Research into the use of the time violation rule - NEW petition expessing concern about it's inconsistant use

by Born Slippy Wed 17 Jun 2015, 7:51 am

I've timed a bit of the Rafa match. Have to say that's as quick as I've seen him play.

I timed the two service games prior to the TV (at 2-1 and 3-2) and he was within 25 seconds on every point.

In the TV game I broadly agree with HE's timings. He gets the warning at bang on 25 seconds. I agree that it is very odd that he gets it on that point.

I then timed the final game. Notably there was no attempt to speed up with Rafa going over time on more or less every point. On the matchpoint he takes 32 seconds to prepare himself - doesn't lose his 1st serve.

by MMT1 Thu 18 Jun 2015, 8:38 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:If everyone else has worked out that Rafa gets TV's then you'd have thought Rafa and his camp would also have worked it out - and made sure he didn't keep going over the limit - why on earth do they (Rafa/Toni) let him go over the limit so much? It can only be for their own benefit if he speeds it up. They really are shooting themselves in the foot.

Why does he continue to illegally coach him as well? I'm not being glib, but I would imagine they do both because they believe it is to his benefit as a player. As such, I don't think one can argue that they are pointless rules that have no effect on the result. They clearly do to Nadal and all the other players who perpetually break them. And I don't understand why the argument continues to be that he shouldn't be given time violations at "critical" points - the only logical conclusion is that he should be given more time violations, more frequently, and I can imagine that this would not be received very well by the Nadals or their supporters.

I should also point out that if inconsistency is the problem, assuming all of these citations of how much time he takes between points are accurate, it should be clear to him that he is consistently sanctioned more frequently on "big" points - there is the consistency. It's up to him to adjust to it, not the umpires.

by hawkeye Tue 23 Jun 2015, 2:37 pm

Noticed that a petition has been set up because there is concern about how the time violation rule is being used.

Time limits for tennis players? Time for a response - a request to the ATP & ITF

We want to bring to your urgent attention the fact that growing numbers of tennis fans are raising serious concerns about the inconsistent application of the Time Violation Warning rule in ATP and ITF tournaments. This is beginning to spoil our enjoyment of this exceptional sport.

Umpires are currently issuing warnings randomly and arbitrarily, with some players who persistently go over the time limit not being penalised, and others regularly being given a warning.

In addition, it has been noted that the first warning of a match is suddenly given at a crucial point in a game - e.g. at break point - even when the time has been exceeded previously. We are concerned that this practice could significantly alter the outcome of a match.

We, the undersigned, urge you to find a way of regularising the application of the rule and respectfully request a formal response to the specific concerns highlighted in this petition.

Thank you.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/time-limits-for-tennis-players-time-for-a

by temporary21 Tue 23 Jun 2015, 8:25 pm

Interesting petition did one of us make that? I wouldn't inmediately discount their opinions just because they're women. I can sort of see why they wouldn't like it happening at crucial points. To the casual person it can look a bit dodgy. A shot clock still solves this for good

by It Must Be Love Tue 23 Jun 2015, 9:01 pm

hawkeye wrote:Noticed that a petition has been set up because there is concern about how the time violation rule is being used.

Time limits for tennis players? Time for a response - a request to the ATP & ITF

We want to bring to your urgent attention the fact that growing numbers of tennis fans are raising serious concerns about the inconsistent application of the Time Violation Warning rule in ATP and ITF tournaments. This is beginning to spoil our enjoyment of this exceptional sport.

Umpires are currently issuing warnings randomly and arbitrarily, with some players who persistently go over the time limit not being penalised, and others regularly being given a warning.

In addition, it has been noted that the first warning of a match is suddenly given at a crucial point in a game - e.g. at break point - even when the time has been exceeded previously. We are concerned that this practice could significantly alter the outcome of a match.

We, the undersigned, urge you to find a way of regularising the application of the rule and respectfully request a formal response to the specific concerns highlighted in this petition.

Thank you.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/time-limits-for-tennis-players-time-for-a

Thanks Hawkeye

by hawkeye Tue 23 Jun 2015, 9:28 pm

temporary21 wrote: I wouldn't inmediately discount their opinions just because they're women.

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue 23 Jun 2015, 9:55 pm

temporary21 wrote:I wouldn't inmediately discount their opinions just because they're women.

So maybe after a couple of hours?

I know what you were trying to say temp, but boy, did it come out wrong!

by temporary21 Tue 23 Jun 2015, 10:30 pm

?? Should we dismiss everything they say about Nadal because of "hormones" then? Some people dont like the rule for valid reasons you know

by **JuliusHMarx** Tue 23 Jun 2015, 11:14 pm

It's just reads as if you're saying we shouldn't discount them immediately - so it seems like it's OK to discount them but not immediately.
I think everyone knows what you meant, but the wording was unfortunate and a bit amusing, that's all.

by temporary21 Wed 24 Jun 2015, 1:07 am

You shouldn't dismiss anyone immediately, not at least until youve seen the response and assessed it... Sorry I dont get how my comment implied some kind of time degenerative effect, anyway point stands.

by summerblues Wed 24 Jun 2015, 4:12 am

It Must Be Love wrote:Thanks Hawkeye

by hawkeye Wed 24 Jun 2015, 7:14 am

Almost forgot to add the latest

hawkeye wrote:Two more to add.

hawkeye wrote:

hawkeye wrote:I thought I'd group some of Nadal's recent time violations in one place. I only started keeping a record after the Nadal Verdasco match in Miami so I'm not sure about how many he received before then. Although I do know about the Fognini Rio semi Finals where he was given two in one game when serving at 6-2, 2-3. He was broken and was also broken mentally by the time violations and went on to lose the match after being in complete control.

hawkeye wrote:

Miami 2015
Nadal against Versdasco. Nadal serving in the first set at 4-5 on brake/set point. He receives a time violation and loses the set

Monte Carlo 2015
Nadal against Isner. 2nd set Nadal serving at 4-4, 30-40. Isner asks the Umpire to give Nadal a time violation and the Umpire obliges. Nadal loses his serve. Isner holds for the set
Nadal against Ferrer. 1st set Nadal serving 3-3, 30-30 time violation. 2nd set Nadal serving at 3-3, 30-30 time violation Nadal lost his serve. 3rd set Nadal serving at 3-2, 30-40 time violation Nadal went on to win his serve.

Barcelona
Nadal against Almagro. Nadal got a first time violation early in the first set. 2nd set Nadal serving for the match 40-40. Almagro asked the Umpire to give Nadal a time violation and the Umpire obliged.

This is from Madrid

hawkeye wrote:Catching up with the Nadal/Dimitrov match.

Nadal serving at 1-1, 30-40 was issued with a time violation 27 seconds after the ball went out of play. He was broken.

Later in the match Nadal was serving 3-3, 15-0 when Dimitrov broke his raquet. He delayed play by 46 seconds. Nadal served a double fault afterwards. (The time violation rule is also meant to be applied if the receiver delays play).

This is from Rome

hawkeye wrote:Watching the Isner/Nadal match. Isner serving at 4-4, 30-40 (break point) took 32 seconds with no time violation. Quite an achievement to take so long when all he had to do was shuffle a few feet to the side. Nadal serving for the match at 5-4, 15-30 (not a break point but about as near as Isner got to one) was given a time violation at 29 seconds

Another from Rome

hawkeye wrote:

Nadal serving at 6-7, 1-1, 30-40 (break point) was given a time violation at 31 seconds. This was a pivotal part of the match as Wawrinka had all the momentum having won the first set on a tie break and Nadal would have been wobbling. He was given a huge shove with the targeted time violation. During that game he took 33, 25, 22, 26, 22, 26, 31 (break point/time violation), 23, 30 (break point/broken) seconds between points. A commentator said "It would be interesting to see how often Nadal gets a time violation on break point. Huh! But never in a tie break".

That's 8 matches were Nadal has been given a time violation on a crucial point.

French Open 4th round Nadal v Sock. Nadal serving for the match 6-3, 6-1, 5-4, 30-40 time violation loss of first serve. Lost serve and subsequently the set. (I don't know at what point Nadal received the first tv?)

That's 9 matches were Nadal has been given a tv on a crucial point

French Open quarter finals Nadal v Djokovic. Nadal serving to stay in the first set. 4-5, 40-40 time violation given. This is the one that made John McEnroe feel "sick to his stomach".

Stuttgart quarter finals Nadal v Tomic. Nadal serving for the first 5-4, Ad Tomic (break point) time violation given at 28 seconds. It was given as Nadal was taking his arm back to serve.

11 matches (and counting) were Nadal has recieved a tv on a crucial point.

Queens 2nd round. Nadal serving at 3-6, 7-6, 4-3 against Dolgopolov. He was given a time violation at 26 second 30-40 break point. During this game he took 25, 28, 28, 28, 26 (tv break point), 32 (Dolgopolov challenged), 27 seconds between points. Nadal was broken and went on to lose the match. I timed that the violation was given at 26 seconds but perhaps I was being generous as others reported that the tv was given at 25 seconds.

12 matches and counting...

by Born Slippy Wed 24 Jun 2015, 9:55 am

HE - your hypothesis appears to be that Nadal is being deliberately targeted to cause him to lose. Do you have any theory why that might be?

by Johnyjeep Wed 24 Jun 2015, 12:38 pm

Nadal won the point in question where he was given a TV.

250 signatures is the target for that petition eh?

This thread never fails to bring a smile to my face.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 24 Jun 2015, 1:07 pm

It's interesting that many of the comments are effectively saying 'Stop targeting Rafa'.
My cynicism may well have been justified.

For example "Let's face facts - umpires are only targeting Rafael Nadal at crucial times - break points" Clearly that person has an incorrect view of the facts and needs to do the proper research.

by MMT1 Wed 24 Jun 2015, 3:16 pm

Born Slippy wrote:HE - your hypothesis appears to be that Nadal is being deliberately targeted to cause him to lose. Do you have any theory why that might be?

Why not start with the hypothesis that Nadal is over the limit on every serve, and as such, nobody has any business complaining about when he is cited? If I speed everyday of the week and get cited once, can I really argue that this is unfair because today I have an important meeting to get to?

If there is another petition asking for a shot clock, I would sign that today, because then the apologists wouldn't have the umpire to complain about, and would have to focusing their attention exactly where it belongs - on Nadal.

If there were a petition to go back to continuous play (which was abandoned in deference to players of another era who also perpetually violated that rule) I'd sign it yesterday.

by hawkeye Wed 24 Jun 2015, 4:04 pm

Born Slippy wrote:HE - your hypothesis appears to be that Nadal is being deliberately targeted to cause him to lose. Do you have any theory why that might be?

Well he has lost a lot after receiving time violations on crucial points. But why would the ATP or ITF or Umpires choose to deliberately target him? I have no idea. I also have no idea why in 2013 the ATP and ITF made noises implying they wanted to enforce this rule more strongly and then after a few months largely ignore it. I can see what's happening but don't know why.

MMT1 wrote:

If there is another petition asking for a shot clock, I would sign that today, because then the apologists wouldn't have the umpire to complain about, and would have to focusing their attention exactly where it belongs - on Nadal.

I would sign it today too Smile

Because then it would be transparent and couldn't be used unfairly. The focus wouldn't just be on Nadal and he wouldn't be the only one targeted.

There are good rules and bad rules but the worst thing is always when rules are not applied to everyone equally.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 24 Jun 2015, 4:24 pm

I wouldn't want a shot clock - too disruptive to the player's serving routine. The only way it would work would be to bring it in now at junior level and move it forward as those players grow older, so they have time to get used to it.
A shot clock would have a devastating effect on Rafa's serve. I'm very surprised that any Rafa fan would want a new rule that would see him punished even further, and also ensure he got punished more than any other player (given that he goes over the time limit more than any other player).

by Johnyjeep Wed 24 Jun 2015, 4:28 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:I wouldn't want a shot clock - too disruptive to the player's serving routine. The only way it would work would be to bring it in now at junior level and move it forward as those players grow older, so they have time to get used to it.
A shot clock would have a devastating effect on Rafa's serve. I'm very surprised that any Rafa fan would want a new rule that would see him punished even further, and also ensure he got punished more than any other player (given that he goes over the time limit more than any other player).

It's the irony that I love most about it all.

by MMT1 Wed 24 Jun 2015, 5:00 pm

hawkeye wrote:

I would sign it today too Because then it would be transparent and couldn't be used unfairly. The focus wouldn't just be on Nadal and he wouldn't be the only one targeted.

There are good rules and bad rules but the worst thing is always when rules are not applied to everyone equally.

Nadal violates the time violation on EVERY serve, even by your accounting - what is unfair about him being cited more frequently than other players who violate the rule less frequently than he does. Nobody is over the limit as often as he is. That entire notion is a fantasy and your data is incomplete (because you only report a selection of games where he's been cited) invalid (because it has no relation to the universe of available data on all players) and unreliable (because there is no way to know whether you are accurately recording and/or reporting the times).

Nadal is over the limit on every point and he takes longer on the big points - this is obvious to you and everyone who watches him play. You should send Nadal a message telling him to hurry up - asking the umpires to take care of his problem form him is reaching around your @$$ to scratch your elbow.

by hawkeye Wed 24 Jun 2015, 5:23 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:I wouldn't want a shot clock - too disruptive to the player's serving routine. The only way it would work would be to bring it in now at junior level and move it forward as those players grow older, so they have time to get used to it.
A shot clock would have a devastating effect on Rafa's serve. I'm very surprised that any Rafa fan would want a new rule that would see him punished even further, and also ensure he got punished more than any other player (given that he goes over the time limit more than any other player).

With a shot clock all players would be playing with the same rules. That's the bare minimum of what a rule should be.

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 24 Jun 2015, 5:31 pm

I'm just surprised that as a Rafa fan you'd want something that I think would be hugely detrimental to his game, that's all.

If a shot clock came in, the player most affected would be Rafa. At which point Rafa fans could argue that it was brought in simply to target him.

by MMT1 Wed 24 Jun 2015, 8:03 pm

hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:I wouldn't want a shot clock - too disruptive to the player's serving routine. The only way it would work would be to bring it in now at junior level and move it forward as those players grow older, so they have time to get used to it.
A shot clock would have a devastating effect on Rafa's serve. I'm very surprised that any Rafa fan would want a new rule that would see him punished even further, and also ensure he got punished more than any other player (given that he goes over the time limit more than any other player).

With a shot clock all players would be playing with the same rules. That's the bare minimum of what a rule should be.

The only one not playing with the same rules as everyone else is Nadal, who is over the limit on virtually every point he serves - if he were playing with the same rules as everyone else, he should be cited much more frequently than he does - or as the rules are now, serving with one serve most of the time. Nadal is his own worst problem and his own worst argument.

by MMT1 Wed 24 Jun 2015, 8:09 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:I'm just surprised that as a Rafa fan you'd want something that I think would be hugely detrimental to his game, that's all.

If a shot clock came in, the player most affected would be Rafa. At which point Rafa fans could argue that it was brought in simply to target him.

Actually, I think if Nadal were forced to play more quickly by a shot clock, it would have no impact on his results. He's been accommodated and coddled by umpires (and indirectly by tournament administrators) for years, and as such I think he does it because he's gotten used to it and in his mind, believes he needs to hear a pin drop before he serves to play his best. But it's a total non-sense. Even if his high intensity points require him to take more time in between points, I think he is sufficiently talented and skilled to find other ways to win. What makes him exceptional is his footwork, his vision (he's got great eyes - remember when he was telling Federer at Wimbledon 2008 where his vibration dampener had gone from the net, and it was 10 feet away from Federer who couldn't see it), his ability to start and stop as quickly as he does, competitiveness, and hand-eye coordination (I mean anyone who can win 14 majors with his weak hand has got to be enormously talented). If you took away this one madness in his method, I think he has about 10 distinguishing characteristics to make up for it - that's one (of the many) reason(s) why I get so frustrated with his perpetual time wasting.

by hawkeye Wed 24 Jun 2015, 11:31 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:I'm just surprised that as a Rafa fan you'd want something that I think would be hugely detrimental to his game, that's all.

If a shot clock came in, the player most affected would be Rafa. At which point Rafa fans could argue that it was brought in simply to target him.

If a shot clock was brought in it wouldn't just target one player. Why do you think it would be hugely detrimental to the game in general?

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 24 Jun 2015, 11:42 pm

Because players have honed their service action with years or practice. It would be too jarring to add such a significant extra element into it at a stroke.

That's why it would need to be introduced with juniors.

If it were brought in now, I'm certain Rafa would suffer the most from it and get more punishment than any other player - hence it could be argued that it was brought in to target him.

by hawkeye Thu 25 Jun 2015, 12:11 am

JuliusHMarx wrote:Because players have honed their service action with years or practice. It would be too jarring to add such a significant extra element into it at a stroke.

That's why it would need to be introduced with juniors.

If it were brought in now, I'm certain Rafa would suffer the most from it and get more punishment than any other player - hence it could be argued that it was brought in to target him.

So are you saying you don't want a limit on the time between points? But presently the ATP has a limit. If there is no shot clock how can the rule be enforced fairly and how can it be seen to be enforced fairly? At present no one knows when players go over the time without using a stop watch. If a player loses a first serve I want to know why. If another player is allowed to take 35 seconds without a penalty I want to see the clock ticking.

Maybe it is non Rafa fans that are scared of a shot clock. Maybe Rafa fans should start a petition to bring in the shot clock Very Happy

by **JuliusHMarx** Thu 25 Jun 2015, 12:19 am

I should have made clear that I wouldn't want a visible shot clock. I'd be happy with a timekeeper privately monitoring the time.

I wasn't aware of Rafa fans starting any petition?

by Born Slippy Thu 25 Jun 2015, 12:28 am

JuliusHMarx wrote:Because players have honed their service action with years or practice. It would be too jarring to add such a significant extra element into it at a stroke.

That's why it would need to be introduced with juniors.

If it were brought in now, I'm certain Rafa would suffer the most from it and get more punishment than any other player - hence it could be argued that it was brought in to target him.

I don't agree with this. No player's service action takes 25 seconds. Even Rafa was under 25 seconds most of the time versus Dolgo at Queens. I have no doubt that if he got hit with a warning after the first point and lost his first serve every point thereafter he would be playing within the rules within 2 games. Same with all the other players.

by **JuliusHMarx** Thu 25 Jun 2015, 12:30 am

Yet he keeps getting warnings and still keeps going over time. The warnings have little effect on his time-keeping. Perhaps he isn't bothered by them and they don't affect his game at all.

by lags72 Thu 25 Jun 2015, 10:47 am

JuliusHMarx wrote:Yet he keeps getting warnings and still keeps going over time. The warnings have little effect on his time-keeping. Perhaps he isn't bothered by them and they don't affect his game at all.

Well, it's something of a conundrum, it really is.

We know that he keeps exceeding the limit from one match to the next, despite regularly being given warnings. So on the face of it one could conclude that the warnings have had little success in terms of getting him to comply (consistently, at least) with the rule.

And yet hawkeye, having conducted detailed research, appears convinced that the warnings have, on occasion, had a devastating effect on his game - and even his mental well-being.

By way of specific example, hawkeye feels that in the Rio SF v Fognini, two TV warnings were the cause of Rafa being broken in the second set - a development from which he allegedly never recovered. Hawkeye's take on things was that, quote, "he was broken and was also broken mentally by the time violations and went on to lose the match after being in complete control".

Personally I reckon it would take a lot more (and I mean a LOT more) than a couple of TV warnings for the battle-hardened, tough-as-they-come competitor Rafa Nadal to be "broken mentally". But ..... if we speculate for just a moment that these warnings could conceivably have such a dramatic effect as that described by hawkeye, the logical conclusion would be that Rafa would take much more care to play to the rule and thereby avoid violations and the damaging consequences. There is, however, little evidence of this to date.

by bogbrush Fri 03 Jul 2015, 6:54 am

He's speeded up his game to avoid blatant breaches but still takes too long, but the effect on his game is plain to see.

Inadequate time to clear and recharge those big muscles means fatigue sets in, he can't run people into the ground any more, and he panics resulting in the wayward shotmaking we now see.

by temporary21 Fri 03 Jul 2015, 1:42 pm

Same response. He was the same speed in 2013. More than that he's not looking tired in matches. It might have upset his rhythm, if not for this going on for a while. It looks like correlation confused with causation to me

by bogbrush Fri 03 Jul 2015, 6:16 pm

Nah, the panic is clear in the shots. It was even predicted by Tenez long before it happened.

by hawkeye Wed 08 Jul 2015, 5:48 pm

Tied at 5-5 and 30-30 during Pospisil’s service, Maria called the Canadian for a time violation. That particular game featured several long rallies. Both players were averaging well beyond the 20-second limit. This seemed a needless and largely pointless intrusion into Pospisil’s concentration.

Predictably, he lost the next two points and was broken.

“So typical,” Pospisil muttered at Maria as he sat down for a break.

Even Andy Murray 1.0 – Tim Henman – thought it was a harsh call. The former English star now works as a TV commentator.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/more-sports/canadas-vasek-pospisil-facing-andy-murray-at-wimbledons-centre-court/article25349636/

Apparently a graphic shown during the match indicated that Pospisil was over the time limit 70% of the time and Murray was over 60% of the time. I wonder if Pascal Maria is a Murray fan chin

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/time-limits-for-tennis-players-time-for-a

by Guest Wed 08 Jul 2015, 5:56 pm

I reckon that we should scrap the petition and start a support group for players issued with TVs. We could provide free coffee and biscuits. Share experiences and hug it out Very Happy

by LuvSports! Wed 08 Jul 2015, 6:01 pm

In the third set he was deducted his first serve for averaging 33 seconds in that game at 0-30 down. He went on to hold.

by hawkeye Wed 08 Jul 2015, 6:13 pm

LuvSports! wrote:In the third set he was deducted his first serve for averaging 33 seconds in that game at 0-30 down. He went on to hold.

That was the second time violation and he didn't hold it gave Murray the break so he could serve for the match.

If you’re going to put a rule on the books, enforce it every time. But don’t pick and choose when it’s applied and certainly don’t wait until the biggest moments of the match to call a player on it for the first time. Yet this is what happens in tennis every day and it’s magnified when it happens in the Wimbledon quarterfinals, which went down Wednesday.

Canadian Vasek Pospisil was serving down a set at 5-5, 30-30 when chair umpire Pascal Maria, one of the most respected officials in the sport, called the Canadian for his first time violation of the day, literally a split-second before Pospisil was about to toss the ball for his serve. Then, later in the match, with Pospisil down two sets and 0-30 at 4-4, Maria called another.

On ESPN, announcers Chris Fowler and Brad Gilbert were in disbelief. “There’s absolutely no reason to give that time violation,” Gilbert said, while Fowler was also incredulous about the timing of the violation. The first came before, arguably, the biggest point of the match (up to that point) and clearly threw off Pospisil, who served a fault immediately after and then lost the next two points to give Murray what was essentially a match-clinching break. On the second violation, Pospisial would go on to get broken, which led Murray to serve for the match.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2015/07/tennis-time-violation-rules-andy-murray-30-seconds-25-pascal-maria-violation-wimbledon

chin

by LuvSports! Wed 08 Jul 2015, 6:18 pm

You're right. But he did win that point and the next.

by hawkeye Wed 08 Jul 2015, 6:47 pm

Ben Rothenberg twitter

Twice Vasek Pospisil has been given a time violation at a crucial and twice Murray has broken shortly after.

https://twitter.com/BenRothenberg

Christopher Clary on twitter

"Ridiculous" - Vasek Pospisil on the time violation called on him when he was serving at 5-5, 30-all in the 2d set. I have to agree

https://twitter.com/christophclarey

Carole Bouchard on twitter

Pospisil called his warning for time violation "ridiculous", also said there are obvious double standards.

https://twitter.com/carole_bouchard

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 08 Jul 2015, 8:11 pm

Kyrgios said the same thing about double standards - when he was changing his socks the umpire spoke to him and Kyrgios mentioned how a top player would get away with breaking the tv rule all the time ("every point" I think he said).

by LuvSports! Wed 08 Jul 2015, 9:05 pm

That top player was Rafa. Azarenka said she grunts louder than him. It's funny others see him as the worst offender.

by temporary21 Wed 08 Jul 2015, 9:41 pm

Well I mean it's about everyone. I can understand people's frustration when a huge deal is made if this, but only one person is ever focused on. It doesn't matter who the worst offender is, no one should do it. A lot of the commentators didn't like posposil losing his serve, moreover murray was over the time too. Posposil was taking so long because he was so tired, he was taking a lot longer. When you have consistent rythm, even slow then I don't see how saying they're tired is anything but an uninformed guess

by **JuliusHMarx** Wed 08 Jul 2015, 10:01 pm

If Pospisil was taking a lot longer then I guess he was the most likely to get the warnings. That seems to be how it the officials are dealing with it at the moment - sort of like they let you have some leeway, but once it gets too much, you get a tv.

by hawkeye Wed 08 Jul 2015, 10:33 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:Kyrgios said the same thing about double standards - when he was changing his socks the umpire spoke to him and Kyrgios mentioned how a top player would get away with breaking the tv rule all the time ("every point" I think he said).

Did Kyrgios get a tv for changing his socks? I don't believe he did. Rafa was threatened with one when he asked to change his shorts. So yes I do believe there are double standards. Kyrigios appears to have a little chip on his shoulder about Rafa.

by hawkeye Wed 08 Jul 2015, 10:54 pm

JuliusHMarx wrote:If Pospisil was taking a lot longer then I guess he was the most likely to get the warnings. That seems to be how it the officials are dealing with it at the moment - sort of like they let you have some leeway, but once it gets too much, you get a tv.

According to the screen graphic Pospisil was over the limit 70% of the time and Murray 60% of the time. There was no indication of who took the longest and when. So presumably Pascal Maria was keeping track and would be able to show exactly why he chose to ignore Murray taking too long most of the time. He must also have some detailed statistics on Pospisil that would explain why those precise two crucial points warranted penalty. I would like to see the calculations.

This from twitter

Tony Ndagijimana. Are umpires reviewed for performance by the ITF? Are these made public? Pascal Maria has been poor today.

Christopher Clarey. Yes they are reviewed. No the reviews are not made public

https://twitter.com/BenRothenberg/status/618804364120064000

As a viewer I would like to know why a player gets disrupted on a crucial point. If not I feel cheated. I don't trust what I am seeing.

by **JuliusHMarx** Thu 09 Jul 2015, 12:33 am

I suspect this forum is the wrong place to answer your questions.

by Born Slippy Thu 09 Jul 2015, 1:00 am

Apparently Pospisil was taking an average of 30 and 33 seconds respectively in the two games in which he got TVs - compared to an average of 25 seconds throughout the match.

by Haddie-nuff Thu 09 Jul 2015, 2:32 am

JuliusHMarx wrote:Kyrgios said the same thing about double standards - when he was changing his socks the umpire spoke to him and Kyrgios mentioned how a top player would get away with breaking the tv rule all the time ("every point" I think he said).

a
So then all players take note according to Kyrgios it should be ok to take extra time to change your socks. Without tv
Yes I agree it is double standards,

by Guest Thu 09 Jul 2015, 7:23 am

hawkeye wrote:
JuliusHMarx wrote:If Pospisil was taking a lot longer then I guess he was the most likely to get the warnings. That seems to be how it the officials are dealing with it at the moment - sort of like they let you have some leeway, but once it gets too much, you get a tv.

According to the screen graphic Pospisil was over the limit 70% of the time and Murray 60% of the time. There was no indication of who took the longest and when. So presumably Pascal Maria was keeping track and would be able to show exactly why he chose to ignore Murray taking too long most of the time. He must also have some detailed statistics on Pospisil that would explain why those precise two crucial points warranted penalty. I would like to see the calculations.

This from twitter

Tony Ndagijimana. Are umpires reviewed for performance by the ITF? Are these made public? Pascal Maria has been poor today.

Christopher Clarey. Yes they are reviewed. No the reviews are not made public

https://twitter.com/BenRothenberg/status/618804364120064000

As a viewer I would like to know why a player gets disrupted on a crucial point. If not I feel cheated. I don't trust what I am seeing.

So we chastise the umpire for making a correct decision?

It's good to know they are damned if they do and damned if they don't. I know we are demanding consistency, but the fact remains that Maria was correct either way to issue those TV's.

I wouldn't deem 30-30 'crucial' given there is still another point after that to play for.

by Sponsored content