Nadal Says The 25 Second Rule Will Harm The Fans

First topic message reminder :

This is what Nadal had to say about the new 25 second rule. I was wondering when he would be asked about it.

“People want to see long matches, competitive rallies and amazing shots. For me to play in a high level for four hours, I need more than 25 seconds,” said the Spaniard, famous for taking long between serves. ”I don’t think players are happy with the new rule. The umpire will have to decide when it’s up to follow it or not. Because if it’s something mathematical, it will harm the fans.”

http://www.tennispanorama.com/archives/35199/rafael-nadal-tennis-panroama-news

Quite right too!

@SB... Agree on both counts.

1. My numbers show the average points per minute and 2005 is greater than 2009/2012. Rome 2006 (on fast Clay) took less time than Madrid 2009, even though the conditions are not necessarily identical. (Before someone mentions Federer numbers, I have already seen the W numbers which Lydian has shared in the past during the infamous Miami debates).

2. If not doping at higher echelons can serve as an example for lower echelons to not dope, why cannot the higher echelons of current Tennis play within limits that x% of ATP can stick religiously to? (We can discuss 'x%', if necessary.)

And Nadal can play fast, as evidenced at VTR, so the OCD aspects may not be salient (unless he did Hypnotherapy during his injury recovery ).

And, there are other players who also break the same rules, and my comments apply to all such players, not just Nadal.

The reason for Nadal being the flag-bearer of this is due to his comments in the OP.

Yes LF, very much agree with all that

laverfan wrote:The reason for Nadal being the flag-bearer of this is due to his comments in the OP.

To hopefully preempt feeling of unfairness on H-N's part (and others who may feel similar), I would further add that the main reason why Nadal gets mentioned more than other players who similarly break this rule is that he is miles and miles more important than all those other players. In tennis it is first probably Fed, then Rafa, then nothing for a long while, then some more of nothing, and then come the rest.

For example, Berdych was also complaining about the new enforcement, which I think is just as disappointing, but Berdych is just so much less visible and important, that it of course gets much less reaction.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:

I love how Nadal taking a few seconds extra (although I watched Chile Open and he has seemed to cut out on the time taken between points to around 15-20 seconds) is seen as cheating, and when Federer tries to cheat by pointing to the wrong spot on the court in trying to mislead the umpire it will be brushed under the carpet.

Federer was just being cheeky, you should love him anyway after all those French Opens he donated for the man with no knees.

Actually JM your humour does not under normal circumstances make me laugh... BUT.. you have excelled yourself with this one.. hillarious

summerblues wrote:Yes LF, very much agree with all that

laverfan wrote:The reason for Nadal being the flag-bearer of this is due to his comments in the OP.

To hopefully preempt feeling of unfairness on H-N's part (and others who may feel similar), I would further add that the main reason why Nadal gets mentioned more than other players who similarly break this rule is that he is miles and miles more important than all those other players. In tennis it is first probably Fed, then Rafa, then nothing for a long while, then some more of nothing, and then come the rest.

For example, Berdych was also complaining about the new enforcement, which I think is just as disappointing, but Berdych is just so much less visible and important, that it of course gets much less reaction.

Well thanks for considering my feelings SB but Im not on my own with this one. The explanation, I grant you is a good one but still not fair, It matters not as to his importance because there are no allowances made for his importance when it comes to anything to his advantage.. you cant have it both ways.
The rules apply to all players alike and dealt with fairly - I make no allowances for Rafa if he breaks the rules but neither do I want to see others not penalised for breaking the rules either.. if that makes sense

What a loathesome person Nadal is. He was hard enough to like before this with all his gamesmanship and capybara impressions.

His whole argument is a rather false construct.

People want to see long matches? Not sure that's true. Rafa v Novak AO12 is interesting as on oddity but if every match were as long as that, tennis would become unwatchable.

Competitive rallies? Competitive doesn't mean long. If you play a 30 shot rally and are feeling tired from it, find a way to orchestrate a shorter one next. People want to see variety.

Amazing shots? Again, nothing to do with the length of the rally. An amazing shot can come at any time.

As others have said, this issue is not about any one player alone. This is about umpires being given a mandate to enforce the existing time limits for all players in all matches. If a significant % of players are able to stick to the time limits then there is no reason why they cannot all do so.

I find the insistence of labelling this a new rule by some a little disingenuous. If the courts reduce the sentencing for violating an existing law, does that make it a new law? Committing the act is no more or less legal than it was previously.

Carrieg4

It's not a new rule, it's a change to the way it is penalised. In fact, the penalties are more lenient for the server (a fault rather than a point penalty) and exactly the same as before for the receiver.

From http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/09/Feature/ATP-Board-Approves-Change-In-Time-Violation-Penalty.aspx
"From 2013, on both the ATP World Tour and ATP Challenger Tour, a time violation between points (25 seconds) will be penalised in the first instance with a warning. For the second and all subsequent violations, the penalty will be a fault for the server and a point penalty for the receiver. Currently, the rule is a warning and then point penalty for both the server and receiver. "

The rule hasn't changed, the penalty is more lenient. But it is being more strictly enforced, for the benefit of tennis as a whole.

Haddie-nuff wrote:It matters not as to his importance because there are no allowances made for his importance when it comes to anything to his advantage.. you cant have it both ways.

I am not sure what you mean here. Where would you like to see allowances to his advantage?

Even if say you are right what would it matter? It almost sounds to me like you are saying that people are right about Rafa here but you will still not agree with them because you know they would not say similar things if they were in Rafa's favor.

It is as if I said to IMBL that I will not agree with him that Rafa is a better clay courter than Roger unless he agrees with me that Roger is a better grass court player.

super_realist wrote:What a loathesome person Nadal is. He was hard enough to like before this with all his gamesmanship and capybara impressions.

May I suggest that we keep the emotion out and discuss this a bit more civilly.

HM Murdoch wrote:His whole argument is a rather false construct.

This is why super_realist dislikes the specific player.

HM Murdoch wrote:People want to see long matches? Not sure that's true. Rafa v Novak AO12 is interesting as on oddity but if every match were as long as that, tennis would become unwatchable.

...and broadcasters would lose interest. They had much rather show an interesting short duel, rather than a protracted ritual like Apocalypse Now.

HM Murdoch wrote:Competitive rallies? Competitive doesn't mean long. If you play a 30 shot rally and are feeling tired from it, find a way to orchestrate a shorter one next. People want to see variety.

This is the crux of the matter. Playing styles can vary, but the framework of rules should still be followed.

HM Murdoch wrote:Amazing shots? Again, nothing to do with the length of the rally. An amazing shot can come at any time.

Agree. If you live by the sword, you die by the sword. If a specific playing style is more physical than others, than anything less than 100% fitness, will be very visible.

lags72 wrote:Carrieg4

Seconded.

SB

You wrote

would further add that the main reason why Nadal gets mentioned more than other players who similarly break this rule is that he is miles and miles more important than all those other players.


What Im trying to say (though obviously not very well) that this is or should not be the reason that Rafa is singled out for breaking the rule when on the other hand he is being accused of wanting things to his advantage in other respects his importance does not matter (neither should it). No matter what profile you have as a player.. rules is rules.. and Rafa should be treated no more or less than any other player. And any other player should be treated the same as him whew!!!!!

From the AO:
"There is no problem for me with the new rule. I am one of the ones and Rafa people mention with slow play, but I can play as quick as the rules say. I have no complaint"

“I think with the new rule and everything we will be shortening our time between points, and as much as it was a pleasure to be part of such a classic match and in history, I think nobody likes to spend six hours on the court,” Djokovic said on Friday.

This is the attitude all players should have. They have chosen this sport and you play within the rules. A basketball player can't shoot a free throw from 9 feet six inches instead of 10 feet because his range is much better 6 inches in. Nadal is capable of playing within the rule.. I know he is.. and the umpires have shown already that after long rallies,etc they are willing to give the players a few extra seconds to catch up.. He's be fine...

carrieg4 wrote:As others have said, this issue is not about any one player alone. This is about umpires being given a mandate to enforce the existing time limits for all players in all matches. If a significant % of players are able to stick to the time limits then there is no reason why they cannot all do so.

I find the insistence of labelling this a new rule by some a little disingenuous. If the courts reduce the sentencing for violating an existing law, does that make it a new law? Committing the act is no more or less legal than it was previously.

Yes a very good post. I don't like players dragging out the between point period, it makes for dull viewing. Sometimes the best tennis I have seen from guys is when they are bit physically winded or tweaked and they make the committment that ok I have to win this match with my shots. Then all of sudden the guy goes on a barage of winners and steals the match because he knows he can't rely on his legs but he can open his shoulders.

TRuffin wrote:From the AO:
"There is no problem for me with the new rule. I am one of the ones and Rafa people mention with slow play, but I can play as quick as the rules say. I have no complaint"

“I think with the new rule and everything we will be shortening our time between points, and as much as it was a pleasure to be part of such a classic match and in history, I think nobody likes to spend six hours on the court,” Djokovic said on Friday.

This is the attitude all players should have. They have chosen this sport and you play within the rules. A basketball player can't shoot a free throw from 9 feet six inches instead of 10 feet because his range is much better 6 inches in. Nadal is capable of playing within the rule.. I know he is.. and the umpires have shown already that after long rallies,etc they are willing to give the players a few extra seconds to catch up.. He's be fine...

Where did you get that quote from Djokovic TRuffin?

The thing is that even if players stick to even 20 seconds between points and even if they shorten points and don't run around at all there will still be very long matches. Just ask Isner and Mahut. The way tennis is scored this will always be a possibility. Even with tie breaks it is still possible to have 20 + minute games.

It makes me wonder exactly what the reasoning behind the NEW rule is.

Is it to stop players from a sort of gamesmanship by interfering with the pace of play?

Are matches too long and this is seen as a way of shortening them?

Are rallies too long and this is a way of shortening them.

Do viewers want more serve and volley style tennis and this would encourage this style of play?

Is it a way of rewarding the more physically fit player?

Would it be fun to see Nadal punished and have points taken away from him?

All of these reasons have been given for implementing this NEW rule at some point. So what is the reason?

summerblues wrote:Tenez was leaning towards the view that Nadal intentionally beefed up his routine to give himself unfair advantage, which helped him win matches. If I remember well, you were leaning towards the view Nadal was taking long mostly out of habit that would be difficult to shake.

Somewhere along the way Tenez claimed that in Miami 2005 Nadal stuck to the time limit on 90% of points (or something like that). When you presented the evidence tthat this was wrong, he refused to budge.

The way I see it, Tenez's main point - that Nadal was intentionally bending rules - may well have been correct, it is just that for whatever reason he got himself cornered into defending that silly 90% statement.

The analysis I did on Nadal from playing his first match at Wimb 2003 through to more recent events showed that he was always taking around 26-28 secs on average. Of course for some points he takes longer to recover, no doubt. But the overall averages across matches haven't been changing from the very start.
So, what gives? Where did this so called "intentionally beefing up the routine" start exactly if the average has never changed much since 2003, and always above 25secs? This is why I always asserted my point - i.e. that he's never been quick as a pro, hence it points to habituation right from the "get-go". We know how much a creature of habit he is elsewhere so serving time being driven by habit driven isn't a particularly large leap of faith. But again - just where is the evidence of any building up of routine? He took over 26.5 secs (IIRC) on average even at Wimb2003 at as a barely turned 17 yr old. The ralleys on a quicker surface back then were not long...yet he still took that time. My only conclusion was that the "beefing up the routine" is a myth, unsubstantiated. And yes when Tenez was confronted with actual data he squirmed around on the issue - Miami 2005 is no different from Miami 2004. The data showed that, and probably no different to any other Miami year played there. Again, routine building is a myth...unless someone can point to where/when it started with actual evidence.

In terms of actual rule breaking, you'll never actually hear me defending Nadal per se. I've never supported taking longer, they should all stick to 25s...in theory. However, I understand that he's basically saying 25s isn't practical when ralleys are lasting so much longer. So much longer than the time when 25s rule was created I'll wager. Infact, if surfaces have slowed by say 20% since 2001...is it not unrealistic to expect the 25s rule to increase by 20%...I.e. go to 30 seconds? If anything, it can be construed that players are being penalised to stick a rule that was created back in faster conditions. So, it's a difficult issue. But....I don't support rule breaking. This is why I think the rule needs to move to 30s then be governed 100%...to reflect slower conditions the players have had imposed on them by ATP! Andy Murray also supports moving to 30s and said so in January this year.

hawkeye wrote:

TRuffin wrote:From the AO:
"There is no problem for me with the new rule. I am one of the ones and Rafa people mention with slow play, but I can play as quick as the rules say. I have no complaint"

“I think with the new rule and everything we will be shortening our time between points, and as much as it was a pleasure to be part of such a classic match and in history, I think nobody likes to spend six hours on the court,” Djokovic said on Friday.

This is the attitude all players should have. They have chosen this sport and you play within the rules. A basketball player can't shoot a free throw from 9 feet six inches instead of 10 feet because his range is much better 6 inches in. Nadal is capable of playing within the rule.. I know he is.. and the umpires have shown already that after long rallies,etc they are willing to give the players a few extra seconds to catch up.. He's be fine...

Where did you get that quote from Djokovic TRuffin?

The thing is that even if players stick to even 20 seconds between points and even if they shorten points and don't run around at all there will still be very long matches. Just ask Isner and Mahut. The way tennis is scored this will always be a possibility. Even with tie breaks it is still possible to have 20 + minute games.

It makes me wonder exactly what the reasoning behind the NEW rule is.

Is it to stop players from a sort of gamesmanship by interfering with the pace of play?

Are matches too long and this is seen as a way of shortening them?

Are rallies too long and this is a way of shortening them.

Do viewers want more serve and volley style tennis and this would encourage this style of play?

Is it a way of rewarding the more physically fit player?

Would it be fun to see Nadal punished and have points taken away from him?

All of these reasons have been given for implementing this NEW rule at some point. So what is the reason?

It's not a new rule, it's a new sanction.

You've been told this, what, 30 times? Well done for trying it on again though.

Boo Rafa, I went to see action, not players standing around.

Did you know...the 3rd set against Zeballos, if we cut out the time between points??.. It was 10 minutes long.

I also think TV needs to learn a few tricks and edit out the breaks between points. Even on live matches, this is possible by delaying the start time of the transmission by a certain time. Catch up to live coverage by the middle of the third set?
Anyway, at least on playbacks this needs more of a look for me.

HE

Writing new in capitals is fooling no-one. To follow your example

IT IS PLAINLY NOT A NEW RULE.

We are not gullible. Please do not treat us as such.

Many thanks.

Talk about splitting hairs. As far as I know it is a new rule, since you can now deduct a "fault" as a penalty. (You miss your first serve and go straight to second) whereas previously you had to deduct the point.

If we look at the official release on the ATP site, the word "rule" is used and the mention of the current rule implies a new rule.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/09/Feature/ATP-Board-Approves-Change-In-Time-Violation-Penalty.aspx
From 2013, on both the ATP World Tour and ATP Challenger Tour, a time violation between points (25 seconds) will be penalised in the first instance with a warning. For the second and all subsequent violations, the penalty will be a fault for the server and a point penalty for the receiver. Currently, the rule is a warning and then point penalty for both the server and receiver

Anyway, I don't see the point in arguing semantics too much. It looks pretty clear to me but feel free to disagree.

Henman Bill wrote:Talk about splitting hairs. As far as I know it is a new rule, since you can now deduct a "fault" as a penalty. (You miss your first serve and go straight to second) whereas previously you had to deduct the point.

If we look at the official release on the ATP site, the word "rule" is used and the mention of the current rule implies a new rule.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/09/Feature/ATP-Board-Approves-Change-In-Time-Violation-Penalty.aspx
From 2013, on both the ATP World Tour and ATP Challenger Tour, a time violation between points (25 seconds) will be penalised in the first instance with a warning. For the second and all subsequent violations, the penalty will be a fault for the server and a point penalty for the receiver. Currently, the rule is a warning and then point penalty for both the server and receiver

Anyway, I don't see the point in arguing semantics too much. It looks pretty clear to me but feel free to disagree.

I do disagree on this occasion HB. It is clearly not a new rule. The rule has not changed - the time limit is exactly the same as it was before. All that has been amended is the penalty for breaking that rule. They have reduced it (the bounders ).

It is important to establish this as a very few posters are acting like the ATP have suddenly changed the goalposts and are being mean and unfair which is plainly not the case.

I would like to emphasise that this is not against any one player or their fans. I fully agree with Haddie who appears happy with the enforcement of the existing time limit as long as it is universally and fairly applied.

Henman Bill wrote:Talk about splitting hairs. As far as I know it is a new rule, since you can now deduct a "fault" as a penalty. (You miss your first serve and go straight to second) whereas previously you had to deduct the point.

If we look at the official release on the ATP site, the word "rule" is used and the mention of the current rule implies a new rule.

http://www.atpworldtour.com/News/Tennis/2012/09/Feature/ATP-Board-Approves-Change-In-Time-Violation-Penalty.aspx
From 2013, on both the ATP World Tour and ATP Challenger Tour, a time violation between points (25 seconds) will be penalised in the first instance with a warning. For the second and all subsequent violations, the penalty will be a fault for the server and a point penalty for the receiver. Currently, the rule is a warning and then point penalty for both the server and receiver

Anyway, I don't see the point in arguing semantics too much. It looks pretty clear to me but feel free to disagree.

The word currently implies

a. New rule replacing an old rule, or, b. Modification of an existing rule.

(Take your pick - reminds me of tom-a-to vs tom-ah-to or para-meter or p-a-ra-meter ).

carrieg4 wrote:I do disagree on this occasion HB. It is clearly not a new rule.

Whether or not we call it a new rule, to me the main point is that the current set-up is on paper less punitive than the old one - instead of a point penalty it is now a 2nd serve. One could even argue that ATP partly gave in to the slow players by reducing the penalty rather than simply applying the rules as they stood before.

lydian wrote:So, what gives? Where did this so called "intentionally beefing up the routine" start exactly if the average has never changed much since 2003, and always above 25secs? This is why I always asserted my point - i.e. that he's never been quick as a pro, hence it points to habituation right from the "get-go".

I timed two Fed Nadal Miami matches, one from 2005 (or was it 2004?), and the other one from a couple of years ago. Nadal was slow in both of them (so that is in line with what you are saying) but he was quite a bit slower in the more recent one. But I am willing to give your stats the benefit of the doubt and assume he did not really slow over time. Nevertheless, I am far more inclined to think that he was intentionally bending the rules to his own benefit (though possibly from a yopung age) than that he was just an innocent creature of habit.

He himself seems to be admitting as much, as he also did last year after the AO.

Haddie-nuff wrote:SB

You wrote

would further add that the main reason why Nadal gets mentioned more than other players who similarly break this rule is that he is miles and miles more important than all those other players.


What Im trying to say (though obviously not very well) that this is or should not be the reason that Rafa is singled out for breaking the rule when on the other hand he is being accused of wanting things to his advantage in other respects his importance does not matter (neither should it). No matter what profile you have as a player.. rules is rules.. and Rafa should be treated no more or less than any other player. And any other player should be treated the same as him whew!!!!!

Well yes, I agree with that but I have to say that I am still not clear (likely my bad) what it is that you mean when you say Rafa is being singled out.

Are you saying that he should not be singled out in the application of the rule on court or are you saying that he should not be singled out in the forum discussions?

If it is the former, then I think pretty much everyone is on the same page. I do not remember anyone suggesting the rule should be applied to Rafa only.

If it is the latter, then I will again say that of course as a bigger name he gets mentioned more. If anything, you should be happy about that part. Do you expect Delpo to be mentioned as much as Rafa? Of course people prefer to discuss superstars.

Oh dear SB Im making a bit of a "pigs ear " of this

When I say singled out I mean that Rafa has had a reputation, going before him, as being the player that violates the the 25 second rule... I acknowledge that and do not condone it..

But he is constantly brought up in these debates as being the one player that violates the rule.. he has had his warnings on court .. not as many as some would like to see .. but he has.

We know there are others but somehow they slip under the radar when this subject comes up.. whatever they do now is not the issue. Who were guilty before that was Djoko, DelPotro.. even Andy on occasions.. more recently in Chile Zeballos.. and at one time Isner was pushing his luck.
But mention this rule and the first name is Nadal.
Whether it is on court or on this forum let us have it fairly applied.
Yes I know that does not make Rafa´s case any better ... but it doesn´t make it worse either

You can almost sense the collective relief when Nadal came back last week in that many posters could finally bring out their 7-8 month dusty Nadal voodoo dolls and start sticking pins into them again with renewed vigour. It's been quite amusing to see how quickly those dolls were dusted off....."Under starters orders....and they're off!". Just shows how much tennis needs him given nothing else is discussed.

Every word he utters is poured over like its a new set of tennis commandments. He can't do right for wrong, and every action is judged cynically. Yet look at the forum, there isn't much else being discussed besides Nadal. There are 3 ATP level events going on this week inc. a 500 that Federer is playing in and yet hardly a mention of any of the matches. Are people on this forum real tennis fans, or just Nadal haters? Plus as Haddie says its only Nadal who is vilified for time stretching. There is nothing new being discussed...just the same old tired arguments about Miami, hard-courts, etc. Yawnnnnn......

Haddie-nuff wrote:
We know there are others but somehow they slip under the radar when this subject comes up.. whatever they do now is not the issue. Who were guilty before that was Djoko, DelPotro.. even Andy on occasions.. more recently in Chile Zeballos.. and at one time Isner was pushing his luck.
But mention this rule and the first name is Nadal.
Whether it is on court or on this forum let us have it fairly applied.
Yes I know that does not make Rafa´s case any better ... but it doesn´t make it worse either

Well put Haddie. Nadal is far from the only one to break the rule. One reason I am in favour of the ATP instructing umpires to enforce the rule is that it allows for fair and consistent application of it - whoever breaks it. Murray has broken the rule on occasion as you say. If he does so in future and gets called on it by the umpire I will have little sympathy. The rule is there for all of them and it is good that it is finally being enforced.

lydian, the OP is a Rafa fan - not sure any 'Rafa haters' would have even bothered with the subject otherwise. Even then, if Rafa hadn't said anything about it no-one would be commenting on it this week. But when he says "I need more than 25 seconds" then he ought to expect a bit of criticism.

JuliusHMarx wrote:lydian, the OP is a Rafa fan - not sure any 'Rafa haters' would have even bothered with the subject otherwise. Even then, if Rafa hadn't said anything about it no-one would be commenting on it this week. But when he says "I need more than 25 seconds" then he ought to expect a bit of criticism.

Julius if there is anything that Rafa has inherited from Uncle Toni is that he says things as he sees it.. it is an inherent Spanish trait unfortunately .. they dont always see that it isnt the wisest thing to say what you are thinking They do love to talk do the Spaniards !!!!!

Fed has the same trait and gets similar criticism, but from different people

Murray rarely says anything because of similar criticism

carrieg4 wrote:Murray rarely says anything because of similar criticism

So the motto here is "when in doubt say nowt"

Well actually, prior to the Australian Open, Murray was quoted as saying he didn't have a problem if the 25 second rule was enforced rigorously.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well actually, prior to the Australian Open, Murray was quoted as saying he didn't have a problem if the 25 second rule was enforced rigorously.

Typical Murray - doesn't care if he can give the fans his best tennis or not. (Joke!)

CaledonianCraig wrote:Well actually, prior to the Australian Open, Murray was quoted as saying he didn't have a problem if the 25 second rule was enforced rigorously.

He does offer opinions CC but he thinks very carefully before he speaks. He has been unfairly burned too many times not to.

lydian wrote:Every word he utters is poured over like its a new set of tennis commandments. He can't do right for wrong, and every action is judged cynically.

SoCal had Federer's interview referenced... https://www.606v2.com/t40555-roger-liked-rafa-s-shirt-but-was-dissapointed-that-he-still-isn-t-playing-right-handed

I tried Rotterdam discussion - https://www.606v2.com/t40553-tsonga-loses-to-sijsling-rotterdam-7-63-4-6-6-4

The cynicism has it's basis in breaking the rules and then justifying such by saying it is somehow unfair. There is a minority who seem to do that.

For example, has Del Potro said anything about surfaces, time-between-points recently?

I also think this desire to attack or defend, as the posters may be inclined, to do is also not very good. It does not make for good debate.

I don’t think players are happy with the new rule.

Do you think this is a fair evaluation?

I need more than 25 seconds...

Should this not be a collective 'we' rather than singular 'I'?

He was the VP of PC. Why was there no discussion to make such changes? Why is there a need to have this trial-by-media? Remember AO comments.

I didnt watch his return so I have to ask: How did Nadal fit his routine with the new rule/amment? Did he edit his ritual or did he just go through it very quickly?

kingraf wrote:I didnt watch his return so I have to ask: How did Nadal fit his routine with the new rule/amment? Did he edit his ritual or did he just go through it very quickly?

He did the same routine- just didn't towel too much (ie started the routine quicker).
So managed to avoid going over 25 seconds.

lydian wrote:You can almost sense the collective relief when Nadal came back last week in that many posters could finally bring out their 7-8 month dusty Nadal voodoo dolls and start sticking pins into them again with renewed vigour. It's been quite amusing to see how quickly those dolls were dusted off....."Under starters orders....and they're off!". Just shows how much tennis needs him given nothing else is discussed.

Every word he utters is poured over like its a new set of tennis commandments. He can't do right for wrong, and every action is judged cynically. Yet look at the forum, there isn't much else being discussed besides Nadal. There are 3 ATP level events going on this week inc. a 500 that Federer is playing in and yet hardly a mention of any of the matches. Are people on this forum real tennis fans, or just Nadal haters? Plus as Haddie says its only Nadal who is vilified for time stretching. There is nothing new being discussed...just the same old tired arguments about Miami, hard-courts, etc. Yawnnnnn......

I take exception with that I think there was a lot of headway made in the weak era discussion, born slippey posted a hilarious photo of super talented dave losing a fight with a blade of grass. Is there anything new really about what we discuss on these forums. I personally enjoy rafa being in the mix. It is always fun when he gives an interview and the legion of fed fans go after him, I find it to be heart warming tradition. And now when rafa is on vacation they also have a go at djokovic as well so that makes fun for me as well. If you can get bb and emancipator to cheer for nadal as a djoko fan u know that Novak is doing something right. In fact their cacophony of whining and funeral pronouncement's after each djoko grand slam win is like music to my ears.

Socal

All I can say as a Nadal fan is that he has been back barely a fortnight and this forum is talking of no one else... how boring the rest must be. Like him or hate him you cant obviously ignore him... well done Rafa what would they do without you.

Yes haddie without nadal to kick around the fed fans would be left with nothing to do but talk of Roger's trophies and the Herculean talents of corria and super talented dave. I wear their ridicule of djoko as a badge of honor. In 2009 you couldn't get two people to comment on djoko in a thread. Now he has become arch villain two. I love it hope he plays well enough where he takes over the lead as fed fan's number 1 target. Bb and emancipator have already transitioned into part time nadal fans lol!

socal1976 wrote:Yes haddie without nadal to kick around the fed fans would be left with nothing to do but talk of Roger's trophies and the Herculean talents of corria and super talented dave. I wear their ridicule of djoko as a badge of honor. In 2009 you couldn't get two people to comment on djoko in a thread. Now he has become arch villain two. I love it hope he plays well enough where he takes over the lead as fed fan's number 1 target. Bb and emancipator have already transitioned into part time nadal fans lol!

Does my sarcasm detector smells some weak era here?

Maybe just a little chydremion I have occasionally been known to be sarcastic.

If djokovic wins three slams in a row and lets say he is playing nadal in the uso final I bet there will be a lot of new nadal fans on this forum. Emancipator and bb may even buy a poster of nadal with his shirt off to hang in their bedroom

Chydremion - you should not deny socal his pleasures .....!

I can only imagine that fans of Federer have worn with a similar "badge of honour" the ridicule and criticism of their favourite player that has been directed at both Federer, and themselves, over many years by - amongst others - supporters of Nadal and Djokovic ; and that they too have enjoyed him being the "arch villain", most notably when targeted by the likes of Uneducated Biased and Catalan Power on the old 606 and then continuing here (eg on the infamous sportsmanship thread).

So enjoy it socal ..... You're finally getting just a taste of what those Fed fans must have been enjoying for so very long.

Spread the love ......

Chydremion wrote:

socal1976 wrote:Yes haddie without nadal to kick around the fed fans would be left with nothing to do but talk of Roger's trophies and the Herculean talents of corria and super talented dave. I wear their ridicule of djoko as a badge of honor. In 2009 you couldn't get two people to comment on djoko in a thread. Now he has become arch villain two. I love it hope he plays well enough where he takes over the lead as fed fan's number 1 target. Bb and emancipator have already transitioned into part time nadal fans lol!

Does my sarcasm detector smells some weak era here?

The usual debate about armchair critics calling ATP professionals lazy and weak.

It would be wonderful, if any Tennis player on v2 can claim to be in Top 1,000,000 within ATP.

lydian wrote:Are people on this forum real tennis fans, or just Nadal haters?

Don't worry Lydian, I'm not a Nadal hatah.
I don't think I am anyway.

socal1976 wrote:If djokovic wins three slams in a row and lets say he is playing nadal in the uso final I bet there will be a lot of new nadal fans on this forum. Emancipator and bb may even buy a poster of nadal with his shirt off to hang in their bedroom

Really?? I will support Djokovic against Nadal as long as he has less than 12 slams.

EDIT: Oh didn't read three in a row. Well we can't have Djokovic winning all slams in same year. Not because we hate him. but because deluded Djokovic fans (don't mean you Social) will always use that as opportunity to declare Djokovic unrightfully GOAT above Federer.