Murray Tricks The Umpire Into Allowing Him More Than 25 Seconds Between Points

I doubt that anyone noticed this because everyone apart from Murray's team was watching Federer and Nadal. However I was reading some quotes from Nadal's press conference and was surprised that of all things he was questioned about his grunting. I discovered that the reason for the sudden interest in grunting lay in Murray's match.

Murray's opponent Berlocq had complained that Murray was taking too long between points. This was Murray's devious response.

In a feisty match on Stadium Two, Murray was criticised by Berlocq for taking too long between points and responded by complaining to the chair umpire about the noise level of his opponent.

"It's like sometimes silence and then it comes out of nowhere," said Murray. "It's a bit of a shock.

"That's what I don't understand. To go from nothing to the loudest grunt you can do. It makes no sense."

Murray, who was runner-up at Indian Wells in 2009, said he had never previously spoken to a chair umpire about on-court grunting.

"When I have been on the court or off it, it's never been something I have found to be really that off-putting," said the 25-year-old Scot.

"But if it's going to be suggested that I am using gamesmanship by taking too long, then you can't be making noises like that on the court. I haven't experienced it like that before."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/21782218

Ha ha! It worked and Murray was not penalized. Murray backed by an army of British journalists lead by Niel Harman can do no wrong. He never "whines" he just makes valid points.

Can I ask that you watch the end of the match. Berlocq hardly looked like someone incensed by Murray and your perceived deception. In fact Berlocq looked by all accounts that he was all apologetic at the end. If everyone was watching the Fed match then I wonder what they made of Roger trying to challenge his own serve two shots into a rally.

Oh and we won't mention Rafa being coached during his match either eh?

Perhaps Murray was not penalized because he didn't go over the time. The umpire will have determined that, but as you didn't watch it, you wouldn't know.
Or maybe Murray did go over time and was not penalized in which case I expect your praise of the sensible umpire, ignoring the crazy/stupid rule, to be fulsome.

And yet here you were moaning about wanting the rule to be scrapped.

I have similar code one like the Green Cross Code

1. Stop. Is the message you wish to share worth the time.
2. Think. Am what I am saying not going to make me look somewhat un-informed.
3. Select the vessel you wish to use to convey a message. I implore in most instances you use the brain function and not the backside function.
4. Engage the parties you wish to address in hope you gain acceptance.

I'm confused. Hasn't HE being saying, in support of Rafa, that the rule needs to be flexible?

If so - what's the article about?

Or am I being cynical in knowing the moment this 'controversy' occured, there would be an HE article condemning Andy?

And so there is!!

CaledonianCraig. I haven't got time to watch a Murray match or even part of one. My tennis watching quota is all used up. But why would Berlocq look apologetic. Had he done something wrong? It sounds like the only reason commented on the grunts was to divert attention from his own slow play.


Next time Djokovic plays Murray do you think he should complain about something he finds irritating about Murray so he can bounce the ball a few more times. Ha ha! that was just a joke. Djokovic would never try anything like that against Murray as he knows he would have Neil Harman to answer too.

You haven't watched it and cast judgment?

From now on you shall be known as Dave.

Shall I enlighten you then since you never watched it? Berlocq brought it up with the umpire who never saw fit to warn Murray (umpire's call not Murray's) so prrhaps he wasn't infringing the rule. Later as Murray went to serve Berlocq threw his arms up complaining but umpire told him he was the one delaying by his actions. As for end of match you don't need to be a body language expert to see Berlocq with arm on Andy's shoulder followed by a couple of pats as being apologetic. If any neutral fan saw it differently then please post here.

Of course I didn't watch it! I was watching Federer and Nadal like everyone else. I found out about it because Nadal was questioned about grunting. I bet he thought there has been a new ATP rule prohibiting it. At least now he probably knows he only has to worry when/if he plays Murray... especially if Neil is watching and taking notes...

So players fear Neil Harman?

You will speculate over nothing you saw and proclaim as fact?

It is statements like that which actually make me doubt Darwin's theory of evolution.

lk - She is trying to develop a sense of humour but fails miserably I'm afraid.

pft, cough,haha

Lol

CaledonianCraig. Even I would probably pat Andy on the shoulder if Neil and his powerful media chums were watching...

legendkillar. I'm speculating about the quotes not the match play

sportslover. Hi! Your back. Are you going to stay up to watch Federer/Nadal?

Oh right such powerful media chums that it stopped Berlocq complaining in the first place? DOH. You really must try harder. Might watch Fed v Nadal but worried as there may be more coaching from Uncle Toni or Fed haranguing the umpire to bend the rules and allow a challenge two shots after he has played the shot he wants to challenge.

hawkeye wrote:CaledonianCraig. Even I would probably pat Andy on the shoulder if Neil and his powerful media chums were watching...

legendkillar. I'm speculating about the quotes not the match play

sportslover. Hi! Your back. Are you going to stay up to watch Federer/Nadal?

I will probably record in HD and watch it when I have time.

However I think there is as much chance of Roger winning this match as you have of blowing kisses to Andy after he takes Delpo down.

Lol

sportslover. Wow you've got Sky HD! Don't worry about the result. Both Federer and Nadal already have IW in their collection.

Ain't worried - should I be?

The fact that they both have it is good because it may not happen again for either of them

"Murray tricks umpire into allowing him more than 25 seconds"

"Of course I didn't watch it. I don't have time to watch Murray matches or even part of one"

Are you trying to make yourself sound as ridiculous as possible?

Pfft. Cough. Haha.

Just came across this gem https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=29EV2I5wt3U

HE, remember what I said in the PM last month?

Let's not have these please.

lol - this is such a poor attempt at a wum

I do come on here sometimes to see what 'fact' the HE has discovered to show her Hatred of Murray - usually it is quite amusing, but this one is so far removed from reality, it is a bit dull

It's better than when they're wumming about Fedal though or at least this is funnier. Depends on your taste though I guess.

I can never tell if HE is trying to be funny or not. Her Murray articles range between so far fetched they are funny and plain ill-informed vitriol.

An example of the former was her trying desperately to find a way, any way, of blaming Murray for Feds outburst when everyone else agreed that it was down to Fed but not a big deal so not really worth mentioning.

An example of the latter was falling hook line sinker and copy of Angling Times for a tabloid story about Murray complaining about the scheduling at AO. She never did accept that she was utterly wrong about that, I won't hold my breath....

It is a shame as, when she is not posting about Fed, Nadal, Murray or Djokovic, she posts some interesting thought provoking stuff. I guess it just depends how she wants to be seen.

I have a sneaky feeling that it had a double purpose. Firstly, to have another pop at Murray and secondly an attempt to divert attention from Rafa's big white lie to the umpire about him being coached in his match on the same evening.

@HE... can I request that your dislike for Murray not spoil your enjoyment of the sport. How can you keep going back to the discussion of a bad restaurant (or a 'bad' player aka Murray) when you have a very enjoyable gourmet place (aka Fedal) to enjoy.

Marquis Sade would probably have some choice definitions and long words to describe the OP.

Also constantly trying to convince everyone that a very successful and well reviewed restaurant is in fact a bad restaurant reduces your credentials in the food critics world. Egon Ronay will not be impressed.

This is from the Nadal press interview that took place just after the Murray match were he let it be known he didn't like his opponent grunting. It is clear that he hasn't really been asked about whatever noise he makes before. But now that Murray objects to grunting it is now being raised as an issue.

Q. As happens a lot in your matches on a lot of the intense points, you were grunting pretty loud. Can you talk about just why you grunt?
RAFAEL NADAL: Sorry?

Q. Just a general question about that.
RAFAEL NADAL: (Through translation.) During the point?

Q. Yeah. I know you do it a lot.
RAFAEL NADAL: (Shrugging.) I cannot answer. I didn't know.

Q. You don't know you're grunting?
RAFAEL NADAL: That's the first time I heard that my life.

Q. You don't think you're grunting?
RAFAEL NADAL: I cannot say I don't think. The only thing I can say is I don't feel it. I didn't have that feeling never, so it's first time that somebody told me that. For sure, if I did, you know, I didn't because I wanted.

http://www.bnpparibasopen.com/News/Tennis/2013/Interview-Transcripts/Rafael-Nadal-Fourth-Round.aspx

I wonder who asked the questions? I did notice that Neil Harman was backing Murray up. This is from Harmans twitter account. The first is one of Harmans "tweets". The second is a tweet in response.

Berlocq makes a horrid throaty grunt when he strikes the ball. Muzz doesn't like it and neither do I

Then this in response from Claudia P

Jesus, you didn't even try not to be biased. some more effort pleas, you're supposed to be a journo, not a fanboy

I wonder if it was Harman harassing Nadal in the press conference? I await with interest to see if this is something that will be brought up if/when Murray and Nadal play. Or maybe when Murray and Djokovic play. Murray has way too much influence because of the stength of his media back up.

You wouldn't be making extravagant statements with no factual basis yet again would you HE? Any objective evidence regarding this insidious influence of Murray's that you habitually refer to except that some in the media happen to agree with him on some issues? Thought not.

If those in the media were agreeing with Nadal on issues you would be commending them on their wisdom. Not sure what red PM'd you but it sounds like you should take heed.

I am now convinced that Neil Harman is the most powerful man in the tennis world.

Sod the ITF, sod the players council, sod Federer, sod Nadal.

You heard it here first.

Murray complained because he thought Berlocq was making deliberately off putting, loud, elongated grunting noises. That's how it sounded to me too. No problem with it personally, just a player trying to put off a better opponent.

Why on earth a journalist would ask Rafa about his grunting I don't know. Rafa makes a consistent noise when he hits the ball, but never an elongated one that can be deemed off putting for his opponent.

The journalist and HE have something in common. They've gone way over the top over a minor forgettable issue.

Danny_1982

Murray only complained because Berlocq thought Murray was taking too long between points. He said so himself. This is from Murrays press conference.

Q. Do you think the chair umpire should have said something to Berlocq about the grunting?
ANDY MURRAY: No, look, I mean, I wouldn't have necessarily gone into huge dialogue with the umpire about it if he wasn't complaining about how much time I was taking between the points.
Simple as that.

http://www.bnpparibasopen.com/News/Tennis/2013/Interview-Transcripts/Andy-Murray-Fourth-Round.aspx

Was Murray annoyed by the grunting or was he annoyed by Berlocq's complaint. Was Berlocq's complaint justified? Why did Murray interfere if Berlocq complained? If Murray was taking too long then he was in the wrong and if he wasn't what was the problem? It sounds more like he the higher ranked player was trying to put the lower ranked player in his place.

It's obvious that Rafa was questioned about the noise he makes because of this. Why? It's never been a problem before. Why is Murray so influential that he can make an issue where non exists.

I do agree that the journalists have gone way over the top. That's what I'm pointing out.

Why did Berlocq feel the need to complain in the first place? Now the umpires are finally applying the existing time limits more consistently he can safely leave that to the umpire to decide rather than trying to tell him his job. If Murray was over time then that is for the umpire to sort and I would have no sympathy regarding any warning received.

Maybe Murray would have tolerated the noise from Berlocq if the original complaint hadn't been made or maybe not. He has certainly voiced strong opinions on excessive noise in the past. He is not usually one to complain over much to the umpire but maybe Berlocq trying to interfere in umpiring decisions on top of making that noise tipped him over the edge. The fact remains that the noise was awful.

Every time anything happens in a match involving the top players the journalists ask all the others about it. This is in no way just a Murray phenomenon but you already knew that and this is just SSDD from you.

All that money spent on the Leveson inquiry, and they didn't even uncover the real facts about how Andy Murray controls the press. How disappointing.