The Nalbandian default incident Discussion thread

woodrow1029

Hall of Fame
You fail to understand that Serena was penalized, and it just happened to be on match point. Serena was also penalized by the WTA.
Yeah. But there's a big difference between a point penalty on match point, and a default. You don't have to tell me what I fail to understand. I understand exactly what happened. I guess you don't know what I did for a living.


She wasn't penalized by the WTA. She was penalized by the US Open referee staff, and the ITF.
 

woodrow1029

Hall of Fame
LOL. I just saw Nalbandian's speech. What an idiot. He said "Sorry", but not in the right context.

He was way out of line. What he was talking about with the ATP making mistakes, I'm assuming he was talking about the courts, the scheduling, blah blah blah. A lot of that is subjective.

He's a moron.
 

woodrow1029

Hall of Fame
It wouldn't really have mattered because it was match point...
It would have mattered in that she would have been defaulted from the doubles final, the fine would have been bigger, she would have lost all of her prize money and ranking points for the entire tournament. There's a big difference.

It also could have potentially mattered more, because if she didn't have a warning earlier in the match, that incident would have only been a warning. But nobody thinks of that angle.
 

Virginia

Hall of Fame
A mountain out of a molehilll. Though what Nalby did was way out of line, we have to bear in mind two things. How pathetic is it to have a piece of matchstick in front of the linesman's legs? Clearly Nalby didn't expect it to give way like that - he was expecting a stub toe.

Secondly the injury was minor - I've had more blood flow pruning my roses.

Default the match and a fine - fair enough. But not loss so of earnings and points - that's going too far.

As for his speech afterwards, he'd already apologised profusely to the linesman and the crowd. His criticism of the ATP, though badly timed, is valid. The rules are not applied uniformly and certain players seem to be favoured, whether because of bullying tactics or sheer lack of cajones on the part of the umpires, is a moot point.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
There was not any physical contact between Serena and any official, thus it was a verbal altercation. Nalbandian's actions caused the official to bleed, thus there was a clear physical component.

But you clearly just want an excuse to be mad about the Serena incident all over again, so whatever, carry on. I won't bother you with facts any more.
there ya go ... the moment when "facts" degenerate into "ad hominem" ... accusing me of unverifiable biased thoughts means you lose the argument! :p

Apparently, our disagreement is a symantic one. There was no "verbal altercation," as you claim ...
Altercation: a noisy heated angry dispute (noise and anger was ALL by SWilliams, ZERO was responded by the line judge.
Dispute: verbal controversy ... debate (ALL words [including multiple F-words] were uttered by Williams, but not one, single word was uttered by the official in response)
Debate: a contention by words or arguments (ALL the vitriol was expressed by Williams toward the official, ZERO back from the judge)
Contention: an act or instance of contending
Contend: to strive in debate : argue

There was no debate. It takes at least two to debate.

All the threats of physical violence were uttered by SWilliams as she stalked toward the seated line judge with her tennis racket raise to strike (see photo above). textbook definition of "assault."

Serena Williams Threatens Line Judge “I Would Kill You” [Video] @
http://www.totalprosports.com/2009/...-threatens-line-judge-i-would-kill-you-video/

edit: that video was disabled, but this one is quite explanatory (shows linejudge running in fear when SW starts back at her + when SW denies saying she would "kill you," someone in the crowd yelled, "Yeah, you did.")@
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=QbObCBxG0sM&NR=1

>>>>>>>>>>

I never said Nalbandian didnt deserve his punishment. Just the opposite: I stated that his behavior was "inexcuseable," and it also shocked me. I expected better from him. His job is based on reaction time. He could have stopped himself from acting out the way he did. He also stayed around talking to the man he injured, soliciting the extent of the damage and apologizing directly to his victim.
 
Last edited:

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
A mountain out of a molehilll. Though what Nalby did was way out of line, we have to bear in mind two things. How pathetic is it to have a piece of matchstick in front of the linesman's legs? Clearly Nalby didn't expect it to give way like that - he was expecting a stub toe.

Secondly the injury was minor - I've had more blood flow pruning my roses.

Default the match and a fine - fair enough. But not loss so of earnings and points - that's going too far.

As for his speech afterwards, he'd already apologised profusely to the linesman and the crowd. His criticism of the ATP, though badly timed, is valid. The rules are not applied uniformly and certain players seem to be favoured, whether because of bullying tactics or sheer lack of cajones on the part of the umpires, is a moot point.
Very well said!
 

Nostradamus

Bionic Poster
If that leg has to be amputated, i don't think Nalby has enough money to pay for the lawsuit that will ensue. No pun intended. Hopefully that line judge will be ok and be back to full health for wimbledon
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
Nalbandian lashed out in the heat of competition and the linesman got a bad cut on the shin. That should be a default and a fine, not prize money taken away and ranking points stripped. That's actually insulting to Nalbandian, for the governing body to say to him, after he has worked hard all week and put up with a load of difficult conditions, that it was all for nothing. It spits in the face of Nalbandian if it strips him of ranking points and prize money.
 

Towser83

G.O.A.T.
I think Woodraw said because it's an ITF eevnt, he can't be suspended from it.



That avatar, lol.

Doesn't Nalbandián have a charity that has several hospitals in Argentina?. I think so, so I'm not judging him too hard on this incident... he certainly had to be disqualified (at least) though.
thanks haha, it had to be done.
 

JeMar

Legend
Losing points was way too much. I think he should have kept his prize money through the semis, at least.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Nalbandian has created more interest in tennis today than the whole of Queens and Halle has for a week, so restore his prize money now!
 

Lsmkenpo

Hall of Fame
Nalbandian lashed out in the heat of competition and the linesman got a bad cut on the shin. That should be a default and a fine, not prize money taken away and ranking points stripped. That's actually insulting to Nalbandian, for the governing body to say to him, after he has worked hard all week and put up with a load of difficult conditions, that it was all for nothing. It spits in the face of Nalbandian if it strips him of ranking points and prize money.
Elementary my dear Mustard,

Like I told you before,stick to googling up old clay court stats, these concepts are beyond your *******ed mind to comprehend.

A default is not a great deterrent if the player were close to losing the match, than the only thing the player would really have to fear is a fine, again not a great deterrent for a millionaire.
 

tistrapukcipeht

Professional
Just a thought:

Nalbandian isn't fluent in English, his first language is Spanish, so may have not spoken the words He wanted, had the speech been in Spanish this situation could have been differently judged by us Americans, most of us are very eager to jump to conclusion when people from other countries speak in our language
 

Tony48

Legend
Meanwhile, Djokovic smashed his racquet on the net post directly in front of a ball girl at Rome (vs Nadal). I don't agree with the notion that someone has to bleed before action is taken. Plus there was the damage of property in the Roland Garros final. But the Rome incident was much more serious.
LOL thank God you are in charge of absolutely nothing. Did you even read this foolishness before you hit the "submit" button?

You find the fact that someone was injured as "less serious"? You're an idiot.
 
Last edited:

3fees

G.O.A.T.
Should have broken a racquet or two instead,being disqualified he loses the points and prize money and may face an 8 week suspension and 8K fine...

Cheers
3fees :)
 

dcdoorknob

Hall of Fame
Are you saying Serena shouldn't have been defaulted at the US Open? Had the line umpire actually been able to understand and speak English, 100% Serena would have been defaulted.
I mean I guess I'll take your word for it, but the ITF/tournament/whoever gave the fine out later absolutely knew exactly what she said by then, and I would think they would have made their fine much bigger if they thought it was warranted.

But my main point was that the fundamental difference here was that Serena's tyrade was purely verbal, with nothing she did causing anything at all to come into contact with any official, whereas this Nalbandian incident resulted in physical harm to someone, and that the rules regarding tennis discipline are much more stringent and severe about the latter. Is that incorrect?

For example, if memory serves, one of the Bryan brothers received a fine that same USOpen for some physical contact with an official, and it was noticably bigger than the one given to Serena. The physical contact being the primary reason for that.
 

dcdoorknob

Hall of Fame
Apparently, our disagreement is a symantic one. There was no "verbal altercation," as you claim ...
No, you don't get it. The words I was disagreeing with you about are the words "verbal" and "physical." I said that the Serena incident was purely verbal (meaning that nothing she did caused anything to come into physical contact with that official or anyone else). You responded that it was not verbal, but it was in fact physical, and you posted a picture of Serena standing 10 feet away from the official saying stuff to her like it was intended do something other than support what I had just said.

If you don't want to call it an altercation, that's fine, I've got not problem with that. If you want to continue to say that it wasn't just verbal and was in fact physical, I'm going to keep saying that you're just flat out wrong, though.
 
Last edited:

Virginia

Hall of Fame
Just a thought:

Nalbandian isn't fluent in English, his first language is Spanish, so may have not spoken the words He wanted, had the speech been in Spanish this situation could have been differently judged by us Americans, most of us are very eager to jump to conclusion when people from other countries speak in our language
Good point.

Oh and by the way, a poster in one of the other Nalby threads is a friend of the linesman and he texted him to say that he was fine, just a little surprised by the incident.

And for those of you who referred to the linesman as being "old" and therefore being somehow more vulnerable to serious injury - older folk bleed a lot more easily than younger ones. Sometimes, just a small knock in a strategic place like the shin (because it's close to a bone) will cause bleeding.

Let's not get into a media frenzy over this...
 

Rickenbacker4003

Hall of Fame
Dave's post match interview I think did more damage to him than the actual incident itself. Any sympathy he had went away with the interview. "It's the ATP's fault that I got mad and badly cut that dude's leg."
 

namelessone

Legend
Tbh, I feel a bit sorry for Nalby here. As I was watching this live, it seemed to me like he just wanted to kick that sign out of anger and probably thought it would hold. Either that or in the heat of the moment he didn't see the guy. :)

Too bad, the final was pretty good up until that point.
 

woodrow1029

Hall of Fame
From the ATP Rulebook, page 165 under The Code (for the people that think they were too harsh in giving this penalty so they can see its black and white).

M). Any player that is defaulted shall lose all prize money (gross prize money to be paid to the ATP), hotel accommodations and points earned for that event at that tournament.

In addition, if the Executive Vice President -rules & competition Determines that the default was Particularly injurious to the success of the tournament Or detrimental to the integrity of the sport! He may consider additional penalties (fines and/or suspensions).
 
A mountain out of a molehilll. Though what Nalby did was way out of line, we have to bear in mind two things. How pathetic is it to have a piece of matchstick in front of the linesman's legs? Clearly Nalby didn't expect it to give way like that - he was expecting a stub toe.

Secondly the injury was minor - I've had more blood flow pruning my roses.

Default the match and a fine - fair enough. But not loss so of earnings and points - that's going too far.

As for his speech afterwards, he'd already apologised profusely to the linesman and the crowd. His criticism of the ATP, though badly timed, is valid. The rules are not applied uniformly and certain players seem to be favoured, whether because of bullying tactics or sheer lack of cajones on the part of the umpires, is a moot point.
More blood pruning your roses? What did you prune them with, a butcher knife? You see his leg gushing with blood?

Nalbandian deserved this. He's an idiot, and full of excuses. Move on.
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
No, you don't get it. The words I was disagreeing with you about are the words "verbal" and "physical." I said that the Serena incident was purely verbal (meaning that nothing she did caused anything to come into physical contact with that official or anyone else). You responded that it was not verbal, but it was in fact physical, and you posted a picture of Serena standing 10 feet away from the official saying stuff to her like it was intended do something other than support what I had just said.

If you don't want to call it an altercation, that's fine, I've got not problem with that. If you want to continue to say that it wasn't just verbal and was in fact physical, I'm going to keep saying that you're just flat out wrong, though.
LOL ... what happened to your threat to "carry on. I won't bother you with facts any more" ??? LoLoLoL ... but wait! you didnt add any "facts."

your summary of my post is inaccurate, as anyone can see by going to the post itself. I said" it was a threat of physical harm that put the official in fear of a battery (definition of "assault.)

pfffft ... "10 feet" you claim??? She got much closer than that. And she wasnt "standing" as you falsely claim. She was screaming, swearing, while WALKING TOWARD the little lady sitting down in the completely vulnerable position with SW brandishing her racquet up and down right at the woman. And did you ever hear of an angry player throwing a racket or a ball?????????? DUH!

Watch it again ... shows linejudge running in fear when SW starts back at her + when SW denies saying she would "kill you," someone in the crowd yelled, "Yeah, you did.")@
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&v=QbObCBxG0sM&NR=1

And see the blonde referee? She felt the necessity to put her own body between that of SW and the little line judge in order to protect her just in case.







 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
i consider the incident serious enough to "change that", honestly !
it seems normal to me that he gets significantly punished for this incident, at least at the "scale" of the event where it occured (on the other hand, a suspension, as mentioned by some posters, would probably be too harsh).

next time, he will think twice before acting like this... and probably come back to the good old racquet smashing, which is better and more entertaining for him, for the crowd and for the linesmen. ;)
Completely agree! :)
Nalby needs to engage brain before acting out. In fact, he should probably ask Delpo and his coach Franco Davin for some tips on self-control.
 

NickJ

Professional
It was a helluva kick. Maybe Roy Hodgson should try and get him to to the Euros to start with Rooney against the Ukraine!
 

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
O. M. G. apparently, "assault" means something different under the law in GBR than it does in USA :shock:

David Nalbandian investigated by police after line judge injury
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18479244


edit: got the answer to one question. The umpire did it.
"... umpire Fergus Murphy awarded the match to Cilic despite boos from the crowd."

edit: or maybe it was Tom Barnes (the guy with the white hair):
"ATP supervisor Tom Barnes said he had no other option but to disqualify Nalbandian once he saw the injury and revealed the Argentine would lose ranking points, prize money and be fined for the incident.

"It is unsportsmanlike conduct, and the supervisor has the authority to declare an immediate default," said Barnes.

"Once I saw that the line judge was injured, I didn't have any other option."

Tournament director Chris Kermode described Nalbandian's disqualification as a "clear-cut case" but said the player was afterwards "very apologetic".

"It's not the way we wanted to finish the final, by any means," said Kermode. "I think some sections of the crowd didn't see how bad it was. Anyone who saw it on the television... it was sort of a red card in football.

"I can understand the crowd's frustration. They paid money to see it. It was the best weather day we've had and great tennis so I can understand their frustration but from a rules perspective, there was absolutely no other choice."


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18480270
 
Last edited:

Love Game

Talk Tennis Guru
LOL, the police have been involved?

Didn't expect that.
Seems weird in the circumstances of unintentional injury. Must be the "stunned and angry McDougall" who's brought in the police? ... and it would be a rotten shame if he were to be given the 8-week ban!

"... Nalbandian, who had won the first set 7-6 (7/3) against Croatia's Marin Cilic, had just lost his serve to fall 4-3 down in the second when he reacted with a frustrated kick at the board, which was just in front of line judge Andrew McDougall.

A stunned and angry McDougall then rolled up his trousers to reveal a bloody gash on his leg before remonstrating with Nalbandian.

Nalbandian was immediately disqualified "due to unsportsmanike behaviour" and Cilic was declared the champion.

The Argentine was stripped of his runners-up cheque, worth 44,945 euros ($56,802), and 150 ATP ranking points, which he would have earned as a beaten finalist.

He could also be hit with a 10,000 euro ($12,638) fine, which will be decided by ATP chiefs at a later date.

But he could also face an eight-week ban having also been fined $8,000 for throwing water at an Australian Open tournament worker in January following a five-set defeat to America's John Isner
. ..."

http://www.tennis.co.uk/news/repeat_offender_nalbandian_battles_bigger_sanction_rss2306501.shtml
 

Sentinel

Bionic Poster
Tbh, I feel a bit sorry for Nalby here. As I was watching this live, it seemed to me like he just wanted to kick that sign out of anger and probably thought it would hold. Either that or in the heat of the moment he didn't see the guy. :)

Too bad, the final was pretty good up until that point.
True, he was probably just doing what Roger did with the Perrier sign at Halle recently, except with his foot instead of the racket.
 

NickJ

Professional
But he could also face an eight-week ban having also been fined $8,000 for throwing water at an Australian Open tournament worker in January following a five-set defeat to America's John Isner[/B][/COLOR]. ..."

http://www.tennis.co.uk/news/repeat_offender_nalbandian_battles_bigger_sanction_rss2306501.shtml[/QUOTE]

Sounds like the kick isn't a one off incident and he has serious anger problems. What's he going to do? Apologise to each of the people he injures/abuses in every future tournament? 'I'm sorry, it won't happen again.' 'I'm sorry, it won't happen again.' 'I'm sorry, it won't happen again.' 'I'm sorry, it won't happen again.' 'I'm sorry, it won't happen again.' etc etc etc
 

Satch

Hall of Fame
Tbh, I feel a bit sorry for Nalby here. As I was watching this live, it seemed to me like he just wanted to kick that sign out of anger and probably thought it would hold. Either that or in the heat of the moment he didn't see the guy. :)

Too bad, the final was pretty good up until that point.
Yeah. This just shows why he's wasted all of his talent. His mind is in trouble..
 

Mustard

Talk Tennis Guru
The ATP are going WAY over the top with their punishments. Nalbandian busted his backside all week to get to the final, including playing 2 matches on 1 day, so for some bureaucrats in suits to just take that away and say it was all for nothing, is a disgrace.
 

dcdoorknob

Hall of Fame
Love game,

You can either show where anything that Serena did caused anything to come into physical contact with anyone, or you can continue to prove my point for me.

Since the former didn't happen, I guess the latter is actually your only option.
 

Smasher08

Legend
LOL thank God you are in charge of absolutely nothing. Did you even read this foolishness before you hit the "submit" button?

You find the fact that someone was injured as "less serious"? You're an idiot.
Hey, that which does not involve Nadal gets trivialized by him.

It's a more reliable constant than the speed of light.
 

Smasher08

Legend
As they should. It sure looks to me like Nalbandian clearly intended to kick the stand and was reckless as to whether or not it would strike/injure the linesman.

Personally I think Nalbandian could potentially face some serious legal issues from this, either criminal or civil.

And the Tour are making the right call in coming down hard and setting an example.
 

Smasher08

Legend
Because the act was not premeditated.
Premeditation is irrelevant in a civil lawsuit. Negligence would have to be proven.

And if he didn't intend to hit her (criminal assault) then negligence would be the cause of action.

The young woman would have to prove he had a duty of care, which he breached, and that damage was caused as a reasonably foreseeable result of that breach.

In my view, proving genuine damage, requiring expert evidence of this from a neurologist and/or psychiatrist, would likely be her biggest hurdle.
 

jdubbs

Hall of Fame
The guy got kicked on the shin, it's likely healed within a few days. Nalby should cover any medical bills, but it's unlikely to be a serious issue.

But I can't see it prosecuted as a criminal act.
 

Boricua

Hall of Fame
The guy got kicked on the shin, it's likely healed within a few days. Nalby should cover any medical bills, but it's unlikely to be a serious issue.

But I can't see it prosecuted as a criminal act.
There was no "mens rea" or criminal intent obviously. It was a terrible accident. In terms of damages, the lines person may ask for some money but considering the injury, not alot. Maybe some emotional distress.

Next time Nalby, break the racket by hitting the court in any case, lol.
 
Top