The Latest Interview (Nadal's , Who Else's)

First topic message reminder :

Just as we have successfully discussed fast courts to death, to our rescue comes , who else but Rafa Nadal.

In his latest interview, he tackles another 606v2's favourite topics: time violation.

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/news.aspx?articleid=16795&zoneid=25

No prizes for guessing what he thinks about them....


The intro and Nadal's interview aside, I think that enforcing the 20 seconds rule would sort out the game quicker & better than anything else.

Since the umpires are obviously gutless and underpaid and don't have any say in all this, the onus is on tournament organisers to install visible clocks on courts and see what happens.

Tenez I have watched many many Nadal matches since he was young.
I know for a fact he also took ages to serve since them.
It's not my fault, or Lydians, that you don't know enough about Nadal. Any Nadal fan, or expert on him, will admit that Nadal has been taking more time than he should since he was young, very young. Lydian's evidence would not have been necessary if you knew enough on the subject.
You're just convienently trying to use Miami 2005 as some sort of turning points in nadals time-taking, which just simply isn't the case.
If you did more research and actually watched more Nadal matches (even when he was young) we wouldn't be having this debate.

amritia3ee wrote:Tenez I have watched many many Nadal matches since he was young.
I know for a fact he also took ages to serve since them.
It's not my fault, or Lydians, that you don't know enough about Nadal.

Thanks. I'll have a better look next time.

amritia3ee wrote:Tenez I have watched many many Nadal matches since he was young.
I know for a fact he also took ages to serve since them.
It's not my fault, or Lydians, that you don't know enough about Nadal. Any Nadal fan, or expert on him, will admit that Nadal has been taking more time than he should since he was young, very young. Lydian's evidence would not have been necessary if you knew enough on the subject.
You're just convienently trying to use Miami 2005 as some sort of turning points in nadals time-taking, which just simply isn't the case.
If you did more research and actually watched more Nadal matches (even when he was young) we wouldn't be having this debate.

Yeah, but what's that got to do with the face he breaks the 20 seconds rule in order to recover from long rallies? I mean heave you read what NADAL says in the interview ?

In that case why would he take long when 6-3 6-1 4-0 in the FO final?
The rallies weren't long, Nadal wasn't tired, Federer wasn't tired and the match was practically finished.

amritia3ee wrote:In that case why would he take long when 6-3 6-1 4-0 in the FO final?
The rallies weren't long, Nadal wasn't tired, Federer wasn't tired and the match was practically finished.

rules are there to be applied whatever the circumstances: whoever is playing, whatever the score is.
Kind of not driving through the red light even though there are no cars around.

Ha ha! This thread has been going for so long "the red light" rigid style of rule has already been discussed and dismissed because the 20 second between points rule is nothing like it. See what laverfan has to say about this anology pages and pages back in this thread....