Wimbledon Day 6 - Young Winston (Kerber Enthusiasm)

First topic message reminder :

Order of play

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/22713811

I see

Btw if youre interested, Simon Monfils is gonna resume soon on centre court

Simon two sets to one up but Monfils has the early service break in the fourth set. Could be a very late night.

Heres hoping

They can only go untill 11 I think

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Was it a convincing thrashing of a set, like Murray has just taken? TB sets against big servers aren't as bad as that 3rd set.

You're wummery is priceless now Hawkeye never seems to bother. Federer was losing a set to a guy who had a forehand not much better than most club pro's.

Meanwhile Murray loses a set to a seasoned Top 30 player, who by the way recently beat Roger at a slam and is apparently not in the same league

Mind you Roger's walk to the semi's is just what he needs, what a nice draw he's had and yes it could reap a big reward

banbrotam wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Was it a convincing thrashing of a set, like Murray has just taken? TB sets against big servers aren't as bad as that 3rd set.

You're wummery is priceless now Hawkeye never seems to bother. Federer was losing a set to a guy who had a forehand not much better than most club pro's.

Meanwhile Murray loses a set to a seasoned Top 30 player, who by the way recently beat Roger at a slam and is apparently not in the same league

Mind you Roger's walk to the semi's is just what he needs, what a nice draw he's had and yes it could reap a big reward

Spot on.

Is there a pom-poms emoticon?

The tb that Fed lost wasnt like Groth spanked his way to 6-5 and snuck a point. Fed had at least 3 good plays on his serve that tb and fluffed the pass each time, the point he lost was a double fault from out of total nowhere.

I mean he was fine otherwise, but it goes to show, sets can be dropped by anyone

5th set here we go!

Some very hard hitting here, that roof makes the ball sound a lot louder

In a day of stars, this match is by far the most entertaining.

And looks like it's done for Monfils, Simon leads 4-1 in set 5, Gael serving (so just 1 break down)

4-2. Not just yet

One game away.

Simon wins in five sets.

Simon to the second week, cracking match

Well done Gilles. Seems to be enjoying a resurgence of form.

Never think it's bad for players to drop sets early on in a slam. Look at Andy at Wimbledon in 2013 and 2014. In '13 he has some tough matches, gets through and wins it. Last year he sails through the first four rounds then has a shocker against Dimi.
Rog, in 2012, was two sets down against Benneteau on his way to winning it. Djoko had a bit of a struggle in some of the rounds at Wimbledon last year.

This is true. I don't think there was anything for Murray to be concerned about from this. If it was an injury it was the easiest one to fix I've ever seen; more likely it was a mental walkabout without lasting consequence.

bogbrush wrote:This is true. I don't think there was anything for Murray to be concerned about from this. If it was an injury it was the easiest one to fix I've ever seen; more likely it was a mental walkabout without lasting consequence.

Perhaps. However, mental walkabouts you can get away with against the Seppi's of this world but if they resurface later against the Federer's and Djokovic's of this world he will not get away with it.

The concern is obviously whether he will be fully recovered for the next match. Nothing to suggest he won't be but any form of shoulder injury midway through a slam is a worry.

If the injury recovers, the key point to take is that he obliterated a very good grass-courter with excellent tennis. Karlovic is obviously a concern on courts this quick but, provided Andy can keep his head in the likely tie-breaks, he should get to the Fed SF in reasonable shape.

Ivo has served 40+ aces in 3 straight matches (first time since records began at GS level) but obviously he's playing someone who never loses to specialist ace count players. Friendly giant will make it close but not enough to beat the Scottish moonballer.

Raonic?

bogbrush wrote:This is true. I don't think there was anything for Murray to be concerned about from this. If it was an injury it was the easiest one to fix I've ever seen; more likely it was a mental walkabout without lasting consequence.

Even Murray seemed embarrassed talking about it after. It wasn't an injury time out, it was more of a relaxing yoga session. He wouldn't have taken that if he'd been dominating

But to be honest, I'm happy that he's doing what plenty of others do - even though both time-outs (particularly Seppi's as at least we could see that Murray has some discomfort) were ridiculous

ITO's should be stopped. If you're injured, during the match, tough

That sounds great until someone's on the floor with cramp and everybody's just standing there because they can't help him without defaulting the guy. The exact reason the rule came in

temporary21 wrote:That sounds great until someone's on the floor with cramp and everybody's just standing there because they can't help him without defaulting the guy. The exact reason the rule came in

But it's now so badly abused, that even Murray's decided to use it as a tactic. Previously, like Fed he had an almost holier than thou attitude to getting the trainer on - numerous times he's not taken advantage of the trainer where Novak would have done. Incidentally, I'm not crticising those who do abuse the rule - fair play to them for using every aid available to them

And the trainers not allowed in other mano v mano sports, i.e. boxing!!

The whole point of boxing is to injure your opponent. They also get treatment at the end of every round. What we don't want is people playing on and badly hurting themselves. What about if a MTO mid set forfeited the next game?

temporary21 wrote:The whole point of boxing is to injure your opponent. They also get treatment at the end of every round. What we don't want is people playing on and badly hurting themselves. What about if a MTO mid set forfeited the next game?

interesting proposition, although a whole game won't pass as it's too much: players might avoid it even if they hurt... (but well, at least they won't abuse it!). Maybe lose next point is more realistic and still annoying enough?

It could be argued that a player preparation is part of his game and if he's hurt during the game he could forfeit even the whole match (that's an argument to go for a game lost rather than a point). If you're not fit, don't play; if you're not prepared, take the risk of cramping etc...

However, is there any points based sport (points like volleyball or tennis as opposed to performance based, like marathon for example) where MTO is not allowed/possible? (apart from boxing/martial sports)

What happens in cricket if a bowler has a cramp?

If a bowler gets injured halfway through an over. Then another bowler immediately takes over the rest of the over for him.  In cricket the kiss of a bowler is bad enough   Quite often an injury can come out of nowhere

I'm not saying there's an easy solution but something has to be done

I think it would be easy to differentiate between injuries caused by the court, for instance the Troicki one at Queens and the others the vast majority of which are wear and tear due to how that player plays

Yes. It's another variable that the Umpire would have to judge and is fraught with the chances of misinterpretation. But an injury that is due to the body's action in making a shot, should carry some kind of penalty if the player want to take an ITO

Sacrificing at game is actually a good idea

Not sure why people are up in arms over MTO's. Players are well within the rules to call them. The circumstances yes can be suspect, but it's not different to other sports with footballers feigning injury and having physios on, cricket with drinks breaks. Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Not sure why people are up in arms over MTO's. Players are well within the rules to call them. The circumstances yes can be suspect, but it's not different to other sports with footballers feigning injury and having physios on, cricket with drinks breaks. Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

Oh really???? Not when it comes to TV's though eh??
Wow now there is double standards

I must concur, sadly. I'm not sure why bending one rule but being steadfast for another sends the right message at all

Well if Murray was feigning it then why allow a 90 kg physio to bend and twist your shoulder like he was clearly doing. Looked painful just watching so must have been painful having it done.

Im not saying Andy was as in any violation  I didn't see the match anyways

But the principle of bending one rule and not another when it suits, depending yet again on whoever it may be, is an outrageous suggestion given the argument on this forum  that no rules are there to be broken.
One bent all bent

Personally cc I don't think his MTO was all tactical. I certainly don't mind a game penalty, or even just letting it off. Given the huge talks we've had about rule breaking Im surprised this one gets a pass

Haddie-nuff wrote:Im not saying Andy was as in any violation  I didn't see the match anyways

But the principle of bending one rule and not another when it suits, depending yet again on whoever it may be, is an outrageous suggestion given the argument on this forum  that no rules are there to be broken.
One bent all bent

I agree. However, my point is that it was no violation by Murray and Seppi certainly didn't think so either judging by their jovial exchange at the end.

Yeah I mean they're both seasoned pros. Both know what the other was doing.  The cheeky MTO isn't so overused that I'm massively concerned. In fact my response would be to wait till his MTO was done, and immediately call one myself, if we're gonna bend that one. Then surely the suggestion of letting other smaller rules go comes on the table too. A suggestion that sends chills down me!

temporary21 wrote:Yeah I mean they're both seasoned pros. Both know what the other was doing.  The cheeky MTO isn't so overused that I'm massively concerned. In fact my response would be to wait till his MTO was done, and immediately call one myself, if we're gonna bend that one. Then surely the suggestion of letting other smaller rules go comes on the table too. A suggestion that sends chills down me!

:DOver to you Hawkeye!!

Obviously MTO's should be permitted, with points and games being conceded as time ticks away.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Not sure why people are up in arms over MTO's. Players are well within the rules to call them. The circumstances yes can be suspect, but it's not different to other sports with footballers feigning injury and having physios on, cricket with drinks breaks. Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

Oh really???? Not when it comes to TV's though eh??
Wow now there is double standards

Actually there is a difference. To get an MTO the player has to ask the umpire to bring on the physio first which is within the rules. If they are taking over the permitted time to serve/receive they don't ask which is not within the rules. That said I do think both MTO's yesterday were to try and break the rhythm of the opponent and regroup. I agree that there should be some penalty to make it not such a viable thing to do.

You never see real men who show fairplay resort to this cheap tactic, by real men I mean Federer, Wawrinka and Tsonga. If you want to take an MTO because you can't maintain your body then you should lose 2 points after doing so.

Is that the same Wawrinka who took an MTO against Tsonga in the FO semi ?

Calder106 wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Not sure why people are up in arms over MTO's. Players are well within the rules to call them. The circumstances yes can be suspect, but it's not different to other sports with footballers feigning injury and having physios on, cricket with drinks breaks. Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

Oh really???? Not when it comes to TV's though eh??
Wow now there is double standards

Actually there is a difference. To get an MTO the player has to ask the umpire to bring on the physio first which is within the rules. If they are taking over the permitted time to serve/receive they don't ask which is not within the rules. That said I do think both MTO's yesterday were to try and break the rhythm of the opponent and regroup. I agree that there should be some penalty to make it not such a viable thing to do.

What the hell are you talking about there is no difference only if you are biased
lk quote

Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

There are no rules that can be bent to gain advantage no matter who, no matter the circumstances
Rules are bloody rules and start bending any of then then the sport is in deep trouble.
I remember Novak taking a lot of flack for his MTO's
The duplicity on this forum beggars beief

Don't see why you think I'm being duplicitous. I said that that I didn't think either were required and that there should be something in place which would make players think more about requesting an MTO.

Don't see why you think I'm being duplicitous

:headscratch:Really ???
In which case Ill leave you believing you are right :


.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:Not sure why people are up in arms over MTO's. Players are well within the rules to call them. The circumstances yes can be suspect, but it's not different to other sports with footballers feigning injury and having physios on, cricket with drinks breaks. Just accept it. Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

Oh really???? Not when it comes to TV's though eh??
Wow now there is double standards

Yeah because going over the alotted time is a rule

Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

I quote you again....!!!!!

But not is some cases eh???? You don't even know what you said !!!!

Haddie-nuff wrote:Rules in sport can be bent to gain advantage.

I quote you again....!!!!!

But not is some cases eh???? You don't even know what you said !!!!

Sigh

As you like being pedantic let me indulge you.

Being this is another empty rant of yours. 2 posters understood my point and unlike you didn’t make a song and dance out of it. I do know what I am talking about, sadly you don’t. So let me guide you through the baby steps of understanding my point.

Re-read my post, then Calder106’s post, digest, breathe and relax. If you want to bring up TV’s, there is another thread for it to discuss it on. My post addressed MTO’s specifically and the other rules I touched on in other sports and how they relate to each other. They relate on the integrity and motive of the athlete. E.g in Football a player can feign injury to buy time or receive orders. In Cricket a drinks break can be used to get orders or tactics. Likewise in tennis the MTO can be abused. There is no punishment for these breaks as per se, but my point remains they can be bent to gain advantage. This is not about rule enforcement! In this case the rules are being adhered to, but the integrity is there to be questioned.

Rule bending has been going on since the dawn of time! I don’t believe it can be ‘solved’ as such which is why people should just accept it and move on.