seemed like she wanted to see what would happen, and wanted to push. Or, she knew she was getting out played and wanted to further throw Kim off during match point.

Any of that, of course, is conjecture.

The real shame, IMO, is that it was a very good match up until then. It won't be remembered for the high quality and beautiful ball striking and movement, but instead for Serena's behavior.

IMO, what happened was right. She broke the rules (code of conduct) and paid the penalty.

The only thing you are missing is that THERE WAS NO FOOT FAULT

Anyone who would have this call against them at this critical moment in a semi-final would be pissed off!

I am not condoning her behavior but I completely understand her!
 
The only thing you are missing is that THERE WAS NO FOOT FAULT

Anyone who would have this call against them at this critical moment in a semi-final would be pissed off!

I am not condoning her behavior but I completely understand her!

I'm hoping to see proof of the emboldened statement because everything I've seen so far looked close but inconclusive
 

GasquetGOAT

Hall of Fame
The important point here is the linesperson did not volunteer to go to the chair umpire and tell her what Serena said, the chair umpire asked the linesperson.
 

edmondsm

Legend
Yeah. You can see what happened here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DO_jlXjgxN8&feature=related

It's pretty obvious she says something about the ball going down the line judges throat. And then gets in her face.

As for being defaulted: No, she wasn't. She was given a point penalty on match point, so she lost the match by default because she didn't get to play a match point. But she was not defaulted, she was just given a point penalty on match point.

Wow, that's the first time I've seen the incident. Appalling stuff from Serena.
 

Topaz

Legend
The only thing you are missing is that THERE WAS NO FOOT FAULT

Anyone who would have this call against them at this critical moment in a semi-final would be pissed off!

I am not condoning her behavior but I completely understand her!

Proof? 'Cause I disagree, plus she had been footfaulting the entire tournament and had been called on it in previous matches. Again, all she needed to do was move back an inch from the baseline, but she didn't think to do it or didn't think it was necessary.

The rules are in effect on all points of a match, including the critical ones. Foot faults are against the rules.

And, again, I think you're getting hung up on the FF...the FF didn't cost her the match, it took her to 15-40. The match wasn't over yet, and Serena is very capable of serving out of two match points. But she chose not to.

Personal responsibility.


The important point here is the linesperson did not volunteer to go to the chair umpire and tell her what Serena said, the chair umpire asked the linesperson.

Yes, good point to repeat...some think she 'tattled', but in protocol with the rules, the chair ump asked her to come over and tell her what was said. That's the chair ump's job.

The linespeople and the chair ump all did their jobs very well. On *every* point of the match.
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
Don't forget: she was also shaking her racket at the linesperson in what could easily be considered a threatening manner.

I hate to see it happen to Venus - but Serena should not be allowed - as the rules allow - to play in the dubs final.

And I'm always amused by the Race Card. Blacks don't seem to get it: if an white ex NFLer had done what all sane people know OJ Simpson did that night on Bundy and gotten away with it, whites would have been just as outraged. Same with last night. Sorry if the truth hurts...
 
Last edited:

Topaz

Legend
Jeansain, I believe at :36 you are looking too soon in the service motion. Keep watching, and you see that same foot go from heel to toe...*that* is the part that everyone is concerned with IIRC. And that is not the correct angle to wach for one...you need to be lateral to the server, which is where the linesperson calls from. That's where you can really see if and when she crossed that line.

I really don't want to get in an argument about whether or not there was a FF, because it really is irrelevant. For our 'sequence' purposes, there was indeed a FF called (whether or not you believe it actually happened).

The professional ex-players who have studied the tape say it is inconclusive, so I fail to see why others can so boldly say it is certain one way or the other.
 

Topaz

Legend
Actually she was also called for a FF in the first set vs. Clijsters.

You know, I thought I remembered that, too, but I didn't want to put it in unless I was certain, and I wasn't about to go back and watch the whole match again (I have it recorded).

I'll add it to our sequence! :)
 

jeansain

New User
No, it does not. Scroll forward to 0:40. The shadow is touching the line.

Sequence goes from 0:36 to 0:42.
0:36 - 0:38 ==> you see the shadow under her shoe far from the line
0:39 ==> her shoe covers the shadow exactly at the same spot where the shadow was before
0:40 - 0:42 ==> she lifts her heel, leaving the front of her foot still at the same spot.

I know the angle makes it appear that the foot is touching the line, but if you follow the shadow, it's clear that it isn't the case.
 

Topaz

Legend
I don't think it is clear Jeansain, so I must *respectfully* disagree. Just goes to show how different eyes can look at the same thing but see something different! :)
 
1

1970CRBase

Guest
(1) The person who had the right to call the line was the line judge, not some random tt poster, not some arm chair wannabe, not some fool who thinks that according to "common sense", rules are not rules depending on the "situation". What sort of nonsense is that? You can't talk any sense to people like that.

(2) As for the "kill you" thing, I'm rather curious as to why there's still no absolutely clear recording released of the last couple words Serena Williams was seen saying to the line judge on her initial tirade after her various words about "ball" and "throat". Since the networks usually catch every sound on the court, I somehow don't believe the managed to miss that.

(3) I now believe the line judge's allegation of Serena Williams' threat. Why would she lie about that? Can you prove she was lying? Can you prove she had any personal bias against Serena Williams? Can you prove she had any motivation for lying?

If you want to find the truth about the alleged threat, charge Serena Williams with criminal intimidation & take the matter to a real Court. Who would the judge find to be a credible witness?
 
The rules are in effect on all points of a match, including the critical ones. Foot faults are against the rules.

Maybe the rulemakers in tennis should consider allowing the server to serve from a little bit in the court on really important points.
 

Topaz

Legend
There is such a thing called slow motion.

And the experts have said the slow motion is inconclusive. I have watched it myself, and unfortunately the only camera angle we have is inconclusive. It certainly does *not* prove that she did *not* FF.

You know who had the best view? The line judge.
 

Topaz

Legend
Maybe the rulemakers in tennis should consider allowing the server to serve from a little bit in the court on really important points.

*eyebrow* Are you serious?

And who decides what a 'really important point' is?

Nawww, I don't think so. How about we follow the rules on ALL of the points?
 

Crusher10s

Rookie
So if it'd been a default then she'd (Serena) have lost her prize money and any ranking points she'd earned.

Instead of it being a default, she was assessed a penalty point and simply lost the match.

I see...
 
1

1970CRBase

Guest
And the experts have said the slow motion is inconclusive. I have watched it myself, and unfortunately the only camera angle we have is inconclusive. It certainly does *not* prove that she did *not* FF.

You know who had the best view? The line judge.

Exactly. Since the available replays are inconclusive, at least to deciding the call in favour of Serena Williams, then there is no reason not to accept the judgement of the lines judge who wouldn't make the call unless in her eye it was definitive, conclusive that it WAS a clear FF and not a dubious call. If people like McEnroe, for example, or the assorted tennis journalists think they know better, why is there a need for a line judge to be sitting at that position with their eye fixed on the line at all? Why not just call lines as how commentators like Mac see fit from where they are sitting up in the box or wherever else?
 
Top