Nadal time wasting

naxroy wrote:

legendkillar wrote:

naxroy wrote:never said umpire writes the rules

You can't take the position that just because the umpire didn't enforce the rules that the players mustn't be breaking them.

Nadal was taking on average 31 between points yesterday, so Nadal clearly was breaking that particular rule, so from a factual perspective Tenez with what he is stating is correct on that element.

However, as Decima or whatever he's called himself now says, where do you draw the line across all forms of sport?

I wouldn't goes as far to say it is the defining factor in his success.

Maybe, just maybe umpires talk about this issue in their meetings and they are doing what they think has to be done, considering the rule and the circumnstances. Maybe it is just that some guys in the internet would do it in a different way, but they are just internet users and no tennis umpires of the first level.

Eh? 

I can't imagine they would. Especially considering the Nadal/Bernandes spat. Neither the ITF or the ATP came in support of Bernandes. So if the governing bodies of the game are not going to support the umpires, I can't imagine they are going to show a collective stand let alone an individual one. 

Purists out there would call Nadal a cheat and others would take it with a pinch of salt. Problem with the time violation rule, is you lose a first serve after warning. Beyond that no escalation. So it's then not perceived by the sport or its governing bodies as a major rule in the event of it being broken. 

I can see both sides and that's where I'll draw the line from my view.

naxroy wrote:Maybe, just maybe umpires talk about this issue in their meetings and they are doing what they think has to be done, considering the rule and the circumnstances. Maybe it is just that some guys in the internet would do it in a different way, but they are just internet users and no tennis umpires of the first level.

Good point. I don;t have to please you so I speak my mind. The rules don't have to please you or Nadal. However an umpire cannot go in the way of frustrating millions of fans by disqualifying a cheat. because there is too much money involved and more importantly his job at stake.

But by supporting Nadal you are supporting cheating. Not much different than by liking meat you support the disgusting ugly meat industry....Yet I like my meat but unlike you I am no hypocrite.

By calling me a hypocrite I assume you believe that I am not saying what I really think.

I would like you to believe me, I am really saying what I think.

naxroy wrote:By calling me a hypocrite I assume you believe that I am not saying what I really think.

I would like you to believe me, I am really saying what I think.

To take the example of the meat industry, it's not what you think that matters, its what you do. because many people like meat (and I am one of them), the meat industry has to look at producing it with all the horror that goes with it.

Supporting Nadal is consenting to his cheating (or breaking the rule if you prefer). He plays a game that can only be effective if he takes 50% extra time between points. If he had Davydenko sex appeal, no one would have accepted that cheating.

It;s because Lance was a very popular sportman that he was untouchable for years...only when people started to forget about him that his cheating was dealt with.

In a way it is like our politicians. If we were not stupid, we woudl not have rotten politicians.

Tenez wrote:unlike you I am no hypocrite.

I see two incorrect statements here.

but I dont think he is cheating, that is the difference.


so I dont see why I am accused of being a hypocrite.

on the other hand, are you comparing armstrong´s doping case with nadal taking 5-10 extra seconds between points?

naxroy wrote:on the other hand, are you comparing armstrong´s doping case with nadal taking 5-10 extra seconds between points?

Neither are allowed.

Lots of players abuse the time rule, which isn't exactly a very stringent rule of the game. Its been made to allow continuity in viewing and prevent unwanted time wasting by players. It doesn't have to be applied very strictly, some relaxation should be allowed.

It wasn't a big problem until Nadal started to abuse it. So much that it become as 'expected' with him. And he uses it as a success ingredient which is important on clay with long rallies and defending from 10m.

Lots of other players also take long time between points. Cilic, Nishikori, Djokovic..

But Nadal is the constant and biggest abuser. Umpires aren't exactly counting the seconds, the TV broadcaster is. So its easy for the latter to show it. 

Nadal has been warned about it the least number of times. Which is a BIG surprise.

you are confused there

doping is not allowed

time violation is a penalty the umpire can use to ensure continous game.

naxroy wrote:you are confused there

doping is not allowed

time violation is a penalty the umpire can use to ensure continous game.

No the difference is they are not applying the rule. Nadal shoudl get a warning the first time he gest over 25s which is roughly after the first point and then should be stripped of second serves afterwards and I think they are points penality afterwards and maybe but not sure disqualified if he keeps doing it....but of course no one dares going to that point. NO different to me than the UCL wishing to turn lance out when they knew he was a cheat. They are the same financial forces behind it.

But anyway, you and rotla are pointing to others breaking the rule as an excuse but there should be zero tolerance. Nadal first has allowed other players to abuse it yet tehy do it less than Nadal.

doping is not the same as a yellow card in football

time violation that leads to loss of point would be similar to a yellow card

if a referee doesnt show yellow card when you think he should have, it can be unfair in your eyes, but it is nothing like doping


a player that is constanly making hard fouls but never gets yellow cards is normally disliked by the rest of players, 


most of the players in the circuit admire nadal (specially closest rivals)

What does doping do? It allows more oxygen consumption. Exactly what taking extra time do.

Whatever way you look at it, you are supporting a cheat whose tennis is based on extra power and stamina.

naxroy wrote:doping is not the same as a yellow card in football

time violation that leads to loss of point would be similar to a yellow card

if a referee doesnt show yellow card when you think he should have, it can be unfair in your eyes, but it is nothing like doping


a player that is constanly making hard fouls but never gets yellow cards is normally disliked by the rest of players, 


most of the players in the circuit admire nadal (specially closest rivals)

I wouldn't equate it with hard fouls even, as fouls could potentially injure the opposition. I think the most similar analogy I can think of in football is something Born Slippy thought of a few years ago, taking a throw not from the position where the ball went off the sidelines, but slightly forward.

DEC1M7 wrote:

naxroy wrote:doping is not the same as a yellow card in football

time violation that leads to loss of point would be similar to a yellow card

if a referee doesnt show yellow card when you think he should have, it can be unfair in your eyes, but it is nothing like doping


a player that is constanly making hard fouls but never gets yellow cards is normally disliked by the rest of players, 


most of the players in the circuit admire nadal (specially closest rivals)

I wouldn't equate it with hard fouls even, as fouls could potentially injure the opposition. I think the most similar analogy I can think of in football is something Born Slippy thought of a few years ago, taking a throw not from the position where the ball went off the sidelines, but slightly forward.

Taking a throw further forward suggests a one-off where Nadal takes extra time so regularly that it can only be considered to be a deliberate strategy.  Perhaps someone who always tries to take a throw or free kick from a more advantageous position and who also always tries to stand too close to the ball in a wall when the other side have a free kick?  If truth be told, the football analogy is a difficult one.

One thing for sure, I can't equate it to doping because it's not covert, it's out there in front of the officials for them to call.

barrystar wrote:One thing for sure, I can't equate it to doping because it's not covert, it's out there in front of the officials for them to call.

But as I said earlier, the officials are not applying the rule due to the popularity of the player. No different to me than the UCL officials protecting Lance...except that there it is done openly.

Turning up doped makes a player's entire presence a lie; nothing he can do on the Court renders his conduct of the match lawful; as unattractive as it may be for a player setting out to cheat in front of the officials hoping or expecting that they won't control him, it's very different.

Tenez wrote:

barrystar wrote:One thing for sure, I can't equate it to doping because it's not covert, it's out there in front of the officials for them to call.

But as I said earlier, the officials are not applying the rule due to the popularity of the player. No different to me than the UCL officials protecting Lance...except that there it is done openly.

or because umpires as the rest of players think it is all within the normal continuous going of the game and dont take it as cheating, because in fact he is not cheating. just in your wet eyes

barrystar wrote:

DEC1M7 wrote:

naxroy wrote:doping is not the same as a yellow card in football

time violation that leads to loss of point would be similar to a yellow card

if a referee doesnt show yellow card when you think he should have, it can be unfair in your eyes, but it is nothing like doping


a player that is constanly making hard fouls but never gets yellow cards is normally disliked by the rest of players, 


most of the players in the circuit admire nadal (specially closest rivals)

I wouldn't equate it with hard fouls even, as fouls could potentially injure the opposition. I think the most similar analogy I can think of in football is something Born Slippy thought of a few years ago, taking a throw not from the position where the ball went off the sidelines, but slightly forward.

Taking a throw further forward suggests a one-off where Nadal takes extra time so regularly that it can only be considered to be a deliberate strategy.  Perhaps someone who always tries to take a throw or free kick from a more advantageous position and who also always tries to stand too close to the ball in a wall when the other side have a free kick?  If truth be told, the football analogy is a difficult one.

One thing for sure, I can't equate it to doping because it's not covert, it's out there in front of the officials for them to call.

The thing is, footballers do always take a few step forwards when doing a throw in from where they are meant to, it is a regular thing.

The throw in after a few steps forward is quite innocent and a louzy analogy in this case. 
Nadal is the king of the "schwalbe": diving and fixing a penalty. He fools the ref or taking advantage of his bad judgement. He needs these illegal tricks in order to keep his intensity at a crucial level. It's nasty gamesmanship. 

Nadal takes a dive, scores the penalty pumps his fist and says 'f#ck you!" to his opponant.

Good for the sport no?

I agree that moved up throw-ins aren't a good analogy, but diving is too strong.  Time wasting is disrespectful envelope pushing, but there's nothing deceptive about it; it's out there for all to see.

Perhaps always standing up to the ball before a free-kick and forcing the referee to wave you back every time is close in terms of attitude, but football is a flowing game whilst tennis is punctuated by a natural break for every point.  There are no easy comparisons from football to habitual time-wasting in tennis.

gallery play wrote:The throw in after a few steps forward is quite innocent and a louzy analogy in this case.
Nadal is the king of the "schwalbe": diving and fixing a penalty. He fools the ref or taking advantage of his bad judgement. He needs these illegal tricks in order to keep his intensity at a crucial level. It's nasty gamesmanship.

Nadal takes a dive, scores the penalty pumps his fist and says 'f#ck you!" to his opponant.

Good for the sport no?

It's quite literally not that though, because diving attempts deceives the referee. However going over the time limit deceives no one, in fact the umpire will know the precise time is taken between points better than Nadal himself.
That analogy would work if Nadal paid someone in the crowd to shout out at particular times, so the umpire could tell the crowd to be quiet which would elongate the time between points.
As for your analogy of Nadal saying 'fuck you' to his opponent, again I think this narrow minded silo of a forum has distorted reality for you- Nadal has never said anything disrespectful like that to an opponent.

it is simple, nadal is not a cheater

nadal is admired by all of his rivals, and they only have words of respect for his on and offcourt behaviour

barrystar wrote:I agree that moved up throw-ins aren't a good analogy, but diving is too strong.  Time wasting is disrespectful envelope pushing, but there's nothing deceptive about it; it's out there for all to see.

Perhaps always standing up to the ball before a free-kick and forcing the referee to wave you back every time is close in terms of attitude, but football is a flowing game whilst tennis is punctuated by a natural break for every point.  There are no easy comparisons from football to habitual time-wasting in tennis.

Yeah. In fact even the direct comparison of time wasting in football (which is done by so many teams when they're the underdog in a match and leading), for me is worse than time wasting in tennis. As in football there's a time limit, so it has a big impact.

naxroy wrote:it is simple, nadal is not a cheater

nadal is admired by all of his rivals, and they only have words of respect for his on and offcourt behaviour

Indeed, Federer in particular I think really admires him and has spoken at length about Nadal's positive contribution to the sport.

barrystar wrote:I agree that moved up throw-ins aren't a good analogy, but diving is too strong.  Time wasting is disrespectful envelope pushing, but there's nothing deceptive about it; it's out there for all to see.

Perhaps always standing up to the ball before a free-kick and forcing the referee to wave you back every time is close in terms of attitude, but football is a flowing game whilst tennis is punctuated by a natural break for every point.  There are no easy comparisons from football to habitual time-wasting in tennis.

It is about gaining an unfair physical advantage...So it is doping. Unconcealed doping but doping!

What's interesting is that taking extra time would benefit more someone has extra red cells and whose game requires those extra red cells.

Physiology gives a very clear picture of what Nadal needs to do.

lol

DEC1M7 wrote:

naxroy wrote:it is simple, nadal is not a cheater

nadal is admired by all of his rivals, and they only have words of respect for his on and offcourt behaviour

Indeed, Federer in particular I think really admires him and has spoken at length about Nadal's positive contribution to the sport.

Wait until he moves to Uniqlo!

and Nole?

barrystar wrote:I agree that moved up throw-ins aren't a good analogy, but diving is too strong.  Time wasting is disrespectful envelope pushing, but there's nothing deceptive about it; it's out there for all to see.

Perhaps always standing up to the ball before a free-kick and forcing the referee to wave you back every time is close in terms of attitude, but football is a flowing game whilst tennis is punctuated by a natural break for every point.  There are no easy comparisons from football to habitual time-wasting in tennis.

The thing is: he knows how to fill those 30-35 seconds. He developed those fake OCD actions to feign he's in a hurry to execute the serve. He uses anything that moves or makes sound as an excuse to wait even longer, no other player does that. It's out there for all to see but he does it very subtly. It's deceptive or at least manipulative, just like diving.

Actually, as long as there's no clock it's not so clear for all to see. The 25 second shot clock will make things more clear.

Yes, GP, again people are naive and don;t realise that those vital seconds stolen there and then are crucial for his success.

He knows that without them, there is a chance he loses 5 or 6 games in a row in those final sets like he did in Miami 05, Wimby 07, AO12, AO17...and most likely earlier if he played within the rule.

you and those  stolen seconds, remind me of smeagol and his ring

naxroy wrote:you and those  stolen seconds, remind me of smeagol and his ring

gallery play wrote:

barrystar wrote:I agree that moved up throw-ins aren't a good analogy, but diving is too strong.  Time wasting is disrespectful envelope pushing, but there's nothing deceptive about it; it's out there for all to see.

Perhaps always standing up to the ball before a free-kick and forcing the referee to wave you back every time is close in terms of attitude, but football is a flowing game whilst tennis is punctuated by a natural break for every point.  There are no easy comparisons from football to habitual time-wasting in tennis.

The thing is: he knows how to fill those 30-35 seconds. He developed those fake OCD actions to feign he's in a hurry to execute the serve. He uses anything that moves or makes sound as an excuse to wait even longer, no other player does that. It's out there for all to see but he does it very subtly. It's deceptive or at least manipulative, just like diving.

Actually, as long as there's no clock it's not so clear for all to see. The 25 second shot clock will make things more clear.

I am not sure it would... to intoxicated Nadal fans. Even if the shot clock eventually makes it behind Nadal's back, I am sure it won't mean anything to most as it will just be a token visual.

If people can't see what a crook he is already, they never will.

I remember when I saw him first it was an instant, intense turn-off. Everything about his behaviour on court screamed odious ugliness.
And those who feed on that....no comment.

The stench Nadal leaves in tennis world after RG fortunately evaporates quickly these days as he is scared to play on grass.

I am pretty sure that the day they apply the rule Nadal retires or doesn;t win anything!

What's quite funny is that they talked a lot about time keeping when Nadal was out injured but as soon as he comes back...here we go again...nothing has changed!

yeah, those changes wont affect nadal as his career is almost over, but I am sure he would adapt.

he has shown how he never stops improving, and adapting to new situations of the game

Really a mith of the sport

11 RG, simply astonishing