Ramos is a garbage official, plain and simple. He's been cursed out by players like Federer in the past with not even a warning issued from him, but he wants to observe the letter of the rules for being called a "thief"? Do not be surprised if we never see Ramos at another Serena match (or grand slam women's final) again.
Could Serena have handled it better? Sure. Have I ever seen an umpire issue penalties on a player like this in a grand slam (let alone a final) before? Never in my close to 20 years of watching tennis.
Joined: 22 Apr 2001 Posts: 1677 Location: Cerritos, California
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 7:07 pm Post subject:
I have watched tennis my whole life (not that it makes me an expert). I hate when the sexism card is pulled in unwarranted situations. It only gives detractors fodder to assert that the feminism claims are over-the-top/ making something out of nothing.
There is no evidence (in my mind) that men have acted like Williams in the aggregate with no consequence. Anecdotal examples are not evidence in my mind. Indeed, a simple youtube search would reveal as much. Per the letter of the tennis law, Williams was in violation.
Really, this isn't about sexism. It is poor sportsmanship. Osaka was pummeling Williams in the match and she imploded.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29354 Location: La La Land
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:42 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Serena should just shut up. .
I feel like in a conversation about sexism. Saying the woman should shut up is probably the least thoughtful thing you could say.
And when male professional tennis players say they said and done worse. Without being penalized, I have to take their word for it.
At least you're not saying, no modern male player got away with worse. Because obviously you were wrong saying that. Seems like your goal posts have shifted.
I'll just repeat my initial statement. 2 things can be true at once. Serena lost her composure. AND if she was a male player like say Roddick or Blake . She wouldn't have been penalized. Not me saying that. That is Roddick and Blake saying that (and they aren't alone). _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Last edited by kikanga on Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:52 pm; edited 4 times in total
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31929 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 9:44 pm Post subject:
Corey78 wrote:
I have watched tennis my whole life (not that it makes me an expert). I hate when the sexism card is pulled in unwarranted situations. It only gives detractors fodder to assert that the feminism claims are over-the-top/ making something out of nothing.
There is no evidence (in my mind) that men have acted like Williams in the aggregate with no consequence. Anecdotal examples are not evidence in my mind. Indeed, a simple youtube search would reveal as much. Per the letter of the tennis law, Williams was in violation.
Really, this isn't about sexism. It is poor sportsmanship. Osaka was pummeling Williams in the match and she imploded.
I already pointed out one such instance, in the very same tournament. In fact, on the very next day to when Serena had that infamous meltdown in the Clijsters match.
No code violation.
Also, at the Citi Open in 2015, Alex Zverev had the following exchange with the chair umpire...
Zverev: "You're a damn idiot."
Umpire: "Don't talk to me like that."
Zverev: "I'll fu*king talk to you however I want to fu*king talk to you."
No code violation. And I'll give you 1 guess as to who that chair umpire was.
Look, there is a double standard, and to not acknowledge it is akin to simply burying your head in the sand.
And while Osaka outplayed Williams in the match and deserved to win, it's not like she was just outclassing her so badly in the second set that it wasn't within the realm of possibility that Serena could've pulled out that second set. I mean, it was a 6-4 set with a game penalty. All it may have taken was one break. Again, not saying Osaka didn't deserve to win, as she most certainly did. I'm merely saying that it's not exactly fair to say that Ramos' decisions had no effect whatsoever on the match. When you're the greatest player of all time and you're facing a 20-year-old in her first Grand Slam final, it's obviously within the realm of possibility that you can get one break of serve back and then pull out a tight set and then see what the younger player's nerves are made of in a third set.
But again, Osaka deserved to win for sure and was the better player yesterday. It's just a shame how it all went down.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31929 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Sun Sep 09, 2018 11:06 pm Post subject:
epak wrote:
But are instances when a male player had 3 different types of code violations and the ump did take a point?
Well, sure. John McEnroe was defaulted on more than one occasion and to my knowledge, it's always about the accumulation of code violations, as opposed to just being defaulted from a match for one specific thing that he did that was considered to be especially egregious. In general, the first code violation is a warning. The second one costs you a point penalty. The third one costs you a game penalty. Then the next one costs you a set penalty. Then, finally, another one would cost you the entire match. Of course, there are ways that you can be defaulted for just one code violation, but they have to be extreme circumstances. David Nalbandian was defaulted from a final once when, in frustration, he kicked a wooden barrier towards the side of the court after losing a point. Just one problem: one of the linespeople was sitting on a chair inside of the wooden barrier, and the wood went directly into man's leg, injuring him. That's an automatic default when your actions injure a match official, whether intentional or not. There was a regrettable incident once at Wimbledon in a men's doubles match where Tim Henman was upset with himself after losing a point, and he happened to attempt to hit the ball to the other side of the court, semi-hard (but he didn't whale on it) in frustration. Unfortunately for Henman, a ball girl happened to be running from one side of the net to the other mistakenly, and the ball struck her. Even though everyone knew Henman had no intention of striking the ball girl, his team was defaulted.
To go back to the women's final on Saturday specifically, the issue I have is with the first and third code violations. I've already mentioned how I think calling a code violation for coaching is chicken-bleep; the WTA Tour even issued a new statement late last night basically saying that the sport needs to take a hard look at that rule, since it seems like it gets applied at random. The second code violation was an automatic; when you abuse your racket and it becomes unplayable, it's an instant code violation. As for the third one, yeah, she wasn't conducting herself very nicely, but I didn't think it warranted a code, particularly given the other examples of conduct by men that I have mentioned. Now, that doesn't mean that there have been men in the past who haven't been given code violations for verbally abusing the chair umpire. But given that no profanity was used, and given the context of it being a Grand Slam final, and given the chicken-bleep nature of the first code in the first place...yeah, it was just really unfortunate that Ramos felt the need to issue the third code violation. Again, Zverev blatantly swore at him 3 years prior, and nothing happened. (And I note that swearing at someone might be different from just using profanity in general.)
Joined: 18 Dec 2015 Posts: 5234 Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:13 am Post subject:
ChickenStu wrote:
epak wrote:
But are instances when a male player had 3 different types of code violations and the ump did take a point?
Well, sure. John McEnroe was defaulted on more than one occasion and to my knowledge, it's always about the accumulation of code violations, as opposed to just being defaulted from a match for one specific thing that he did that was considered to be especially egregious. In general, the first code violation is a warning. The second one costs you a point penalty. The third one costs you a game penalty. Then the next one costs you a set penalty. Then, finally, another one would cost you the entire match. Of course, there are ways that you can be defaulted for just one code violation, but they have to be extreme circumstances. David Nalbandian was defaulted from a final once when, in frustration, he kicked a wooden barrier towards the side of the court after losing a point. Just one problem: one of the linespeople was sitting on a chair inside of the wooden barrier, and the wood went directly into man's leg, injuring him. That's an automatic default when your actions injure a match official, whether intentional or not. There was a regrettable incident once at Wimbledon in a men's doubles match where Tim Henman was upset with himself after losing a point, and he happened to attempt to hit the ball to the other side of the court, semi-hard (but he didn't whale on it) in frustration. Unfortunately for Henman, a ball girl happened to be running from one side of the net to the other mistakenly, and the ball struck her. Even though everyone knew Henman had no intention of striking the ball girl, his team was defaulted.
To go back to the women's final on Saturday specifically, the issue I have is with the first and third code violations. I've already mentioned how I think calling a code violation for coaching is chicken-bleep; the WTA Tour even issued a new statement late last night basically saying that the sport needs to take a hard look at that rule, since it seems like it gets applied at random. The second code violation was an automatic; when you abuse your racket and it becomes unplayable, it's an instant code violation. As for the third one, yeah, she wasn't conducting herself very nicely, but I didn't think it warranted a code, particularly given the other examples of conduct by men that I have mentioned. Now, that doesn't mean that there have been men in the past who haven't been given code violations for verbally abusing the chair umpire. But given that no profanity was used, and given the context of it being a Grand Slam final, and given the chicken-bleep nature of the first code in the first place...yeah, it was just really unfortunate that Ramos felt the need to issue the third code violation. Again, Zverev blatantly swore at him 3 years prior, and nothing happened. (And I note that swearing at someone might be different from just using profanity in general.)
I feel like in a conversation about sexism. Saying the woman should shut up is probably the least thoughtful thing you could say.
I don't feel the need to pander with PC BS. Serena has made an ass of herself. She needs to shut up. If you don't think that is "thoughtful," suck it up.
Joined: 22 Apr 2001 Posts: 1677 Location: Cerritos, California
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:40 am Post subject:
ChickenStu wrote:
Corey78 wrote:
I have watched tennis my whole life (not that it makes me an expert). I hate when the sexism card is pulled in unwarranted situations. It only gives detractors fodder to assert that the feminism claims are over-the-top/ making something out of nothing.
There is no evidence (in my mind) that men have acted like Williams in the aggregate with no consequence. Anecdotal examples are not evidence in my mind. Indeed, a simple youtube search would reveal as much. Per the letter of the tennis law, Williams was in violation.
Really, this isn't about sexism. It is poor sportsmanship. Osaka was pummeling Williams in the match and she imploded.
I already pointed out one such instance, in the very same tournament. In fact, on the very next day to when Serena had that infamous meltdown in the Clijsters match.
No code violation.
Also, at the Citi Open in 2015, Alex Zverev had the following exchange with the chair umpire...
Zverev: "You're a damn idiot."
Umpire: "Don't talk to me like that."
Zverev: "I'll fu*king talk to you however I want to fu*king talk to you."
No code violation. And I'll give you 1 guess as to who that chair umpire was.
Look, there is a double standard, and to not acknowledge it is akin to simply burying your head in the sand.
And while Osaka outplayed Williams in the match and deserved to win, it's not like she was just outclassing her so badly in the second set that it wasn't within the realm of possibility that Serena could've pulled out that second set. I mean, it was a 6-4 set with a game penalty. All it may have taken was one break. Again, not saying Osaka didn't deserve to win, as she most certainly did. I'm merely saying that it's not exactly fair to say that Ramos' decisions had no effect whatsoever on the match. When you're the greatest player of all time and you're facing a 20-year-old in her first Grand Slam final, it's obviously within the realm of possibility that you can get one break of serve back and then pull out a tight set and then see what the younger player's nerves are made of in a third set.
But again, Osaka deserved to win for sure and was the better player yesterday. It's just a shame how it all went down.
Again, in 2016 this same umpire issued Andy Murray a code violation for calling him "stupid." Here, Serena demanded an apology, appealed to her motherhood, called the umpire a thief, and a liar.
Not only that, Rafael Nadal and, I believe, Djokovic have complained about this umpires technical falling of the rules. I don't see sexism. In fact I am surprised that's Serena who has 23 Grand Slams simply could not keep her composure. The match was lost because she could not keep her composure. You just have to be smarter than that, and it's very unusual to see tennis players who are not smarter than that, especially those with multiple upon multiple Grand Slam championships.
SAS breaking down the referee Carlos Ramos on his show... sounds consistent, a consistent askwhole but consistent. Penalized Djokovich, Nadal same way he penalized Serena. Is there a wide sexism problem in tennis (beyond this particular ref)?
Joined: 22 Apr 2001 Posts: 1677 Location: Cerritos, California
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 9:45 am Post subject:
ChickenStu wrote:
epak wrote:
But are instances when a male player had 3 different types of code violations and the ump did take a point?
Well, sure. John McEnroe was defaulted on more than one occasion and to my knowledge, it's always about the accumulation of code violations, as opposed to just being defaulted from a match for one specific thing that he did that was considered to be especially egregious. In general, the first code violation is a warning. The second one costs you a point penalty. The third one costs you a game penalty. Then the next one costs you a set penalty. Then, finally, another one would cost you the entire match. Of course, there are ways that you can be defaulted for just one code violation, but they have to be extreme circumstances. David Nalbandian was defaulted from a final once when, in frustration, he kicked a wooden barrier towards the side of the court after losing a point. Just one problem: one of the linespeople was sitting on a chair inside of the wooden barrier, and the wood went directly into man's leg, injuring him. That's an automatic default when your actions injure a match official, whether intentional or not. There was a regrettable incident once at Wimbledon in a men's doubles match where Tim Henman was upset with himself after losing a point, and he happened to attempt to hit the ball to the other side of the court, semi-hard (but he didn't whale on it) in frustration. Unfortunately for Henman, a ball girl happened to be running from one side of the net to the other mistakenly, and the ball struck her. Even though everyone knew Henman had no intention of striking the ball girl, his team was defaulted.
To go back to the women's final on Saturday specifically, the issue I have is with the first and third code violations. I've already mentioned how I think calling a code violation for coaching is chicken-bleep; the WTA Tour even issued a new statement late last night basically saying that the sport needs to take a hard look at that rule, since it seems like it gets applied at random. The second code violation was an automatic; when you abuse your racket and it becomes unplayable, it's an instant code violation. As for the third one, yeah, she wasn't conducting herself very nicely, but I didn't think it warranted a code, particularly given the other examples of conduct by men that I have mentioned. Now, that doesn't mean that there have been men in the past who haven't been given code violations for verbally abusing the chair umpire. But given that no profanity was used, and given the context of it being a Grand Slam final, and given the chicken-bleep nature of the first code in the first place...yeah, it was just really unfortunate that Ramos felt the need to issue the third code violation. Again, Zverev blatantly swore at him 3 years prior, and nothing happened. (And I note that swearing at someone might be different from just using profanity in general.)
If the argument is that code violations for coaching are applied at random, that I'm not really sure there is an argument. I can't really argue that or against it. But, Serena here specifically asserted that the way she was treated is different than how men are treated, and if that is a case then there must be evidence to support that contention. I have not seen evidence to support that contention. Indeed, Serena set at a press and said that he's never given a guy a code violation for calling him a thief, was she aware that he gave Andy Murray a code violation for calling him stupid?
But are instances when a male player had 3 different types of code violations and the ump did take a point?
Well, sure. John McEnroe was defaulted on more than one occasion and to my knowledge, it's always about the accumulation of code violations, as opposed to just being defaulted from a match for one specific thing that he did that was considered to be especially egregious. In general, the first code violation is a warning. The second one costs you a point penalty. The third one costs you a game penalty. Then the next one costs you a set penalty. Then, finally, another one would cost you the entire match. Of course, there are ways that you can be defaulted for just one code violation, but they have to be extreme circumstances. David Nalbandian was defaulted from a final once when, in frustration, he kicked a wooden barrier towards the side of the court after losing a point. Just one problem: one of the linespeople was sitting on a chair inside of the wooden barrier, and the wood went directly into man's leg, injuring him. That's an automatic default when your actions injure a match official, whether intentional or not. There was a regrettable incident once at Wimbledon in a men's doubles match where Tim Henman was upset with himself after losing a point, and he happened to attempt to hit the ball to the other side of the court, semi-hard (but he didn't whale on it) in frustration. Unfortunately for Henman, a ball girl happened to be running from one side of the net to the other mistakenly, and the ball struck her. Even though everyone knew Henman had no intention of striking the ball girl, his team was defaulted.
To go back to the women's final on Saturday specifically, the issue I have is with the first and third code violations. I've already mentioned how I think calling a code violation for coaching is chicken-bleep; the WTA Tour even issued a new statement late last night basically saying that the sport needs to take a hard look at that rule, since it seems like it gets applied at random. The second code violation was an automatic; when you abuse your racket and it becomes unplayable, it's an instant code violation. As for the third one, yeah, she wasn't conducting herself very nicely, but I didn't think it warranted a code, particularly given the other examples of conduct by men that I have mentioned. Now, that doesn't mean that there have been men in the past who haven't been given code violations for verbally abusing the chair umpire. But given that no profanity was used, and given the context of it being a Grand Slam final, and given the chicken-bleep nature of the first code in the first place...yeah, it was just really unfortunate that Ramos felt the need to issue the third code violation. Again, Zverev blatantly swore at him 3 years prior, and nothing happened. (And I note that swearing at someone might be different from just using profanity in general.)
Thanks!
Wanted to make sure it wasn't some precedent.
Joined: 22 Apr 2001 Posts: 1677 Location: Cerritos, California
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:14 am Post subject:
The rulebook states that “verbal abuse is defined as a statement about an official, opponent, sponsor, spectator or other person that implies dishonesty or is derogatory, insulting or otherwise abusive."
By this measure, Williams conduct clearly falls under the rule. She called the Umpire a thief and a liar. At the same time, under this rule, mere curse words may not necessarily fall under the rule. In any case, we don't need to decide whether or not this umpire engaged in sexist activity, he didn't. I already provided an example of Andy Murray calling this umpire stupid and receiving a code violation. Is calling an Umpire a thief and a liar materially different than calling the Umpire stupid;I think not.
Again, Serena just has to be better than this. If you get two violations you should know to act smarter. We are all NBA fans; if a player gets a technical foul, then he or she should know to control his or her behavior. The player should play smarter and act smarter. Flashback, Draymond Green in the 2016 finals-- people were upset at the call which they felt changed the fabric of the finals, at the same time it was incumbent on Draymond Green not to be an idiot. Here, the same rationale applies. Serena should have acted and played smarter. Instead, she pouted and acted like a baby appealing to her motherhood, demanding an apology, stalling the match, and calling the umpire a thief and a liar. She has been playing professional tennis since the 90's. She has 23 Grand Slam trophies. She needs to be smarter than this.
Last edited by Corey78 on Mon Sep 10, 2018 7:58 pm; edited 2 times in total
SAS breaking down the referee Carlos Ramos on his show... sounds consistent, a consistent askwhole but consistent. Penalized Djokovich, Nadal same way he penalized Serena. Is there a wide sexism problem in tennis (beyond this particular ref)?
It is reasonable to assume that there is sexism, and double standards, in tennis just like every other aspect of our culture. But whatever sexism may exist did not spring into existence during the US Open final. Declaring yourself a victim of sexism after making an ass of yourself on national television does not strike me as persuasive.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was frustration setting in because this was the 2nd straight grand slam final she was getting their butt kicked in. She made it to the Wimbledon finals and lost 6-3, 6-3. While she said she was surprised she made it that far in that tournament, she probably expected to win this tournament.
I wouldn't be surprised if there was frustration setting in because this was the 2nd straight grand slam final she was getting their butt kicked in. She made it to the Wimbledon finals and lost 6-3, 6-3. While she said she was surprised she made it that far in that tournament, she probably expected to win this tournament.
Didn't she also double fault twice in a game she was up 3 break points? And ended up losing that game? That would have frustrated me. Is that what led to the racket abuse?
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 67720 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 10:39 am Post subject:
IMO Serena lost it because she was being bested by a relatively unknown. The chair overreacted but was within the rules.
I thought after she broke her racket she was on a downward spiral. I really didn't think she was going to make a comeback. _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31929 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 3:21 pm Post subject:
I'll use another analogy for issuing a coaching code violation that I really feel is appropriate (y'all can decide whether it is or not): do police officers pull you over for going 36 in a 35 MPH zone? For going 66 on the freeway when the posted limit is 65? No, of course they don't. Technically, can they issue that ticket, and technically, are you breaking the law? Yes. But there's common sense in the world. Every single professional tennis player receives coaching, in some manner. It might be a hand signal, or it could be something as simple as your coach saying "move up", or "make her play", etc etc. But every player receives coaching. To pick and choose when to make that call, I'll say again, it's just unnecessary and petty.
I'll use another analogy for issuing a coaching code violation that I really feel is appropriate (y'all can decide whether it is or not): do police officers pull you over for going 36 in a 35 MPH zone? For going 66 on the freeway when the posted limit is 65? No, of course they don't. Technically, can they issue that ticket, and technically, are you breaking the law? Yes. But there's common sense in the world. Every single professional tennis player receives coaching, in some manner. It might be a hand signal, or it could be something as simple as your coach saying "move up", or "make her play", etc etc. But every player receives coaching. To pick and choose when to make that call, I'll say again, it's just unnecessary and petty.
You would need to ask Ramos why he decided to issue the warning. This is an experienced gold badge official. Something about this incident motivated him to act. I’m skeptical of the notion that Ramos suddenly lost his common sense.
Lots of people speed. I sure do. I may not like it if I get a ticket. But that does not make the cop a thief, he does not owe me an apology, and I’m out of line if I tell him I’m going to see to it that he never works in my neighborhood again.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31929 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 4:47 pm Post subject:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
I'll use another analogy for issuing a coaching code violation that I really feel is appropriate (y'all can decide whether it is or not): do police officers pull you over for going 36 in a 35 MPH zone? For going 66 on the freeway when the posted limit is 65? No, of course they don't. Technically, can they issue that ticket, and technically, are you breaking the law? Yes. But there's common sense in the world. Every single professional tennis player receives coaching, in some manner. It might be a hand signal, or it could be something as simple as your coach saying "move up", or "make her play", etc etc. But every player receives coaching. To pick and choose when to make that call, I'll say again, it's just unnecessary and petty.
You would need to ask Ramos why he decided to issue the warning. This is an experienced gold badge official. Something about this incident motivated him to act. I’m skeptical of the notion that Ramos suddenly lost his common sense.
Lots of people speed. I sure do. I may not like it if I get a ticket. But that does not make the cop a thief, he does not owe me an apology, and I’m out of line if I tell him I’m going to see to it that he never works in my neighborhood again.
I'm specifically talking about being 1 MPH over. No one gets a ticket for that, even though you're technically breaking the law and even though, technically, the officer would have every right to issue that ticket. As for "gold badge official", I don't care. There are a lot of truly awful officials in sports that are held in high regard by their sport, for whatever reason. Joe West and Angel Hernandez have continued to work MLB postseason games, for years, and everyone involved with the game (players, fans, managers, commentators) knows that they are abysmal. That just means nothing to me.
I'm specifically talking about being 1 MPH over. No one gets a ticket for that, even though you're technically breaking the law and even though, technically, the officer would have every right to issue that ticket.
But why do you assume that Serena's coach was only 1 mph over the limit? You are essentially assuming your conclusion -- that this was such a trivial violation that no one would get a "ticket" for it. But that's not true. I don't watch as much tennis as some of you, but even I've seen warnings issued for coaching.
Here's what Martina had to say on the subject:
Quote:
To recap: The trouble began when early in the second set, Ms. Williams was given a warning for coaching. This one is on her coach: Patrick Mouratoglou was using both hands to motion to Ms. Williams to move forward and got called on it. While it is true that illegal coaching is quite common and that most coaches do it, it’s also true that despite what many commentators have said following Saturday’s events, they are called on it quite frequently and that most of the time, players just shrug it off and know that going forward, they and their coaches now need to behave, because the next infraction will cost them a point. The player is responsible for his or her coach’s conduct. And it is actually irrelevant whether the player saw or heard whatever instructions were given; either way, it is still an infraction.
I'm specifically talking about being 1 MPH over. No one gets a ticket for that, even though you're technically breaking the law and even though, technically, the officer would have every right to issue that ticket.
But why do you assume that Serena's coach was only 1 mph over the limit? You are essentially assuming your conclusion -- that this was such a trivial violation that no one would get a "ticket" for it. But that's not true. I don't watch as much tennis as some of you, but even I've seen warnings issued for coaching.
Here's what Martina had to say on the subject:
Quote:
To recap: The trouble began when early in the second set, Ms. Williams was given a warning for coaching. This one is on her coach: Patrick Mouratoglou was using both hands to motion to Ms. Williams to move forward and got called on it. While it is true that illegal coaching is quite common and that most coaches do it, it’s also true that despite what many commentators have said following Saturday’s events, they are called on it quite frequently and that most of the time, players just shrug it off and know that going forward, they and their coaches now need to behave, because the next infraction will cost them a point. The player is responsible for his or her coach’s conduct. And it is actually irrelevant whether the player saw or heard whatever instructions were given; either way, it is still an infraction.
Joined: 17 Nov 2007 Posts: 67720 Location: In a world where admitting to not knowing something is considered a great way to learn.
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 6:51 pm Post subject:
I'm beginning to feel sorry for Naomi Osaka. She's nowhere in the news after her great win. I thought this would have blown over by now. _________________ Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.
America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Mon Sep 10, 2018 7:24 pm Post subject:
jodeke wrote:
I'm beginning to feel sorry for Naomi Osaka. She's nowhere in the news after her great win. I thought this would have blown over by now.
It should have....there is nothing to see here.....a world class athlete did not act perfectly for match. It should 100% be about Osaka at this point, and discussing what her future may hold after a major win, who else is rising up in Osaka's generation, and does Serena have another major title or three left in her, etc.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Do not be surprised if we never see Ramos at another Serena match (or grand slam women's final) again.
