Vukov Banned

You still want to defend this @nolefam_2024 ?

You really should apologize for your disgusting defence of this. Utterly disgusting.
I don't want to defend vukov. I want wta to be transparent. We are in very different world today where things are fought in public court.

Heard Depp
Lively Baldoni

I want public to be in the know about this.
 
I don't want to defend vukov. I want wta to be transparent. We are in very different world today where things are fought in public court.

Heard Depp
Lively Baldoni

I want public to be in the know about this.

What if they found that he was making her drink out of the toilet after losses? Just to think of some extreme mental abuse.

You think it's being kept secret so the WTA can go full woke on Stefano. What if it's being kept secret to spare Rybakina AND Vukov the embarrassment?
 
What if they found that he was making her drink out of the toilet after losses? Just to think of some extreme mental abuse.

You think it's being kept secret so the WTA can go full woke on Stefano. What if it's being kept secret to spare Rybakina AND Vukov the embarrassment?
If it was this embarrassing then rybakina would not be asking to reinstate him.

It's a simple issue. The player herself says she is not victimized and wta is going beyond to say yes she is.
 
The rules do not control whom the player can hire. The rules control who is permitted to work at WTA events, including coaches. The WTA does not have the power to ban Vukov from Rybakina's life (though perhaps it would be better for her if it did). It does have the power to ban him from working at a WTA tournament as an official coach.


Not sure if WTA has observed Vukov abusing Rybakina in the public that could malign the image of WTA ?
 
If it was this embarrassing then rybakina would not be asking to reinstate him.

It's a simple issue. The player herself says she is not victimized and wta is going beyond to say yes she is.

Of course she would be. Because if she admits his conduct then she is admitting her own failure, and admitting she can't make her own sensible decisions.

You see this over and over in abusive relationships. The victim claims he/she isn't a victim and is making sound decisions. Seen it a million times
 
If it was this embarrassing then rybakina would not be asking to reinstate him.

It's a simple issue. The player herself says she is not victimized and wta is going beyond to say yes she is.

Oh, good idea.... asking a victim of mental abuse to say if the abuser is ok or not.....Because lord knows every abuse victim is readily forthcoming on their abusers behavior. JHC....
 
How old is the guy and how old was Rybakina when he met her and started being her coach and more?
:notworthy:

Think she was a teen

It's gross, you're on the right track

Edit--she was 19/20 and he was 32

I've dated 21yo at 41+, but not from a position of power and closeness like a coach/teacher etc
 
so the BBC article states “The manner in which he spoke to her on and off court at tournaments has come under scrutiny.”

If this is all what WTA has got, then they are in big trouble if Vukov or Rybakina go legal.

I think as long as there is not a public display of abuse , I am wondering what legal standing WTA has. Seems far reaching.

I like Rybakina and it is possible coach is abusive . It is also possible they have a peer to peer relation that is not like the typical player-coach relationship .

I like to go by what is legally permitted and I am not sure of WTA’s stand here
 
so the BBC article states “The manner in which he spoke to her on and off court at tournaments has come under scrutiny.”

If this is all what WTA has got, then they are in big trouble if Vukov or Rybakina go legal.

I think as long as there is not a public display of abuse , I am wondering what legal standing WTA has. Seems far reaching.

I like Rybakina and it is possible coach is abusive . It is also possible they have a peer to peer relation that is not like the typical player-coach relationship .

I like to go by what is legally permitted and I am not sure of WTA’s stand here

Yeah you're right, seems like nothing. Let's wait for the inevitable lawsuits from the wronged parties.
 
Everyone has to question everything all the time. People acting like the WTA bans coaches for no reason on a daily basis. Jesus Christ. What a world.

Some question anything where some vile male is rightfully accused of abuse, as if they are clean little lambs in a field of flowers. The WTA was justified in protecting Rybakina, and needs to remove anyone else charged with similar behavior.

Of course she would be. Because if she admits his conduct then she is admitting her own failure, and admitting she can't make her own sensible decisions.

You see this over and over in abusive relationships. The victim claims he/she isn't a victim and is making sound decisions. Seen it a million times

Exactly. Certain people--usually males--will jump on the victim's contradictory behavior as "proof" of male offender innocence, when innumerable cases illustrate the victim has been conditioned--by the abuser--to defend him, even at the expense of her own safety / psychological well-being.
 
so the BBC article states “The manner in which he spoke to her on and off court at tournaments has come under scrutiny.”

If this is all what WTA has got, then they are in big trouble if Vukov or Rybakina go legal.

I think as long as there is not a public display of abuse , I am wondering what legal standing WTA has. Seems far reaching.

I like Rybakina and it is possible coach is abusive . It is also possible they have a peer to peer relation that is not like the typical player-coach relationship .

I like to go by what is legally permitted and I am not sure of WTA’s stand here
Anyone knows how this kind of law suits are carried out? The player will be taking huge risk, it seems
 
Good riddance to him. You only needed to see the way he acted in her box during her matches to know he was some kind of character, and none of this is surprising to discover on top of that.

The problem is that she was saying as recently as the Aussie Open that she wants him back. So... Unless her mind has been changed on that, the signs are probably still not particularly good for her until she gets her head straight. I look forward to hearing from her about this.

He's not just the coach but the BF too
 
so the BBC article states “The manner in which he spoke to her on and off court at tournaments has come under scrutiny.”

If this is all what WTA has got, then they are in big trouble if Vukov or Rybakina go legal.

I think as long as there is not a public display of abuse , I am wondering what legal standing WTA has. Seems far reaching.

I like Rybakina and it is possible coach is abusive . It is also possible they have a peer to peer relation that is not like the typical player-coach relationship .

I like to go by what is legally permitted and I am not sure of WTA’s stand here
This is a weirdly naive post. The head-scratching, "Gee, I wonder if anything bad happened here" attitude ignores the fact that an investigation was conducted and was concluded unfavorably regarding Vukov's conduct.

Whether there was a "public display of abuse" is irrelevant. An investigation was conducted to determine what occurred! Again, you seem to be stuck at the start of the process, rather than the end. And this is the second time in the thread you've complained that the ban "seems far reaching." Exactly who else is it reaching besides Vukov?
 
so the BBC article states “The manner in which he spoke to her on and off court at tournaments has come under scrutiny.”

If this is all what WTA has got, then they are in big trouble if Vukov or Rybakina go legal.

I think as long as there is not a public display of abuse , I am wondering what legal standing WTA has. Seems far reaching.

I like Rybakina and it is possible coach is abusive . It is also possible they have a peer to peer relation that is not like the typical player-coach relationship .

I like to go by what is legally permitted and I am not sure of WTA’s stand here
If Vukov sues, the WTA just brings the same people who gave evidence for the ban to give the evidence of abusive behavior/toxic workplace/domestic violence occurring in/around WTA practice courts/locker room/facilities and Vukov will lose quickly.

The only person standing up for the abuser is the victim of the abuse. Ever heard of Stockholm Syndrome? Vukov doesn't stand a chance in court.
 
Also, how come PM never got banned? Because his last name doesn't end in -ov or -ev?

IMHO doubtful it has anything to do with names. Seems a lot more plausible that PM has gotten a pass due to his standing, power, and influence within tennis. Vukov, although successful as a coach, is not the same as PM in terms of power, influence, etc. Sufficient “smoke” was probably enough to conclude there is fire, and justify the punishment.

Another possibility is the case WTA developed against Vukov is a lot more damning than what they had on PM.
 
Not necessarily.

Victims of abuse routinely don’t speak up, file charges, leave the situation, etc. out of fear.
You are right but this is not that. She is not just silent but ADAMANT that they reinstate him. I don't see her being fearful at all.
 
The same deluded posters who think that WTA should NOT intervene in obvious mental abuses cases like will probably be the first person to raise their pitchfork if this abuse turns physical, even deadly. "What did the WTA do when there were already signs of verbal abuse? Why wasn't he banned then?" People without self-reflection and with rigid thinking.

The WTA investigation confirmed what many fans and commentators have noted, that Vukov's behavior towards Elena was toxic and manipulative. The "potato picking" remark is disgusting, but I'm afraid Elena herself believes it. Unfortunately, like many other victims of the "battered wife" syndrome, she doesn't admit it, that Vukov is a scoundrel.
 
You are right but this is not that. She is not just silent but ADAMANT that they reinstate him. I don't see her being fearful at all.
WTF cant you just assume the WTA who has been investigating this a long time knows more than you or anyone here? Like why cant you just accept that?

There are two options here. He is a great guy and it's all cool, or the WTA did a massive investigation and found out hes not.

Dude I was a cop for 23 years, I went to way too many domestic abuse calls. I cant tell you how many of these women for whatever reasons reverse themselves in court even after their partner has been arrested and I had tons of physical and photo evidence along with their statements at the time.

But no they go into court and say he never did anything. After I put in tons of time trying to get someone put away. So honestly you dont know crap about this stuff.
 
The same deluded posters who think that WTA should NOT intervene in obvious mental abuses cases like will probably be the first person to raise their pitchfork if this abuse turns physical, even deadly. "What did the WTA do when there were already signs of verbal abuse? Why wasn't he banned then?" People without self-reflection and with rigid thinking.

The WTA investigation confirmed what many fans and commentators have noted, that Vukov's behavior towards Elena was toxic and manipulative. The "potato picking" remark is disgusting, but I'm afraid Elena herself believes it. Unfortunately, like many other victims of the "battered wife" syndrome, she doesn't admit it, that Vukov is a scoundrel.
There are usually constraints preventing victims leaving a marriage. But is Lena still believing in this jerk or he is pulling some kind of leash on her? Tennis players switch coaches like getting a different car. Normally it's entirely the player decision.
 
IMHO doubtful it has anything to do with names. Seems a lot more plausible that PM has gotten a pass due to his standing, power, and influence within tennis. Vukov, although successful as a coach, is not the same as PM in terms of power, influence, etc. Sufficient “smoke” was probably enough to conclude there is fire, and justify the punishment.

Another possibility is the case WTA developed against Vukov is a lot more damning than what they had on PM.

And if Serena had acted the way Rybakina is acting, it would have been a big problem

All Serena did was win and they kept their relationship a secret
 
And if Serena had acted the way Rybakina is acting, it would have been a big problem

All Serena did was win and they kept their relationship a secret

Mostly I agree, although that incident at Wimby where Serena pulled out of the doubles match, all disoriented…that was *really* strange. (Obviously, no proof I’m aware of that PM had anything to do with it).
 
Mostly I agree, although that incident at Wimby where Serena pulled out of the doubles match, all disoriented…that was *really* strange. (Obviously, no proof I’m aware of that PM had anything to do with it).

Oh yeah you aren't wrong, that was MEGA weird, probably the weirdest thing ever re Serena.

I wouldn't be surprised if she was faking it to dodge a PED test but who knows, really. She looked drunk as hell
 
I'm a big fan and think Vukov's been holding her back, and regardless of what the exact details are, it's clear they have an extremely unhealthy relationship and he's abusing his power.
The thing is both things can be true: 1) that she's a grown woman capable of making her own decisions 2) that it's almost impossible to make the right the decision after you've been in a difficult situation for years.
I really hope she finds a way to move on in her life but it's clear to me it's going to take a while. Also, this is much bigger than tennis for her. It's an issue that affects much more than her career.
 
The details are bizarre:
- Mental and physical abuse resulting in constant illnesses
Vukov had subjected Rybakina to mental abuse and pushing her beyond her physical limits, which caused her to become ill.
- Vukov had harassed Rybakina her by refusing to leave her alone during the U.S. Open - after she dismissed him from the team - when he sent her multiple texts
- Increasing evidence the two are in a ‘romantic relationship’, after staying in the same hotel room in Melbourne Findings stated by Portia Archer, the chief executive of the WTA -
Yes, her current coach, David Sanguinetti, said in a recent interview that Vukov will always be in the picture because he and Rybakina are 'close'. She, herself, said in a recent interview that Vukov is helping her with 'things on the court, and things off the court'. I can imagine a lover's quarrel led to their initial break up which seemed to have an effect on her given the numerous pullouts from tournaments. Apparently they have kissed and made up but there are other things/people involved now. And I can aver that coaches too are held to a code of conduct by the WTA and ATP much like the players.
 
Last edited:
And I can aver that coaches too are held to a code of conduct by the WTA and ATP much like the players.
All this material is readily available: https://www.wtatennis.com/wta-rules. In particular, the WTA Safeguarding Code sets forth very detailed behavioral standards, procedural rules, dispute and appeal processes, etc. The entire Code applies to all "Covered Persons," who are defined as follows:

Any person subject to this Safeguarding Code. Covered Persons are: WTA employees and contractors; WTA Directors; WTA designated officials; WTA Players (full and associate members); any non-WTA Player member competing in a WTA tournament; WTA Tournament Directors; WTA Sponsors and partners; Player Support Team members [including, but not limited to: coaches, agents, managers, physios, strength and conditioning coaches, health care providers, family members, and guests or similar associates of a player]; Tournament personnel [including, but not limited to: staff, officials, volunteers, contractors, sponsors, healthcare providers, members of the media, tournament guests]; and any persons credentialed by the tournament.
Note: The parentheticals and bracketed content above appear in the original. These are not my emendations.
 
This is a weirdly naive post. The head-scratching, "Gee, I wonder if anything bad happened here" attitude ignores the fact that an investigation was conducted and was concluded unfavorably regarding Vukov's conduct.

Whether there was a "public display of abuse" is irrelevant. An investigation was conducted to determine what occurred! Again, you seem to be stuck at the start of the process, rather than the end. And this is the second time in the thread you've complained that the ban "seems far reaching." Exactly who else is it reaching besides Vukov?

I may be naive but i want to first understand WTA's legal rights. It is very probable Vukov is an abuser, but does WTA have the legal standing to go against him, is where i stand.

WTA is an organization that survives barely and i am not sure they can even afford good legal counsel .
 
I may be naive but i want to first understand WTA's legal rights. It is very probable Vukov is an abuser, but does WTA have the legal standing to go against him, is where i stand.

WTA is an organization that survives barely and i am not sure they can even afford good legal counsel .

I love posts like this... :rolleyes:
 
Think she was a teen

It's gross, you're on the right track

Edit--she was 19/20 and he was 32

I've dated 21yo at 41+, but not from a position of power and closeness like a coach/teacher etc
this is not only an issue of him being abusive but also the power imbalance. No good coach will be in a relationship with their student. If they decide to be in a relationship, they should quit. The Madison Keys situation doesn't count though because she asked him to coach after they were already together.
 
I may be naive but i want to first understand WTA's legal rights. It is very probable Vukov is an abuser, but does WTA have the legal standing to go against him, is where i stand.

WTA is an organization that survives barely and i am not sure they can even afford good legal counsel .
What you're really asking is why does the WTA have skin in the game or a right to determine Vukov's right to coach Rybakina. Rybakina and Vukov play/coach on the WTA tour. What they do reflects on the WTA (and their bottom line) and the WTA absolutely has the right to make rules on the conduct of these people and the "workplace environment." The extent of that right may be in question but banning a coach or player is absolutely within acceptable limits.
I'm quite sure the WTA has enough money to hire a good attorney.
 
this is not only an issue of him being abusive but also the power imbalance. No good coach will be in a relationship with their student. If they decide to be in a relationship, they should quit. The Madison Keys situation doesn't count though because she asked him to coach after they were already together.

Yes

But...It did work for Serena, for quite a long time and excellent results.
 
What you're really asking is why does the WTA have skin in the game or a right to determine Vukov's right to coach Rybakina. Rybakina and Vukov play/coach on the WTA tour. What they do reflects on the WTA (and their bottom line) and the WTA absolutely has the right to make rules on the conduct of these people and the "workplace environment." The extent of that right may be in question but banning a coach or player is absolutely within acceptable limits.
I'm quite sure the WTA has enough money to hire a good attorney.

We are talking about "optics" now and that is subjective territory.

I hope WTA has concrete proof and evidence. If they have , then I am all for that organization to get Vukov expelled.

But if they are going based on hearsay, that is troubling.
 
We are talking about "optics" now and that is subjective territory.

I hope WTA has concrete proof and evidence. If they have , then I am all for that organization to get Vukov expelled.

But if they are going based on hearsay, that is troubling.
No, we're not talking about optics directly. We're talking about the right of an organization to determine the rules of their workplace environment. Optics does matter and companies/organizations absolutely have the right to make decisions to protect the integrity of their reputation. In economic speak, the corporation is worth the value of their tangible assets and something called "goodwill." That's essentially their reputation. And goodwill is worth a lot of money. Coca Cola commands a certain value not only because it has all these machines that make a tasty soda but because the brand is worth a lot. Arguably, coca cola's brand value/goodwill is worth more than their tangible assets combined. So yes, optics matter...a lot.
 
Last edited:
I may be naive but i want to first understand WTA's legal rights. It is very probable Vukov is an abuser, but does WTA have the legal standing to go against him, is where i stand.

WTA is an organization that survives barely and i am not sure they can even afford good legal counsel .
Look at my post directly above yours (#88).
 
No, we're not talking about optics directly. We're talking about the right of an organization to determine the rules of their workplace environment. Optics does matter and companies/organizations absolutely have the right to make decisions to protect the integrity of their reputation. In economic speak, the corporation is worth the value of their tangible assets and something called "goodwill." That's essentially their reputation. And goodwill is worth a lot of money. Coca Cola commands a certain value not only because it has all these machines that make a tasty soda but because the brand is worth a lot. Arguably, coca cola's brand value/good will is worth more than their tangible assets combined. So yes, optics matter...a lot.

No doubt every organization has a right to frame workplace rules. Let's hope those rules are still within the framework of the law and they have enough proof someone broke the law.
 
Back
Top