US OPEN 2012 MEN'S SEMI-FINAL

noleisthebest wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:
This was interesting, NITB clearly hinting Summerblues has an 'untrained eye.'
Let's get this clear, Summerblues I believe is one of the best posters I have seen, in analysis and description. A better poster than me, I would say.
.

I prefer Tenez's school of thought

That's fine by me.

Doesn't address the rest of the points in my comment though.

hawkeye

Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will. If you're that keen, just go and comb through many a fine thought over on the older pages of v2.

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

There was one thing in the semi, if anybody noticed. Both players did not use hawkeye during their match. I think it showed their respect between each other and I appreciate it. Their game benefited from this and everything was going smoother. for both

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will.

Bulletproof logic.

paulcz wrote:There was one thing in the semi, if anybody noticed. Both players did not use hawkeye during their match. I think it showed their respect between each other and I appreciate it. Their game benefited from this and everything was going smoother. for both

Nole gets on very well with Ferrer and a lot of other players. It is nice to see a match played in that spirit, although I don't mind a bit of fist-fight either
Remember the brave Nadal shoulder bump against Rosol....and the response

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will. If you're that keen, just go and comb through many a fine thought over on the older pages of v2.

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

When have you talked about tennis? horses, dreams, buffaloes,muscles,legs, drinking,kip, good looks, wooofie and the list is endless. Do u not embarass yourself?

noleisthebest wrote:

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

Here is my speciality.

In 20112012, what amazed me was that Djokovic played 5 sets 4:50 (290 minutes) against Murray and then played a 5 set 5:53 ( = 353 minute) final against Nadal.

Total minutes on court for Djokovic in 2012 AO SF/F = 643 minutes.

In contrast, Nadal-Verdasco AO 2009 was 314 minutes (5:14) - http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/aus09/news/story?id=3870077

Nadal-Federer AO 2009 was 263 minutes (4:23) - http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/02/01/australia.final/index.html

Total time on court for Nadal in 2009 AO SF/F = 577 minutes.

Courts very similar, similar weather.

So Djokovic played a much more attritional SF/F in 2012, then Nadal in 2009.

...and the 2009 strains caused Nadal to miss Wimbledon, that too despite alleged doping .

Has Djokovic withdrawn from any tourney this year, NITB?

all links from unverifiable Internet.

I have also built a chart for the 11/9 foot faults which a "stuttering and timid" Karlovic , from a poor Tennis nation like Croatia (wonder how they produced Ivanisevic and Cilic) committed. That is my next OTF article.

paulcz wrote:There was one thing in the semi, if anybody noticed. Both players did not use hawkeye during their match. I think it showed their respect between each other and I appreciate it. Their game benefited from this and everything was going smoother. for both

Murray asked Berdych, after his cap fell on the court, whether Berdych was 100% sure that the falling cap had distracted Berdych. When Murray was told that it had, despite Pascal Maria giving the point to Murray,it was replayed and Murray was broken. .

Berdych failed to get Murray's response however, and umpire Pascal Maria initially awarded the point to Murray.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2200452/US-Open-2012-Andy-Murray-beats-Tomas-Berdych-reach-final-New-York.html#ixzz260MFv1ur

wow3 wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will. If you're that keen, just go and comb through many a fine thought over on the older pages of v2.

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

When have you talked about tennis? horses, dreams, buffaloes,muscles,legs, drinking,kip, good looks, wooofie and the list is endless. Do u not embarass yourself?

laverfan wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

Here is my speciality.

In 2011, what amazed me was that Djokovic played 5 sets 4:50 (290 minutes) against Murray and then played a 5 set 5:53 ( = 353 minute) final against Nadal.

Total minutes on court for Djokovic in 2012 AO SF/F = 643 minutes.

In contrast, Nadal-Verdasco AO 2009 was 314 minutes (5:14) - http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/aus09/news/story?id=3870077

Nadal-Federer AO 2009 was 263 minutes (4:23) - http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SPORT/02/01/australia.final/index.html

Total time on court for Nadal in 2009 AO SF/F = 577 minutes.

Courts very similar, similar weather.

So Djokovic played a much more attritional SF/F in 2012, then Nadal in 2009.

...and the 2009 strains caused Nadal to miss Wimbledon, that too despite alleged doping .

Has Djokovic withdrawn from any tourney this year, NITB?

all links from unverifiable Internet.

I have also built a chart for the 11/9 foot faults which a "stuttering and timid" Karlovic , from a poor Tennis nation like Croatia (wonder how they produced Ivanisevic and Cilic) committed. That is my next OTF article.

Nadal never played Novak in 2009.
btw, what's withdrawing from tournaments got to do with anything?

Chesty, tomorrow I shall be downing that bottle of vintage Bollinger I have been saving since Christmas....
I kept it for the Olympic gold, but it was not meant to be this time.
To majestic Nole, holder of two USO titles this time tomorrow

------------------------------------

Such as insightful tennis talk by the only flagbearer of tennis on this forum

noleisthebest wrote:

Nadal never played Novak in 2009.

Was the match at Monte Carlo a hallucination?

BTW, NITB, my other speciality is preferential draws and molly-coddling a specific anglo-Saxon player.

Did you know that the linesperson who foot-faulted Karlovic six times, was I, in disguise? My conspiracy worked in getting Murray to the final. I also coached him to cry on Sue Barker's shoulders, and then Federer's, to get him some sympathy, in anticipation of a loss to Federer at W 2012.

Hey Paul, what will Andy Murray be dreaming about tonight?
-----------------------------------------------

Does this reminds anyone of v2? Yes when nitb used to troll over there

Amritia3ee wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

Nadal never played Novak in 2009.

Was the match at Monte Carlo a hallucination?

Can you please count, NITB?

There are seven matches I count, even though they are from THE unreliable internet. Madrid 2009, MPs for Djokovic, remember?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=D643

laverfan wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

Nadal never played Novak in 2009.

Was the match at Monte Carlo a hallucination?

Can you please count, NITB?

There are seven matches I count, even though they are from THE unreliable internet. Madrid 2009, MPs for Djokovic, remember?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=D643

Sorry LF, but I don't know what you are trying to say. Just spell it out once and for all!

noleisthebest wrote:btw, what's withdrawing from tournaments got to do with anything?

The strain on Nadal in 2009 AO was less than Djokovic in 2012 AO. Such a strain may have caused the eventual Nadal withdrawal from W 2009.

In contrast, Djokovic, despite a more strenuous 2012 AO, is not injured, hence the question? Granted, he has had niggles and personal tragedy, though. The strange 6-0 set @ Cincy against Federer, for example.

noleisthebest wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Amritia3ee wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

Nadal never played Novak in 2009.

Was the match at Monte Carlo a hallucination?

Can you please count, NITB?

There are seven matches I count, even though they are from THE unreliable internet. Madrid 2009, MPs for Djokovic, remember?

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N409&oId=D643

Sorry LF, but I don't know what you are trying to say. Just spell it out once and for all!

Nadal played Djokovic 7 times, despite your claim, that they never played each other in 2009.

You also very conveniently forget the Madrid 2009 match on clay, where Djokovic had match points against Nadal.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Tennis/Media/Videos/2011/05-Madrid/Madrid-2011-Flashback-Nadal-Djokovic-2009.aspx

My 2009 reference was that Nadal never played Nole at AO, as you were trying to say how Nadal spent less time on courts than Novak.
Had Nole played Fed in AO 2012 final, that match would have never lasted 6 hours as it didn't in 2009.
The fact that Nole stood up to Nadal and beat him at his own game is his greatest legacy and favour he will have left to tennis.
Nobody wants players retiring at 26, do they. It's nice to watch Fed play like he does at 31, well I want to see Nole last beyond 26, too.
He is no Federer in attacking but he jolly well hates playing Nadal and putting his body through those bruisings.


Time to move on to Paul's thread

noleisthebest wrote:
The fact that Nole stood up to Nadal and beat him at his own game is his greatest legacy

Record count:

Slams-
Nadal 11-5 Djokovic

H2H-
Nadal 19-14 Djokovic

Last 3 matches-
Nadal 3-0 Djokovic

H2H in Slams-
Nadal 4-3 Djokovic

Ouch.

To Nole's greatest legacy:

wow3 wrote:Hey Paul, what will Andy Murray be dreaming about tonight?
-----------------------------------------------

Does this reminds anyone of v2? Yes when nitb used to troll over there

Wow, why are you bringing this out? It was not addressed to you, so please be so kind and let it for those to whom it is addressed.

What you show is a child´s blabber above a broken toy atm.

paulcz wrote:

wow3 wrote:Hey Paul, what will Andy Murray be dreaming about tonight?
-----------------------------------------------

Does this reminds anyone of v2? Yes when nitb used to troll over there

Wow, why are you bringing this out? It was not addressed to you, so please be so kind and let it for those to whom it is addressed.

What you show is a child´s blabber above a broken toy atm.

Because nitb accused others of not talking about tennis. She should not be saying things if she herself is doing the same thing, should she?

wow3 wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will. If you're that keen, just go and comb through many a fine thought over on the older pages of v2.

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

When have you talked about tennis? horses, dreams, buffaloes,muscles,legs, drinking,kip, good looks, wooofie and the list is endless. Do u not embarass yourself?

Paul for you. I hope you will get my point.

wow3 wrote:

wow3 wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Amri, no disrespect , but if you haven't worked out by now why I think Nadal is rubbish, you never will. If you're that keen, just go and comb through many a fine thought over on the older pages of v2.

I'm not into time-wasting here and boring others to death with various charts and proofs. That's LF's speciality.
You can also ask HE, I'm sure she'll give you an accurate update.
That's LF's speciality.

Anyway, enough of this empty tenisless talk, it reminds me of V2 too much

When have you talked about tennis? horses, dreams, buffaloes,muscles,legs, drinking,kip, good looks, wooofie and the list is endless. Do u not embarass yourself?

Paul for you. I hope you will get my point.

Wow, Nitb is one of the most positive posters and very good tennis observer, so I can understand her what she wrote. If you do not catch her point above then stop being annoying. That is too childish. I have said enough to Nadal as well and do not want to continue in this now. That is quite easy to understand.

Wow, Nitb is one of the most positive posters and very good tennis observer, so I can understand her what she wrote. If you do not catch her point above then stop being annoying. That is too childish. I have said enough to Nadal as well and do not want to continue in this now. That is quite easy to understan

----------------------------

Stop being biased, read the comments carefully. nitb is the most negative poster on here. Discussing murray's dreams is very mature,no? If she has the courage to criticise Murray then she should have the guts to answer questions regarding djoker.

Anyone watching women's final?

Just started watching, Serena 6:2, Azarenka serves to consolidate the break. Can she at least make the match competitive?
She is a strong girl, if anyone can do it, she can.

Serena called for foot-fault, quick, run for cover

Women play tennis as well???

noleisthebest wrote:My 2009 reference was that Nadal never played Nole at AO, as you were trying to say how Nadal spent less time on courts than Novak.

That is all you can think of, despite me elucidating the years clearly in my time comparison study between AO 2009 and AO 2012 (same surface, same weather). This clearly tells me you have no interest in this discussion, but a defence of Djokovic, despite many untrained observers showing that Djokovic has modelled himself as another Nadal. And the Murray identikit tennis is somehow inferior. It would be interesting to see if what Djokovic did to Nadal, is what Murray will do to Djokovic. The signs are all there at the AO 2012 SF.

noleisthebest wrote:Had Nole played Fed in AO 2012 final, that match would have never lasted 6 hours as it didn't in 2009.
The fact that Nole stood up to Nadal and beat him at his own game is his greatest legacy and favour he will have left to tennis.

Why? Now you remind me of ABN (anyone-but-Nadal), and very similarly ABM (anyone-but-Murray).

noleisthebest wrote:Nobody wants players retiring at 26, do they. It's nice to watch Fed play like he does at 31, well I want to see Nole last beyond 26, too. He is no Federer in attacking but he jolly well hates playing Nadal and putting his body through those bruisings.

I would highly recommend watching the AO 2012 Murray-Djokovic SF .

noleisthebest wrote:Time to move on to Paul's thread

noleisthebest wrote:

laverfan wrote:
... of the accusation that Murray was given preferential treatment. You are not reading my posts in it's entirety. We can stop discussing this, if you are not interested. Are you?

I knew you'd run out of steam.....GSM

paulcz wrote:Wow, Nitb is one of the most positive posters and very good tennis observer, so I can understand her what she wrote. If you do not catch her point above then stop being annoying. That is too childish. I have said enough to Nadal as well and do not want to continue in this now. That is quite easy to understand.

So why not continue the discussion. See my comment above. The following comment reeks for positivity about the current state of the sport.

noleisthebest wrote:It's not his fault he is having to play in the era of fitness Godzillas such as Nadal. You should be grateful he's got him out of picture and saved tennis

Is winning a match now the equivalent of eliminating an 'enemy'? I had much rather go back to the days of Fedal, if such is the observation skill.

At least there was no discussion about taking another player out of the picture.

You can't take it on the chin, can you....

noleisthebest wrote:Serena called for foot-fault, quick, run for cover

Karlovic should take some inspiration from Serena.

laverfan wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:My 2009 reference was that Nadal never played Nole at AO, as you were trying to say how Nadal spent less time on courts than Novak.

That is all you can think of, despite me elucidating the years clearly in my time comparison study between AO 2009 and AO 2012 (same surface, same weather). This clearly tells me you have no interest in this discussion, but a defence of Djokovic, despite many untrained observers showing that Djokovic has modelled himself as another Nadal. And the Murray identikit tennis is somehow inferior. It would be interesting to see if what Djokovic did to Nadal, is what Murray will do to Djokovic. The signs are all there at the AO 2012 SF.

noleisthebest wrote:Had Nole played Fed in AO 2012 final, that match would have never lasted 6 hours as it didn't in 2009.
The fact that Nole stood up to Nadal and beat him at his own game is his greatest legacy and favour he will have left to tennis.

Why? Now you remind me of ABN (anyone-but-Nadal), and very similarly ABM (anyone-but-Murray).

noleisthebest wrote:Nobody wants players retiring at 26, do they. It's nice to watch Fed play like he does at 31, well I want to see Nole last beyond 26, too. He is no Federer in attacking but he jolly well hates playing Nadal and putting his body through those bruisings.

I would highly recommend watching the AO 2012 Murray-Djokovic SF .

noleisthebest wrote:Time to move on to Paul's thread

noleisthebest wrote:

laverfan wrote:
... of the accusation that Murray was given preferential treatment. You are not reading my posts in it's entirety. We can stop discussing this, if you are not interested. Are you?

I knew you'd run out of steam.....GSM

paulcz wrote:Wow, Nitb is one of the most positive posters and very good tennis observer, so I can understand her what she wrote. If you do not catch her point above then stop being annoying. That is too childish. I have said enough to Nadal as well and do not want to continue in this now. That is quite easy to understand.

So why not continue the discussion. See my comment above. The following comment reeks for positivity about the current state of the sport.

noleisthebest wrote:It's not his fault he is having to play in the era of fitness Godzillas such as Nadal. You should be grateful he's got him out of picture and saved tennis

Is winning a match now the equivalent of eliminating an 'enemy'? I had much rather go back to the days of Fedal, if such is the observation skill.

At least there was no discussion about taking another player out of the picture.

Stunning post LF, it's a shame NITB can't learn from these posts.

laverfan wrote: Yes, he was treated within the rules, by being offered a route to a complaint. You ignored my question for the official investigation outcome. You have no evidence or information on such an investigation, do you? He was treated fairly within the available framework. Since you saw the match, did he ask for the Tournament Referee to come on court and did he talk to the Chair Umpire and the lines person?

Offered to route a complain?? . Offered??? He wasn't offered anything. You are trying to call as if its a favour he should consider being able to file a complain. He just said he plans to file an official complaint and I know this information because it was published in the wimbledon website.

Did he file it? What was the outcome? Nothing has been made public. I don't have anything on that result. Now you use your authentic sources to tell me .

laverfan wrote: Since you saw the match, did he ask for the Tournament Referee to come on court and did he talk to the Chair Umpire and the lines person?

*LF, you have not seen the match, you know nothing more than what's said or written by someone else. You just can't know it unless you see it. You didn't, I have. You are drawing your points based on someone else's observation and basing it on your assumptions. I'm am not. I saw it myself.

* Trying to blame the victim himself for not complaining hard enough, doesn't make your point ( or even you ) look any better. I already said he did complain it to the umpire and he did nothing. You didn't even see the match, how can you say he didn't complain. Its not everyone personality to revolt in the middle of a match like McEnoe. But that doesn't mean it should be taken as his fault to victimise him. Poor that you think that.

Lots of children face molestation and abuse and all sorts of wrong doings. You must be blaming the children themselves for not complaining hard enough to police, to the president. perfect.

Karlovic is no child, I know, but just because he doesn't complain hard enough, it doesn't mean he should be victimised.

* Calling officials ?? You think they would have done anything?

Look at another foot-fault incident involving llodra.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2009/0913/p02s01-usgn.html

"In a qualifying round for the Rogers Cup in Montreal last month, a foot fault call on a set point caused Michael Llodra to stage a courtside sit-in (here, with pictures). He sat in his chair and refused to continue playing until the tournament organizer himself arrived.

Llodra lost his appeal, his cool, and the game."

And you think if karlovic had protested harder, anything else else might have been done.

* You are wrong to say (or think) that fairness is bounded by a framework. Plain wrong. Just plain wrong. I won't discuss this, think on your own if you can.

laverfan wrote: It does, and you seem to ignore the availability of hawkeye, an unemotional, detached machine as an aid to players. Just because Federer dislikes it does not make it a useless tool.

If you only knew a player can't challenge a foot-fault.

laverfan wrote: If you want to question the framework, this is not the right context within this thread. Let us have a separate discussion.

Framework? NO. I didn't bring any framework in here. I replied to your 3 suggested points that you said Karlovic could have done.

laverfan wrote:
The foot faults/Karlovic discussion and bad line calls are related to HE, and since you mention the accuracy, hence the discussion. Hawkeye allows players to question a linesperson's call, which you seem to ignore. Hawkeye can also be used to detect foot faults and would allow players the option to challenge foot faults when they are called. And you consider it irrelevant to this discussion?

Oh dear. Have you ever seen anytime a player challenge a foot-fault? You don't even know that foot-fault can't be challenged using HE. Its plain decision of the linesman, and only linesman.

laverfan wrote:Were there any other matches involving Murray which had similar footfaults? By your suggestion, international play will always smack of bias to nationalistic and patriotic flaws inherent in humans.

Another silly point trying to defend something you didn't even see.

* I said it before, it it doesn't happen often doesn't mean it didn't even happen that time. Useless argument. If a murderer hasn't killed anyone before doesn't mean he didn't even do it. Why trying to divert the case into a law of probabilities. It just doesn't work here. Even Karlovic said he didn't expect it to happen at wimbledon , but it did.

* Its not just foot-faults, its line-calls as well. Or do you thing its only a foot-fault that a linesman can give. I said previously as well ( please read properly ) that I have seen many occasions where linesman give biased decisions on important points. The whole crowd shouting and in that tense atmosphere, its not very unusual to get carried away.

* Have I see it for any other time when a player is playing against Murray? Yes. And its not only Murray. I have seen it with many players. It always favours the local favourites.

laverfan wrote: There are many other less influential countries, which had participation at W. It is very sad to see such accusations against a specific nation.

This accusation is not baseless. I have reasons for it. If you feel sad about it, so be it.

laverfan wrote: I find it interesting that my points 1-7 were ignored in favour of a contentious Karlovic discussion, which is only marginally within the context.

* I only participated in discussion about Karlovic. Rest I didn't comment, not I wish to. I you think I have ignored them, I'm fine with that. That was not of my interest.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: Yes, he was treated within the rules, by being offered a route to a complaint. You ignored my question for the official investigation outcome. You have no evidence or information on such an investigation, do you? He was treated fairly within the available framework. Since you saw the match, did he ask for the Tournament Referee to come on court and did he talk to the Chair Umpire and the lines person?

Offered to route a complain?? . Offered??? He wasn't offered anything. You are trying to call as if its a favour he should consider being able to file a complain. He just said he plans to file an official complaint and I know this information because it was published in the wimbledon website.

Did he file it? What was the outcome? Nothing has been made public. I don't have anything on that result. Now you use your authentic sources to tell me .

An All England Club spokesman responded to the accusations by saying: "If he wishes to make a formal complaint then all evidence will be reviewed."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/18636457 (from unreliable Internet).

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: Since you saw the match, did he ask for the Tournament Referee to come on court and did he talk to the Chair Umpire and the lines person?

*LF, you have not seen the match, you know nothing more than what's said or written by someone else. You just can't know it unless you see it. You didn't, I have. You are drawing your points based on someone else's observation and basing it on your assumptions. I'm am not. I saw it myself.

* Trying to blame the victim himself for not complaining hard enough, doesn't make your point ( or even you ) look any better. I already said he did complain it to the umpire and he did nothing. You didn't even see the match, how can you say he didn't complain. Its not everyone personality to revolt in the middle of a match like McEnoe. But that doesn't mean it should be taken as his fault to victimise him. Poor that you think that.

Since you saw the match, and you saw the alleged calls, why cannot you be an impartial judge? Self-advocacy is important. An outside observer can assist, but not much more.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Lots of children face molestation and abuse and all sorts of wrong doings. You must be blaming the children themselves for not complaining hard enough to police, to the president. perfect.

Are we equating this to Child Molestation? Very surprised at your ability to compare social issues with incidents at a Tennis match.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Karlovic is no child, I know, but just because he doesn't complain hard enough, it doesn't mean he should be victimised.

* Calling officials ?? You think they would have done anything?

If a player complains at the time of incident, it is much more appropriate. Not wait till the end of the match. The underlying mistrust of authority is tragic.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Look at another foot-fault incident involving llodra.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2009/0913/p02s01-usgn.html

"In a qualifying round for the Rogers Cup in Montreal last month, a foot fault call on a set point caused Michael Llodra to stage a courtside sit-in (here, with pictures). He sat in his chair and refused to continue playing until the tournament organizer himself arrived.

Llodra lost his appeal, his cool, and the game."

I can quote a much worse scenario. Serena losing a match because issues with a linesperson on a foot fault call.

Isner also lost a match because he lost his match focus.

Isner, normally one of the most even-keeled American players, became incensed by the foot fault call. He fired a ball into the stands, drawing a code violation for unsportsmanlike conduct, and at the changeover berated the chair umpire, Carlos Bernardes.

“I haven’t foot-faulted this whole year, and this guy calls one on me,” Isner said incredulously.

Isner’s anger continued into the next changeover two games later. After holding serve for 1-2, he smashed his racket (earning him a second code violation and therefore a point penalty), and continued to complain to Bernardes about the lines judge who had made the call.

“Who is this guy?” Isner said. “How is he going to call a foot fault? Worst call ever.”

http://straightsets.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/03/angered-isner-is-upset-in-five-sets/

I am NOT suggesting such behaviour. But a better approach is to talk to the Chair Umpire or ask for the tournament referee. Since you watched the match, did this happen or not?

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:And you think if karlovic had protested harder, anything else else might have been done.

* You are wrong to say (or think) that fairness is bounded by a framework. Plain wrong. Just plain wrong. I won't discuss this, think on your own if you can.

Can you challenge a serve via hawkeye after five subsequent points have been played? There is a very important notion of timeliness that is being lost here.

Also, fairness is bounded by a framework. For example, judicial principles provide a framework which allows laws like equal opportunity and civil and human rights. Even the forum on which you discuss tennis is bound by a framework. Moderation stems from such a framework being in place.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: It does, and you seem to ignore the availability of hawkeye, an unemotional, detached machine as an aid to players. Just because Federer dislikes it does not make it a useless tool.

If you only knew a player can't challenge a foot-fault.

There is a proposal to allow such calls to be questioned using hawkeye or similar technology.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: If you want to question the framework, this is not the right context within this thread. Let us have a separate discussion.

Framework? NO. I didn't bring any framework in here. I replied to your 3 suggested points that you said Karlovic could have done.

See my comment.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote:
The foot faults/Karlovic discussion and bad line calls are related to HE, and since you mention the accuracy, hence the discussion. Hawkeye allows players to question a linesperson's call, which you seem to ignore. Hawkeye can also be used to detect foot faults and would allow players the option to challenge foot faults when they are called. And you consider it irrelevant to this discussion?

Oh dear. Have you ever seen anytime a player challenge a foot-fault? You don't even know that foot-fault can't be challenged using HE. Its plain decision of the linesman, and only linesman.

Currently, yes, but in the future, it is possible.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote:Were there any other matches involving Murray which had similar footfaults? By your suggestion, international play will always smack of bias to nationalistic and patriotic flaws inherent in humans.

Another silly point trying to defend something you didn't even see.

* I said it before, it it doesn't happen often doesn't mean it didn't even happen that time. Useless argument. If a murderer hasn't killed anyone before doesn't mean he didn't even do it. Why trying to divert the case into a law of probabilities. It just doesn't work here. Even Karlovic said he didn't expect it to happen at wimbledon , but it did.

* Its not just foot-faults, its line-calls as well. Or do you thing its only a foot-fault that a linesman can give. I said previously as well ( please read properly ) that I have seen many occasions where linesman give biased decisions on important points. The whole crowd shouting and in that tense atmosphere, its not very unusual to get carried away.

* Have I see it for any other time when a player is playing against Murray? Yes. And its not only Murray. I have seen it with many players. It always favours the local favourites.

There is a challenge system for line calls, correct?

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: There are many other less influential countries, which had participation at W. It is very sad to see such accusations against a specific nation.

This accusation is not baseless. I have reasons for it. If you feel sad about it, so be it.

An international sport, which should make a level playing field for players and be fair to all players is what I expect a sport to be. If there are issues, they should be addressed.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:

laverfan wrote: I find it interesting that my points 1-7 were ignored in favour of a contentious Karlovic discussion, which is only marginally within the context.

* I only participated in discussion about Karlovic. Rest I didn't comment, not I wish to. I you think I have ignored them, I'm fine with that. That was not of my interest.

Well Laverfan. Lets just leave it here. If I continue I might start to sound rude and "attacking", and that I surely don't want to do.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:Well Laverfan. Lets just leave it here. If I continue I might start to sound rude and "attacking", and that I surely don't want to do.

I have no issues with a civil discussion. Here is a sample of what I dislike...

What is new for the final? Neither Fed nor scratching epileptic torreador, that is not bad

My issues would definitely stem from attacks on subjects of poster intelligence, untrained vs trained observational skills of posters, lack of tennis knowledge and the resulting condescension, derisive player labelling, unfounded accusations of artificial enhancements, references to an abstract and yet undefined concept like talent or lack thereof, nationalistic egos (not pride), GOATness debates, etc.

If such a discussion is not possible, then we should leave it.