Umpires considering boycott of Serena's matches

[Subway Tennis]

Ramos specifically stated to Williams that he did not hold her responsible or consider her a cheat, or some such, and you were the one relying on Ramos if you remember.

So the player and the coach were not found to be acting in concert by Ramos. So you are wrong, as usual. Ramos acted only what he saw the coach doing and he had no wider evidence of collusion.

Spot on

 

[Sentinel]

My proposition is masterfully simple.

You call the violation against the coach and have him removed from the court.

He is the one who is responsible and the player can continue with their ethics unchallenged by the umpire.

Yeah. And if she slams her racket, then remove all her rackets. How do you like that?

 

[Sentinel]

His on court penalties were not challenged and Williams was further penalised for her actions off court, so what's the point in dwelling on the issue?

That 17000 USD fine won't change a thing. If that were true then the fine in 2009 would have fixed her.

She still thinks she is in the right, so is likely to repeat her actions.

 

[Sudacafan]

That 17000 USD fine won't change a thing. If that were true then the fine in 2009 would have fixed her.

She still thinks she is in the right, so is likely to repeat her actions.

Maybe she promises not to do it again if she’s offered an apology.

 

[Sentinel]

So Patrick sends Serena hand signals all the time, and Serena just ignores them?.That does sound strange. As Nadal would say, "unbeeleebobol" .

Good Nadal would never ignore Tio's signals.

Patrick was only telling Good Mrs. Williams that it was baby feeding time.

 

[Sentinel]

Maybe she promises not to do it again if she’s offered an apology.

Good old Bart thinks like a lawyer. For him a token fine is enough.

 

[Bartelby]

Almost a decade between fines seems to indicate a capacity to learn and remember for a far longer period than most people around here.

That 17000 USD fine won't change a thing. If that were true then the fine in 2009 would have fixed her.

She still thinks she is in the right, so is likely to repeat her actions.

 

[Bartelby]

So being publicly humiliated as a cheat in front of a global audience wasn't also a part of the penalty Williams suffered?

As I've said before, most people around here would have acted far worse than Williams given the same circumstances.

And all those people talking about following rules could not even conduct a discussion about the issue without explicitly making political points in violation of forum rules!

Good old Bart thinks like a lawyer. For him a token fine is enough.

 

[Sudacafan]

It’s amazing how there are some individuals here who nearly always stand in the exact opposite position I stand for in many issues.

 

[donquijote]

Nothing changed over the years. Why does this keep happening to Serena and no one else?

 

[Harry_Wild]

I would love to see WTA tour players call their own lines in the WTA tour from now on. It would make “The Real House Wife of ....” reality TV look melo. Have instant replay for only available to the TV audience to find out how accurate each player is and have a running score of accuracy and at advantage and breakpoint too. Drama, drama, drama!

 

[JoelDali]

Nothing changed over the years. Why does this keep happening to Serena and no one else?

Live in NYC for ten years to experience what u see in these pics.

 

[Bartelby]

So Williams is a bit of a bully? I've never seen this quality criticised around here that much when a man behaves as such. And therein lies the problem.

 

[Gary Duane]

@Tennis_Hands hands
@Bartelby

You should both check the timelines of your posts. Either you live in the same time zone and normally post at the same time, or you both took a break at roughly the same time then reengaged many hours later.

What did you do - go to sleep to recharge, to begin the same debate again?

 

[Bartelby]

There's not much of a debate. He writes at too great a length on matters I consider speculative at best.

I just looked at the rule book, and although it is not a killer point, the rule does state that:

a referee may construe ...

In other words, and to continue the point I've made before, Ramos chose to interpret it as coaching.

He wasn't obligated to do so by the rules. He was only obligated to consider it.

This is why, as Navratilova pointed out, he could have given her a soft warning as to how he might consider future gestures from her box.

Given the situation as he knew it at the time then Ramos could have taken a safer course of action.

His argument that the tennis rules are not 'a la carte' also tends to ring a little hollow.

And this is before we get to the following:

Communications of any kind, audible or visible, between a player and a coach ...

So naturally enough the two had a conversation about the message and whether it was received.

This of course raises the semiotic question of what constitutes a message ...

And then back again to tennis_hands and myself.

Are we ever really in any kind of communication with each other given that emission and reception never correspond?

@Tennis_Hands hands
@Bartelby

You should both check the timelines of your posts. Either you live in the same time zone and normally post at the same time, or you both took a break at roughly the same time then reengaged many hours later.

What did you do - go to sleep to recharge, to begin the same debate again?

 

[flanker2000fr]

Their action might be more about disrespect of the umpires in general - with this simply being the case that crystallized their frustration.

I mean, what's their job description? They're paid $450 freaking dollars to listen to millionaires yell at them that they're corrupt. I can't blame them for this. I just can't.

Too bloody right.

 

[Yoneyama]

So Williams is a bit of a bully? I've never seen this quality criticised around here that much when a man behaves as such. And therein lies the problem.

Yeah but the men who exhibit bully-like behaviour on tour don't demand apologies, deny it profusely, pull out the Victim Card, Race Card, Mother Card, everyotherexcuse Card...

People don't care that SW is a bully, people care that she think's shes God's gift and an unblemished role-model when she isn't.

 

[Harry_Wild]

 

[flanker2000fr]

Ramos specifically stated to Williams that he did not hold her responsible or consider her a cheat, or some such, and you were the one relying on Ramos if you remember.

So the player and the coach were not found to be acting in concert by Ramos. So you are wrong, as usual. Ramos acted only what he saw the coach doing and he had no wider evidence of collusion.

Except that it's not the rule: if a coach is seen coaching by the ref, regardless of the player actually seeing / receiving it, this can be considered coaching and it is then a code violation. The player is deemed responsible of the behavior of people on their payroll. So if she need to have a tantrum with anyone, it should be Moratoglu.

 

[sbengte]

Their action might be more about disrespect of the umpires in general - with this simply being the case that crystallized their frustration.

I mean, what's their job description? They're paid $450 freaking dollars to listen to millionaires yell at them that they're corrupt. I can't blame them for this. I just can't.

Couldn't have said it better. I don't know why this Serena incident has upset and bothered me so much - I think it is the fact that WTA, USTA president came out in support of her inexcusable behavior , not to mention the dimwit fans that don't know the basic rules and don't follow men's tennis came out with wild allegations throwing mud on Ramos.

WTF is wrong with everyone ? How can you support a multi-millionaire misusing her clout to bully, abuse and insult a regular official who was doing his job with integrity ? And on top of that take refuge in BS like sexism and what not to cover up for her disgraceful behavior .

Do people have no morals left whatsoever ? I wish there was some way I could show support publicly to Ramos and his ilk.

 

[sbengte]

Except that it's not the rule: if a coach is seen coaching by the ref, regardless of the player actually seeing / receiving it, this can be considered coaching and it is then a code violation. The player is deemed responsible of the behavior of people on their payroll. So if she need to have a tantrum with anyone, it should be Moratoglu.

Sigh....dimwits on SM are disputing Ramos' judgement on the coaching violation even as the coach admitted and the rule is clear on player not even having to see it.
Didn't expect someone on a ****ing tennis forum to be still disputing it.

 

[Russeljones]

What I don't understand is what the Kremlin aims to win in this.

 

[FD3S]

So Williams is a bit of a bully? I've never seen this quality criticised around here that much when a man behaves as such. And therein lies the problem.

What?!

Kyrgios routinely takes heat for whenever he does something remotely questionable. Djokovic gets blistered every time he's remotely rude to a linesperson or screams at the crowd. Nalbandian's attained tennis infamy thanks to that kick. Federer's never going to live down that time he told the chair ump to be quiet because he talks when he wants to talk, and you'd think Roddick and Hewitt murdered puppies and kittens in their spare time from how they were torched (and still are, for that matter) for their bratty histrionics, to say nothing of McEnroe and Connors, two men whose collective talent is almost never brought up without their on court jack-assery immediately being mentioned as well.

Men take heat all the time too, they just don't get game penalties because no one's been foolish enough to push their luck with two code violations in the books. Granted none of them are mothers, but I suppose if one of them was it'd overshadow the matter at hand so maybe that's for the best.

 

[sbengte]

So Williams is a bit of a bully? I've never seen this quality criticised around here that much when a man behaves as such. And therein lies the problem.

You think humbalito gets all the love out here for no reason ? He is the Serena of the ATP.

 

[Bartelby]

I have alread said this on many occasions, so see above post 272 and elsewhere I discuss agency.

But to be precise, it does not talk about 'regardless of the player actually seeing/receiving it' in the rule book.

And you underplay the fact that the umpire may or can consider it coaching, which means there is no obligation.

So you are wrong.

The rule states:

Players shall not receive coaching during a match (including the warm-up). Communications of any kind, audible or visible, between a player and a coach may be construed as coaching

If I were a coach I would have a discussion with the player as to my thinking with regard to their coach's gestures/communications before moving to the next step.

Absolutely nothing turned upon waiting to make sure everyone was clear.

Except that it's not the rule: if a coach is seen coaching by the ref, regardless of the player actually seeing / receiving it, this can be considered coaching and it is then a code violation. The player is deemed responsible of the behavior of people on their payroll. So if she need to have a tantrum with anyone, it should be Moratoglu.

 

[Bartelby]

We meddle in everything, tovarisch.

What I don't understand is what the Kremlin aims to win in this.

 

[PDJ]

Yes the ITF got it right. I was particularly disgusted with the response of Katrina Adams, the USTA President.

Yes. That was tacky and just fuelled the angry villagers further.
A pity, because Adams normally seems so sane and sensible.

 

[Sentinel]

So being publicly humiliated as a cheat in front of a global audience wasn't also a part of the penalty Williams suffered?

As I've said before, most people around here would have acted far worse than Williams given the same circumstances.

And all those people talking about following rules could not even conduct a discussion about the issue without explicitly making political points in violation of forum rules!

Tut tut ! Bart, since you talk like a lawyer, might I remind you that "other people HERE would have acted far worse", has nothing to do with what happened. And it is hypothetical. This sentence is precisely the kind of thing you catch with your smart legal sixth sense (or whatever) when OTHERS make it.

Whether people discussing are also making points in violation of forum rules also does not change what happened. The tennis court and this forum are two separate places. As you know.

No. Serena was not publicly humiliated as a cheat. Come on, Bart, you can do better than this. A coaching violation is not the same as being called a cheat. You are talking like Serena now.

Say something meaningful.

 

[PDJ]

Tut tut ! Bart, since you talk like a lawyer, might I remind you that "other people HERE would have acted far worse", has nothing to do with what happened. And it is hypothetical. This sentence is precisely the kind of thing you catch with your smart legal sixth sense (or whatever) when OTHERS make it.

Whether people discussing are also making points in violation of forum rules also does not change what happened. The tennis court and this forum are two separate places. As you know.

No. Serena was not publicly humiliated as a cheat. Come on, Bart, you can do better than this. A coaching violation is not the same as being called a cheat. You are talking like Serena now.

Say something meaningful.

I enjoy his posts. Self appointed 'Devil's Advocate '. Play on words intended.

 

[Sentinel]

Almost a decade between fines seems to indicate a capacity to learn and remember for a far longer period than most people around here.

Again Bart, stop bringing most people here into this.

Does this incident actually show that she did learn from the 2009 one ? It's right up there with the 2009 one. She may not have threatened anyone, but the way she persisted does show that nothing changed.

She's a decade older too, you could have pointed out, if that suited you, and is now a mother, so should have behaved much better. You can spin it that way too if it suits you.

 

[Sentinel]

Maybe she promises not to do it again if she’s offered an apology.

If she promises not to do it again, then that is accepting her action was wrong in the first place, then why would she want an apology

 

[Bartelby]

It is your proposition that all my statements are legal ones.

'The holier than thou' reproach is a valid enough in this context and was not offered as a legal argument.

My point about rules is that people were making an absolute claim for following them despite the fact they were ranting about politics and not themselves following them.

Rule following, insofar as it is normative, is the same on or off a court.

Why is coaching sanctioned if it is not considered ethically bad aka cheating?

You are splitting hairs like a bad lawyer with a difficult brief.

Tut tut ! Bart, since you talk like a lawyer, might I remind you that "other people HERE would have acted far worse", has nothing to do with what happened. And it is hypothetical. This sentence is precisely the kind of thing you catch with your smart legal sixth sense (or whatever) when OTHERS make it.

Whether people discussing are also making points in violation of forum rules also does not change what happened. The tennis court and this forum are two separate places. As you know.

No. Serena was not publicly humiliated as a cheat. Come on, Bart, you can do better than this. A coaching violation is not the same as being called a cheat. You are talking like Serena now.

Say something meaningful.

 

[Sentinel]

I enjoy his posts. Self appointed 'Devil's Advocate '. Play on words intended.

That makes two of us who don't have Bart on ignore.

Maybe we should form an exclusive club of such distinguished people.

 

[Bartelby]

It's more relevant to know whether she has been officially warned for coaching before.

Again Bart, stop bringing most people here into this.

Does this incident actually show that she did learn from the 2009 one ? It's right up there with the 2009 one. She may not have threatened anyone, but the way she persisted does show that nothing changed.

She's a decade older too, you could have pointed out, if that suited you, and is now a mother, so should have behaved much better. You can spin it that way too if it suits you.

 

[Sudacafan]

If she promises not to do it again, then that is accepting her action was wrong in the first place, then why would she want an apology

Nonsense intended.

 

[flanker2000fr]

I have alread said this on many occasions, so see above post 272 and elsewhere I discuss agency.

But to be precise, it does not talk about 'regardless of the player actually seeing/receiving it' in the rule book.

And you underplay the fact that the umpire may or can consider it coaching, which means there is no obligation.

So you are wrong.

The rule states:

Players shall not receive coaching during a match (including the warm-up). Communications of any kind, audible or visible, between a player and a coach may be construed as coaching

If I were a coach I would have a discussion with the player as to my thinking with regard to their coach's gestures/communications before moving to the next step.

Absolutely nothing turned upon waiting to make sure everyone was clear.

Whether directly in the rule or at Ramos' discretion, the fact that he used his discretion effectively made it the rule, that SW's camp had to comply to. Case closed.

 

[Sentinel]

My point about rules is that people were making an absolute claim for following them despite the fact they were ranting about politics and not themselves following them.

So if you discount those people who were discussing politics, then you still will have a lot of people who were NOT, and were asking that rules be followed. Then why bring up the former into this.

Is it possible for you to comment what happened on the court without bringing our forum into it.

My point essentially is that a fine does not often end the story. You said she has been fined and there is nothing to discuss. I was reminded that you once said the same about Maria, she had served her ban and should not be denied WC and other privileges. It;s akin to employers doing a background check, or forms asking whether someone has a criminal record. You cannot say a person has served his time in jail, so is on par with a law-abiding one, and therefore should get the same opportunities.

Your past record does influence how you will be in the future in the eyes of people. I would not have someone with a record of child molestation babysit my kid, no matter how many years he has spent in prison. I don't care about him serving out his sentence.

Serena is a repeat offender. A 17K fine will NOT stop her from insulting others, threatening, and bullying. That's my point. The umpires have every right to demand an apology, and to if they feel so, also boycott her matches. Serena thinks what she did was in the interest of women's rights, that she is fighting for causes. So the fine means nothing to her. She has a likelihood to continue doing this, thinking she is fighting for some cause.

She has shown no remorse/repentance. So the umps are right in asking for an apology.

 

[Sentinel]

Bart, if i ever commit a crime, I'll retain you as my lawyer.

You'll tie the prosecution and judge up in knots with your arguments.

 

[Bartelby]

You do realise that you are talking about stories that are reporting on things that may or may not be being discussed behind the scenes?

If you want her to apologise then she should have been asked to do so at the time of the fine. It's all a bit late in the day now.

So if you discount those people who were discussing politics, then you still will have a lot of people who were NOT, and were asking that rules be followed. Then why bring up the former into this.

Is it possible for you to comment what happened on the court without bringing our forum into it.

My point essentially is that a fine does not often end the story. You said she has been fined and there is nothing to discuss. I was reminded that you once said the same about Maria, she had served her ban and should not be denied WC and other privileges. It;s akin to employers doing a background check, or forms asking whether someone has a criminal record. You cannot say a person has served his time in jail, so is on par with a law-abiding one, and therefore should get the same opportunities.

Your past record does influence how you will be in the future in the eyes of people. I would not have someone with a record of child molestation babysit my kid, no matter how many years he has spent in prison. I don't care about him serving out his sentence.

Serena is a repeat offender. A 17K fine will NOT stop her from insulting others, threatening, and bullying. That's my point. The umpires have every right to demand an apology, and to if they feel so, also boycott her matches. Serena thinks what she did was in the interest of women's rights, that she is fighting for causes. So the fine means nothing to her. She has a likelihood to continue doing this, thinking she is fighting for some cause.

She has shown no remorse/repentance. So the umps are right in asking for an apology.

 

[Sentinel]

If you want her to apologise then she should have been asked to do so at the time of the fine. It's all a bit late in the day now.

I think the fine was imposed by the ITF.

The umps are asking for an apology, and i gather that they got together and talked.

So it is two different parties involved. The the umps dont have a union or association, so they could not have instantly got together anyway.

In any case, whether she actually apologise or not is not the issue to me. Because even if she does, she still thinks she is the victim. It's important _to me_ that it was printed in the papers that they are asking for it, and they might consider boycotting her.
At least people are getting to hear this side of it. Even if nothing comes of it.

 

[AM75]

I have alread said this on many occasions, so see above post 272 and elsewhere I discuss agency.

But to be precise, it does not talk about 'regardless of the player actually seeing/receiving it' in the rule book.

And you underplay the fact that the umpire may or can consider it coaching, which means there is no obligation.

So you are wrong.

The rule states:

Players shall not receive coaching during a match (including the warm-up). Communications of any kind, audible or visible, between a player and a coach may be construed as coaching

If I were a coach I would have a discussion with the player as to my thinking with regard to their coach's gestures/communications before moving to the next step.

Absolutely nothing turned upon waiting to make sure everyone was clear.

But what about PM who admitted he has coached SW?

 

[hoodjem]

YES!! Hope they do boycott.

Let John McEnroe and BJK umpire the matches.

And Connors.

 

[Bartelby]

Ramos didn't know that at the time he made his decision.

But what about PM who admitted he has coached SW?

 

[PDJ]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/tenni...m/news-story/7838285f7d22a4051b152514f72d57d9

Ramos to umpire US Davis Cup tie.

 

[Sentinel]

https://www.news.com.au/sport/tenni...m/news-story/7838285f7d22a4051b152514f72d57d9

Ramos to umpire US Davis Cup tie.

Good news... and its in Croatia, so he should be safe.

He doesn't have to worry about equipment being shoved down his throat.

 

[West Coast Ace]

Well I’m sure PM wanted to achieve something, that’s why he did it. The more important question here is, “did Serena ask for it”? If she did, then she cheated, if she did not, then she did not cheat. That’s why the umpire should have thrown out PM out of the stadia, because he cheated.

What Ramos should have said was: “Serena, you did not cheat but your coach did! So now I will throw him out of the stadium or deduct a game from you because he is your coach”.

Come on. You’re usually one of the better posters; this is just sad.

You sound like the SJW media trying to spin this with ‘everybody coaches’ and deflecting from the reality. They’re a ‘team’ - he’s her coach. It’s on her - she employs him. And it’s probably the first time it’s been called in a major final - but it’s been called regularly during the year, for a long time.

 

[Tennis_Hands]

Trying to equate ethics with legality for the purpose of excusing the inexcusable has got to be the height of the moral breakdown.

 

[Zhilady]

Oh you guys I don’t want to write long messages anymore. I don’t even write this much at work. I get what you all are saying.


As a fan of Serena though, I just refuse to believe that she is an inherently bad human being that you all describe her to be. I am a fan of her’s and still will be despite everything you’ve presented in this thread. Enjoy your discussions.

This is such a cop-out. You can’t make stupid arguments, have them refuted, and then get out of them saying you’re tired of the discussion. Come to terms with the fact that you were wrong about the rules and the truth. Yes, Williams deserved all the violations according to the rulebook. Yes, Ramos enforces the rules with the men, too. And yes, you are not facing up to your own mistake of calling Ramos a liar, a thief, and a sexist just because he docked Serena Williams a game and a point for her infantile behavior. I guess I’m starting to understand why you’re a Serena Williams fan.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

The revolutionaries with their strikes and boycotts have taken over the civilised world!

One might make the argument that the world became more civilized as a result of said Revolutionaries' strikes and boycotts.

 

[Big_Dangerous]

This is a wonderful slap in her face after saying Carlos won’t be umpiring any of her matches in the future. Now she perhaps won’t have any umpire doing so.

That would actually be incredible to see.