Do the umpires always say...

First topic message reminder :

Like most people I suspect, I don't tend to pay much attention to the toin coss, photo op etc before the matches start, but I saw it before the Berdych/Rochus match last night and the umpire went over the hawkeye rules and said "20 seconds between points".

I know this rule has been spoken about often, but have the umpires always said this and then just usually ignored it during the match, or is it something they've recently started making a point of saying, in which case maybe they plan to be stricter?

Tenez wrote:I like the idea of the clock on court cause it woudl make everybody aware. And I am sure that teh crowd woudl be quite up to.....20s but it might get more difficult to control and the crowd should be invited to express their anger at breaking the rule.

Not so long ago, players used to practice their routine between points to be 20s or even less but now the routine is studied to abuse it.

I am not sure encouraging crowd participation is going to be the answer, particularly if you have a partisan home crowd.

I think the Umpire has got to stamp on it at the very beginning of the match when the crowd is going to be quiet and there is less room for ambiguity so that the players and the umpire get a clear feel for proprieties. It's no good waiting until tense moments later on in the match when the crowd will be making more noise. The Umpire needs to take the sting out of the issue when it's easy to do so.

Haven't read this thread throughout but a clock on court sounds good to me. The more awareness the better, because the refs clearly don't have an anwser to it.
The crowd pays for the tickets and at the end of the day it's their party. So why not involving them? Imo there are rules for the players as well the crowd but players are the first to complain when the crowd is not quite during play..there you go
The time wasters laugh at time violation warnings, but will they against a correcting crowd? I like to witness that.

I support that too. We give them vuvuzelas and empty beer cans and bottles as well so they make their presence felt by throwing them on court.

gallery play wrote:Haven't read this thread throughout but a clock on court sounds good to me. The more awareness the better, because the refs clearly don't have an anwser to it.
The crowd pays for the tickets and at the end of the day it's their party. So why not involving them? Imo there are rules for the players as well the crowd but players are the first to complain when the crowd is not quite during play..there you go
The time wasters laugh at time violation warnings, but will they against a correcting crowd? I like to witness that.

Agree with that. The crowd shoudl be entitled to know and shoudl the players stick to teh rule, I can't see why teh crowd woudl behave differentlt than now. The fact is they shoudl shout now to see players take so much time, yet they don't.

Also the clock coudl be invisible but appear visible only from second 20..for instance.

Tenez, I may have made a joke but I support the enforcement of the ban. At the moment it is more of a guideline.

I would also support the publishing of statistics on average time taken by each player.

As a fan I would like to see quicker matches, more action, instead of losing a chunk of a match doing nothing. I think you mentioned you have Eurosport player. When I used it last year (this year I am on Sky) at the end of each point I would fast forward it 20 seconds, a great feature meaning you can watch the matches quicker. Have you tried it? Also, on highlights when they can only show limited points, I think they should edit out the 20 seconds much more than they often do.

I don't think you can honestly say it's a Nadal only issue. Many players do it including his main rival.

Henman Bill wrote:
I don't think you can honestly say it's a Nadal only issue. Many players do it including his main rival.

It's an issue that Nadal started. I can' remember talking about this rule since the Vilas/Nastase times.

And he is teh biggest abuser by a mile.

I'm not convinced. I tell you what. Djokovic is playing now on a repeat. I'll time his next 10 service points and report to you the results and later do the same for Nadal at random. Admittedly a small sample size, but something to be going on with.

By the way, what about when they play each other these two? Do you think the fact that they both play similar defensive and gruelling tennis means Nadal gets no advantage from taking 30s?

crap. Giraldo serving at 0-2 1-5 if Djokovic breaks here won't get the chace to do this today

Well I can tell you Giraldo took 14, 12 and 19 seconds on the last three points, I'll have to do it some other time.

Djoko is breaking the rule cause he knows he can. Before Nadal no-one dared to break it.

That's the problem of having a number one player abusing teh rules. It sets a very bad example. Likewise with drugs and so on.

Good question. But the answer is simple. The answer to that question should be helped by asking another question. Who consumes more (most) energy when rallying? This one benefits more from recuperating.
Nadal not only does more running but he burns much more energy when hitting the ball than Djoko who uses teh power of his opponent by taking the ball earlier and hitting flatter.

Nadal would not last very long at all if he had to abide by teh 20s after those gruelling rallies. UEs woudl flow fast and thick!

I guess you're right that Djoko used less energy, but not by much, they are kind of similar at times.

On drugs, if somehow Nadal was proven to be completely innocent of any offence (hypothetically) would that make a big change to how you feel about him or not really? Assuming he isn't on PEDs, that I respect him on many level for what he brings to the game, even though I would still want to favour the attacking player.

Henman Bill wrote:I guess you're right that Djoko used less energy, but not by much, they are kind of similar at times.

Much less energy. It's not close. Just look at the muscle mass. Those arms are not there to look good only. To create as much pace as Nadal does while topspinning requires probably twice as much power than a FH from Djoko. Well I don't know exactly but much more, especially consideringhow far back Nadal stands.

On drugs, if somehow Nadal was proven to be completely innocent of any offence (hypothetically) would that make a big change to how you feel about him or not really? Assuming he isn't on PEDs, that I respect him on many level for what he brings to the game, even though I would still want to favour the attacking player.

The question of guilty or not is not very relevant anymore. PRP was illegal early 2009 and became legal end of 2009 and that's just an example. YOu can be innocent nowadays using clear "legal" PEDs. Because we all know that no-one could run and hit as hard as those top players (and even lower ranked players) without having PE food ad drinks.

Nadal based his game on a superior physique acquired and not natural. We know that more and more can run as much and for as long as him nowadays. THat's what I don;t like his game and the fact he is bending the rules (cheating in fact) to accomodate his style make his character unpleasant to me.

We know what he does (or would like to do) to take advantage...(MTOs, Time taking, willing to change ranking, shortening the season, on court coaching etc..)....I have little doubt that there are also "advantages" we are not made aware. Toni is very good at making him think that what he does is normal. Taking the guilt out of him. "They all do", you too are "entitled", etc....So that when a rule and conds don't suit them, they think tey are entitled to ask for changing it.

So why should I be forced to be neutral and consider him as just another player. He is not!

I watched the highlights from Nada/Lopez match on he Australian open website and seriously, the first 10 seconds is Nadal preparing to serve. Made me laugh and think of this thread.