Time violation - one rule for him another for the world?

Looks like Nadal got caught a couple of times delaying play - glad to see that the powers that be are finally cracking down on this

Have to say a little bit of poor sportsmanship from Nadal - who seemed to get angry with the Umpire and wanted the umpire to warn him on an unimportant point (to him) - rather than when it happened -


"Rafael Nadal, who needed treatment for a blister on his racquet hand, was angered when he was called for a second time violation by chair umpire Eva Asderaki at deuce while 4-4 at a critical time in the third set.

"I don't want to change the rule. I accept that sometimes I was slow. I respect that," he said. "The negative thing in my opinion is not the warning, but the timing of it. You can choose another moment to do it, not that one.
"She didn't advise me before the second warning that I was still going slow. It's a normal thing for the referee to help the player a little bit, and say, 'Rafa, you are going too slowly'."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/25803118

Surely the first warning is warning enough that he does not need a second warning about a second warning

Anyway, do you think that the 20 second rule is fair and if it is being policed consistently?

Pascal Maria (in the famous 5:53 AO Final) did tell Nadal to speed up, without a warning.

The first warning should be enough.

H-n has quoted Nadal's interview elsewhere, which is probably worth a read as well.

I think Rafa is being a bit self-contradictory on this one.

On the one hand, he says that extra time should be allowed because "the rules cannot go against the good show".

But a "good show" does not include players routinely taking ages to towel down, fidget and bounce the ball before serving.

I'm not against the umpires giving a little leeway. I'd rather watch a competitive point than players gasping for air in 40 degree heat and making mistakes. And generally this seems to be what happens. A player has to be really flouting the rule before they get a warning. Rafa had already been warned once, so he's bang to rights here.

This does highlight an aspect of Rafa and his team that gets under my skin though - their apparent view that the rules only apply as far as they think they should.

Toni routinely breaks the rule about coaching in the match. Rafa seems to view the 20 second rule as a suggestion rather than a law.

And let me pre-empt the inevitable "other players do it too". Here are the players with most time violations last season:

1) Nadal - 30
2) Isner - 14
3) JMDP - 13
4) Fogniniiiiii - 11
5) Djokovic - 10

Rafa has twice as many as the second placed player and he didn't play a full season! He is particularly frequent at breaking this rule.

Rafa did say today "I going to try to go quicker for the future."

It was the 31st time violation today that changed his way of thinking

HM Murdoch wrote:I think Rafa is being a bit self-contradictory on this one.

On the one hand, he says that extra time should be allowed because "the rules cannot go against the good show".

But a "good show" does not include players routinely taking ages to towel down, fidget and bounce the ball before serving.

I'm not against the umpires giving a little leeway. I'd rather watch a competitive point than players gasping for air in 40 degree heat and making mistakes. And generally this seems to be what happens. A player has to be really flouting the rule before they get a warning. Rafa had already been warned once, so he's bang to rights here.

This does highlight an aspect of Rafa and his team that gets under my skin though - their apparent view that the rules only apply as far as they think they should.

Toni routinely breaks the rule about coaching in the match. Rafa seems to view the 20 second rule as a suggestion rather than a law.

And let me pre-empt the inevitable "other players do it too". Here are the players with most time violations last season:

1) Nadal - 30
2) Isner - 14
3) JMDP - 13
4) Fogniniiiiii - 11
5) Djokovic - 10

Rafa has twice as many as the second placed player and he didn't play a full season! He is particularly frequent at breaking this rule.

That was certainly something that stuck out to me...

Main thing here for me, get rid of the dichotomy of 25 seconds on ATP Tour, and 20 seconds in the Majors - for crying out loud. Just equalize it, so that wherever they are playing, players can get their "timing" for the service standardized. It does become an internalized "feature," much the same as muscle memory, when it's done routinely enough, time after time.

Big a Rafa fan as I am, if the rule is broken WHEREVER, then a warning CAN be given - 1st point of match, right down to match point either way.

That said, indeed, the umpires should have some discretion when either temperatures or length of a point, successive points, suggest a slight "easing" of this 20 second rule.

"Teacup storm" really though....

"She didn't advise me before the second warning"

So he gets first warning, and wants to be advised beforehand for the second warning?

This defies adult logic.

yloponom68 wrote:Main thing here for me, get rid of the dichotomy of 25 seconds on ATP Tour, and 20 seconds in the Majors - for crying out loud. Just equalize it, so that wherever they are playing, players can get their "timing" for the service standardized. It does become an internalized "feature," much the same as muscle memory, when it's done routinely enough, time after time.

Should the prize money for slams be also reduced by 20% as compared to ATP (barring the Middle-East ATP events)?

(Just teasing ya, Monopoly! ) .

ATP does not play 5-setters anymore, yet has more time between points.

(I had poll for this subject some time ago. This is what La Monf thinks - https://www.606v2.com/t41094-monfils-would-like-the-time-between-points-reduced-to-10-seconds).

LaMonf probably understands he needs as little time alone with his thoughts as possible...

Reading Rafa's interview I tend to agree on the point that if an umpire doesn't provide context regarding decision making, then they are expendable, as I can't for the life of me figure out what they actually do that can't be self-regulated...maybe the coin toss?

The rest of it is a little... odd. But its his opinion, and he isn't creating the laws on his own... Can't critique him for speaking his mind

To be honest in weather conditions that we saw earlier in the tournament I would say we need a little discretion on the time rule because it really could be dangerous in a physical five setter on the players. That being said Nadal is consistently over more than anyone else and should by now have been docked a couple of faults or points so he has nothing really to complain about. I like the new rule for the most part and would like to see more strict enforcement. However I think they should put an exception in it for extreme heat and humidity where the umpire can use his discretion because the health of players is paramount.

the umpire can do what she did. and rafa is free to have an opinion

20 seconds is ridiculous. It should be equalised as 25 seconds. I remember checking Nadals timing about 2 years back and it was averaging 30 odd seconds between points. Djokovic and Del Potro had a similar average but maybe slightly less. Federer had the shortest average of the top players by a bit of a margin.

Nore Staat wrote:20 seconds is ridiculous.  It should be equalised as 25 seconds.  I remember checking Nadals timing about 2 years back and it was averaging 30 odd seconds between points.  Djokovic and Del Potro had a similar average but maybe slightly less.  Federer had the shortest average of the top players by a bit of a margin.

It may be too short, but it is what it is and Nadal needs to stick to it and not blame others when he falls foul

Rafa should stick to the rules, which stupid or not are clearly there to see. He does also specifically agree with that in the interview though.

He is also right. Any sporting official has not one but 2 real roles. To enforce the rules and to ensure the game runs smoothly and provides entertainment. In rugby, sometimes the former should (and by good referees, is) relaxed in lieu of the latter, where illegal work by both sides on the breakdown is ignored to keep the game flowing, and it's something that is rightfully lauded. Rafa is IMO specifically in the wrong here but makes a valid general point- if Unpires aren't going to trust themselves to take context into account then a TMO or hawkeye may as well do everything. The rapport with the players is one of the few things Unpires have over those methods, and frankly everyone is there to see a good match between the players (whether Rafa's idea of whether this specific call affected that at all is correct is very dubious to me) and the players they know, not Umpires rigidly sticking to rules.

The strange thing about Rafa's breaking of this rule, and it is a problem, much as I am a Rafa fan, is that t when they started heavily enforcing it for a while last year, it just made Nadal seem unbeatable as nobody could rally with him and then recover as quickly as he could, except Djokovic

ChequeredJersey wrote:...The strange thing about Rafa's breaking of this rule, and it is a problem, much as I am a Rafa fan, is that t when they started heavily enforcing it for a while last year, it just made Nadal seem unbeatable as nobody could rally with him and then recover as quickly as he could, except Djokovic

Hmmm, yes that is a fair point ... it works both ways - since both players are involved in the rally ... it becomes survival of the fittest but sooner. I thought the rule would impact against Nadal the most but maybe I hadn't properly thought about it   

The thing about the 20 second rule is that it has the effect of shortening the points. If you had a minute between points, players like Rada could routinely play 40-50 shot rallies which kills a five set game.

The 20 second rule is there so you won't have time to recover. That's the whole point of it.