Why Do We Need Game Changing Penalties For Time Violations?

If a player takes more than 20 seconds (in a slam 25 elsewhere) the umpire can apply penalties. These penalties can change the outcome of a match as the are applied in a strict sequence. 1st serve, point, game, set.... and then presumably match. The umpires have been told they must apply these penalties strictly to every player who takes more time. It's obviously been decided that this matter is very important. But I'm not sure why? Any ideas?

Because it's the rules. There has to be a cut off somewhere and it's set at 20 secs and that should be enforced, though looking at the conditions in Melbourne, maybe a bit longer would be appropriate there.

Because it is in the rule book, so no-one (even Nadal) can pick and choose which rules to he can follow

If there was not time rule, then what is to stop a player sitting down and eating a banana after every point?

Oh I don't know hawkeye, I really don't .... you've  got me all confused with all your poll choices    

But, hey... guess what .... I've just thought of one of my own, not in your poll.... !!

Could it be because sport needs rules, it always has and it always will. And when the rules are broken, most folk agree it's a pretty sensible idea to impose penalties of one sort or another (yes.... including penalties that can end up affecting results) ; the alternative is not to bother with rules at all. And that way lies chaos.

Bit like cricket where teams can be penalised for not maintaining an adequate over rate ; or football teams who conspire to waste time towards the closing minutes of a match in a bid to protect a lead, or ensure a draw.

And a bit like countless other sports really.......

Including tennis.

Including Rafa.

It's a shame some Rafa fans don't like the rules of tennis when it affects their idol.

lags72 wrote:Oh I don't know hawkeye, I really don't .... you've  got me all confused with all your poll choices    

But, hey... guess what .... I've just thought of one of my own, not in your poll.... !!

Could it be because sport needs rules, it always has and it always will. And when the rules are broken, most folk agree it's a pretty sensible idea to impose penalties of one sort or another (yes.... including penalties that can end up affecting results) ; the alternative is not to bother with rules at all. And that way lies chaos.

Bit like cricket where teams can be penalised for not maintaining an adequate over rate ; or football teams who conspire to waste time towards the closing minutes of a match in a bid to protect a lead, or ensure a draw.

And a bit like countless other sports really.......

Including tennis.

Including Rafa.

I do agree, but the examples you give really don't fit, because they are finite time matches and thus timewasting is a genuine way of not giving the opposition the chance to win the match. In tennis, whilst it can aid recovery and thus suits Rafa's style (ironically benefiting his opponent more) and on principle shouldn't be allowed as making any player special is not really right, it cannot be used in the same way as in the sports you mention

Answer to the OP: Because when I turn on the TV to watch the Australian Open (or go to a match at another tournament) I want to see a bit of tennis breaking out amid all the towelling down, posturing, strolling about, scratching of body parts, fist waving, and so-on.
 
If players got on with it then perhaps a rule wouldn't be needed, but not all of them do and matches are getting longer, and longer, and longer so a rule is needed.  Any choice of time between points is bound to be arbitrary - but it's the same for everyone.  Another benefit is that it also introduces the chance of more variety of play - players can't treat every point as a marathon safe in the knowledge that they'll have full recovery time after each point, they have to mix it up a bit.
 
Unfortunately some players think that the way to approach rules they don't like is to ignore them, so sanctions are needed.
 
I can understand why slams have a shorter time between points than ordinary tournaments on the ATP Tour at least.  Slam organisers have a huge draw of 128 to get through with Best-of-five matches.  Saving 5 seconds between each point compared to an ordinary ATP tournament is likely to add up in the course of a fortnight.

Hornets & nest.

They should take 20s as a base and tweak it according to speed index of slam surface.

...joking. Anyway, Monfils wants 10 secs right?

Fair comment Chequered Jersey as regards the accuracy of my analogies ; which is why I said "a bit like .."

And I'm sure there are other sports that WOULD fit more precisely if I could be bothered to think of them.

But ..... in all honesty.... I can't be bothered. My response was my own way of expressing just how tedious I find the ongoing debate re time violation and the fact that the rule is flouted so often (yet not always appropriately dealt with/punished) and by a very limited number of players, and on a repeated basis.

Just my personal view of course.

hawkeye wrote:If a player takes more than 20 seconds (in a slam 25 elsewhere) the umpire can apply penalties. These penalties can change the outcome of a match as the are applied in a strict sequence. 1st serve, point, game, set.... and then presumably match. The umpires have been told they must apply these penalties strictly to every player who takes more time. It's obviously been decided that this matter is very important. But I'm not sure why? Any ideas?

My understanding of the rule was that, after the initial warning, the penalty for each subsequent transgression during the match was always the loss of the first serve. Seems very reasonable to me.

Can you add another answer to the poll?

"To give me something to rant about if it goes against Nadal (it is stupid rule) or against Murray (it is a great rule)

JuliusHMarx wrote:It's a shame some Rafa fans don't like the rules of tennis when it affects their idol.

Some Djokovic´s fans dont either?? bouncing the ball over 20 times can be entertaining I suppose

Ahhh yes the classic fan response. Ignore the comment that detracts from their player and then accuse someone else of doing it.
Yes novak does that but nadal was wrong simple.

Read his presser and you will see he has admitted he was wrong.
Haven´t seen Novak´s so I wouldn´t know.but I cant imagine that he admits to doing much wrong.
So Im detracting from nothing... I know he is wrong you know he is wrong.. what nobody admits to is any other player is wrong  

Haddie-nuff wrote:Read his presser and you will see he has admitted he was wrong.
Haven´t seen Novak´s so I wouldn´t know.but I cant imagine that he admits to doing much wrong.
So Im detracting from nothing... I know he is wrong you know he is wrong.. what nobody admits to is any other player is wrong  

On another thread the stats were posted for repeat offenders in 2013 - we all admit those players were wrong. Pretty sure Djoko was on the list.

This is an extract from Rafa´s presser after the Nishikori match.
I dont really think I need to add anything do you ??

Quote
But I repeat: nothing against the rules. I accept the rules. Sometimes I am wrong. Sometimes I am too slow and I accept that. I respect the decision of the referee even if I am not happy for that, because was not the right moment to do it, in my opinion, before an advise. But she did. That’s all.

No, nothing to add really. Not sure why hawkeye wanted a poll on it.

It truly has been silly season today on this forum.

Is there any chance we can have some kind of categorisation of posts. I was hoping to find some sensible discussion and thoughts re the match today as I missed it. Heard both press conferences. Djokovic sounded very magnanimous. Was impressed.

Johnyjeep wrote:It truly has been silly season today on this forum.

Is there any chance we can have some kind of categorisation of posts. I was hoping to find some sensible discussion and thoughts re the match today as I missed it. Heard both press conferences. Djokovic sounded very magnanimous. Was impressed.  

J J Look at the title of this thread .. it isn´t discussing today´s matches  

Yeah you're right HN. I just didn't know where to post this. Got fed up with reading dross.

Actually talking of todays matches. For research purposes I decided to measure how much time was taken between points to check if the appropriate penalties were being handed out. The shocking thing is that no player was even given a warning and yet they both regularly took over 20 seconds between points.

A good example was when Djokovic was serving at 1-3, 30-40 in the third set. He took an extremely lengthy 45 seconds! You can check this yourself. It was not commented on, Wawrinka didn't notice and the umpire I can only presume decided to turn a blind eye.

So I'm unsure in what matches or circumstances the penalty is applied. Has anyone any ideas?

hawkeye wrote:Actually talking of todays matches. For research purposes I decided to measure how much time was taken between points to check if the appropriate penalties were being handed out. The shocking thing is that no player was even given a warning and yet they both regularly took over 20 seconds between points.

A good example was when Djokovic was serving at 1-3, 30-40 in the third set. He took an extremely lengthy 45 seconds! You can check this yourself. It was not commented on, Wawrinka didn't notice and the umpire I can only presume decided to turn a blind eye.

So I'm unsure in what matches or circumstances the penalty is applied. Has anyone any ideas?

Easy HE when Rafa plays

On a lighter note I remember one of the American commentators who was commentating on a match JMDP was playing at the US Open (bearing in mind how Delpo strolls around the back of the court between serves from one ball boy to another ball boy .. not exactly known for his speed)
say..." my oh my he sure can mosey cant he" ?  

Haddie-nuff wrote:

hawkeye wrote:Actually talking of todays matches. For research purposes I decided to measure how much time was taken between points to check if the appropriate penalties were being handed out. The shocking thing is that no player was even given a warning and yet they both regularly took over 20 seconds between points.

A good example was when Djokovic was serving at 1-3, 30-40 in the third set. He took an extremely lengthy 45 seconds! You can check this yourself. It was not commented on, Wawrinka didn't notice and the umpire I can only presume decided to turn a blind eye.

So I'm unsure in what matches or circumstances the penalty is applied. Has anyone any ideas?

Easy HE when Rafa plays

That's a bit silly, everyone knows Rafa breaks this rule the most so it's reasonable to expect he'd get picked up more.

As for this business of being warned at the 'wrong' time, it's nonsense. I never forget poor Cilic being done at bp down for a first offence. Now that was tough!

I think Rafa is a bit of an easy target, tbh. While I'm sure Rafa does actually take the longest to actually serve, I'm not sure I buy that he breaks the rule twice as much as everyone else. Especially DelPo.

bogbrush wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:

hawkeye wrote:Actually talking of todays matches. For research purposes I decided to measure how much time was taken between points to check if the appropriate penalties were being handed out. The shocking thing is that no player was even given a warning and yet they both regularly took over 20 seconds between points.

A good example was when Djokovic was serving at 1-3, 30-40 in the third set. He took an extremely lengthy 45 seconds! You can check this yourself. It was not commented on, Wawrinka didn't notice and the umpire I can only presume decided to turn a blind eye.

So I'm unsure in what matches or circumstances the penalty is applied. Has anyone any ideas?

Easy HE when Rafa plays

That's a bit silly, everyone knows Rafa breaks this rule the most so it's reasonable to expect he'd get picked up more.

As for this business of being warned at the 'wrong' time, it's nonsense. I never forget poor Cilic being done at bp down for a first offence. Now that was tough!

O so very glad to see you back BB . if you say so it must be right.... everything is nonsense if it doesn´t agree with your biased opinion ... nothing changes   

kingraf wrote:I think Rafa is a bit of an easy target, tbh. While I'm sure Rafa does actually take the longest to actually serve, I'm not sure I buy that he breaks the rule twice as much as everyone else. Especially DelPo.

Yeah but he's got himself a reputation so he will be penalised more

Give a dog a bad name  

As mentioned on another thread I think the 20 second rule will favour Nadal over his opponent.  It takes two to rally and the key is which player has the quickest recovery time.  However it seems to me that Nadal tends to expend more energy in each of his strokes than his opponent (putting in the spin - creating "heavy" balls) ... so that would tend to disfavour Nadal against his opponent ...

Anyway the rule has been implemented in an attempt to reduce match times ... not everyone has 6 hours available to watch each and every match and it mucks up tv schedules etc.

The rules was first implemented because there was a guy (a Canadian maybe?) who would bounce the ball 50 or so times before serving. In the 70s I think.

Im sure nobody questions that there has to be a rule .. but I just wish I  saw some consistency in its application. Its an argument" that has been debated on tennis forums for yonks.. and still it rumbles on .. as bad as the GOAT debate   If it meant bringing in technology to ensure that the rule is adhered to then why not do it.. they brought in Hawkeye and now there are no arguments re line calls. simples !!!

Haddie-nuff wrote:Im sure nobody questions that there has to be a rule .. but I just wish I  saw some consistency in its application. Its an argument" that has been debated on tennis forums for yonks.. and still it rumbles on .. as bad as the GOAT debate   If it meant bringing in technology to ensure that the rule is adhered to then why not do it.. they brought in Hawkeye and now there are no arguments re line calls. simples !!!

  

irony pure irony