“It’s worse to be 5s late than saying bad words or breaking rackets? We’re not going to penalize that but my six seconds yes? Sorry.” - Rafa
— Courtney Nguyen (@FortyDeuceTwits) March 12, 2015
Interesting Rafa. Do you read my blog?
Haha. But seriously, I was reminded of this tweet by my friend Womble tonight.
Is there a 25/20 second rule between points? Yes. Does Rafa break it? Yes. Does he get penalised? Yes. Is the tennis world at large totally and utterly obsessed with this rule when Rafa Nadal is fit and playing tennis? Yes. Do we hear one utterance about it when he's out of the game? NO. Is there a rule about breaking tennis racquets? Yes. Is there a rule about audible swearing? Yes. Does the tennis world at large obsess about these rules and cry in their indignation for them to be enforced? No. Is breaking these rules considered as "understandable" and "letting off steam" - particularly when A. Murray, N. Djokovic and R. Federer commit them - absolutely and utterly Yes.
I hear you Rafa. A capital crime to take extra seconds even after a 40 stroke rally in 38 degree heat but showing "character" when you yell at the crowd [in Serbian] to s*ck my d*ck you mother f*ck*ng wh*re whilst knocking seven shades of sh*t out of a seating bench is "releasing frustration".
Hurry up between points Rafa then they have nothing to throw at you. But injustice with application of rules? YES.
Whilst I support the thrust of your argument (i.e. unequal penalties being applied unequally), it needs to be addressed without reference to what fans of a particular player consider as unfair and unequal. The very fact that Roger, Novak and Andy do not break racquets or swear audibly on a continual basis (in fact they can generally manage to go through a whole match without breaking or cursing anything or anyone) whereas Rafa can barely go through a single game without violating the time rule, is the crux of the issue. Rafa knows he breaks the rule continually whether he's played a 38 shot rally or an 8 shot rally.
ReplyDeleteComparing his planned and conscious (and some say arrogant) decision to slow down the game to his speed to an entirely unplanned and explosive reaction to some factor is not to compare like with like - and that is exactly what Rafa is doing in that quote above, which weakens his argument. I'd far rather Rafa just concentrate on speeding up between points, than to be seen as whining about this.
Rafa needs to play within the rules. That's all. From his emergence onto the tennis scene as a teenager, he has always been slow. If he chooses to slow the game down to his speed then he is perfectly entitled to do so. You play to the speed of the server. So if he chooses to take 25 seconds between every single point then he can do. If another player chooses to take 14 seconds between points, then he equally can do. Fast does not equal good, and slow does not equal bad. You can do exactly what you want within 25 seconds. The trouble is that Rafa at times takes that 1-2-3-4-5 seconds longer than the rules allow. He breaks the rules, he needs to stop it and I wish he would just to make this whole tedious topic go away.
DeleteWhen you are playing a game which stops at the last point and then starts with the next over and over and over again, and the rule that you break is within that stop and start period, as opposed to an outburst that say, may only occur once in a match, gives opportune for one rule being broken much more frequently than another. But the crux of the matter is not the number of times Rafa breaks a rule in a match as opposed to other forms of rule breaking by other players therefore making what he does worse. The crux of the matter is rule breaking. Simple as. If it is deemed fit to punish one form of breaking the rules then it is fit to punish another. That is all.
As always, you have to read the quotes in the full context they were given and Rafa was discussing his altercations with Carlos Bernardes in Rio when this quote came about. But I see this as Rafa discussing rule breaking, how he is penalised for the rules he breaks and yet he sees others breaking rules and they are not. Rafa has a nauseous habit with his time-keeping, but can I understand him being incredulous that 5 seconds of faffing about on a baseline is punished over the every bit as conscious use of the word "fuck" and smashing of equipment ... yes I can actually. Because it's all down to rule breaking - that's his real point. And how one set of behaviour is punished over another and I actually support the examples he uses because I've been saying it myself for a long time now. In the interview he gave he was not trying to back off from taking responsibility of his own behaviour and why he finds himself in the trouble he does. And I repeat again, in the game they are playing, his transgression and particular bad habit will come much more to the fore and occur much more often because it is associated with the stop of one point and the start of another ... but it doesn't invalidate his point of other behaviour and rule breaking going unpunished. And just because it doesn't happen with the frequency that his behaviour does in a match doesn't make him wrong and the others right.
Hi again Woofie,
ReplyDeleteA strict time limit between points was a later addition to the tennis rule book and was brought in to stop deliberate disruptive play during the 70's by players such as Conners, Nastase and McEnroe. Prior to that the rule simply stated that play should be continuous and I doubt that being a few seconds slower or quicker would have been punishable or even noticed. Originally even when the time limit was added it was only used to stop deliberate disruption. ie stopping play to argue, fool around etc and wasn't used just to hurry a player along by a second or two.
So the first point is why was the rule changed and tightened up? At the beginning of 2013 several pages were added to the ATP rule book in an attempt to turn the time taken between points from a guideline that could be applied at an umpires discretion to a strict time limit with the implication that all instances were a player took longer than 20/25 seconds between points would be given a warning then on subsequent instances punished. Before the rule change there was lots of talk by commentators about just one player (Rafa) and how the ATP should tighten up the rule and force him to play quicker. It's ludicrous but I have come to the conclusion that the ATP added a new rule to specifically target one player. Why they should target one of there most popular players I have no idea and it makes no sense. The rule doesn't shorten matches and it doesn't address deliberate disruptive play. eg smashing and changing a racquet, arguing, changing non vital equipment etc. So what was the reasons for attempting to tighten it?
I say "attempting" to tighten the rule because strictly enforcing a 20/25 second time limit is unworkable because all players routinely go over these limits. Get a stop watch and time both players in any match and there will be numerous occasions when they take longer than the allotted time and don't get penalized. Instead of enforcing the rule strictly umpires do it in a corrupt way. Instead of penalizing players every time they go over the limit they just throw in the odd warning and penalty to show they are doing their job. Rafa is the biggest target because of his reputation.
A warning or a loss of first serve may not appear to be such a harsh punishment but if they are applied at critical times in a match they can affect it's outcome. Bearing in mind that these penalties are handed out sporadically it's shocking the number of times Rafa has had a first serve taken away whilst serving at break point down in a critical part of a match. The most recent was in his match with Fognini in Rio. If you look at percentages serving at break point down with a first serve and there is a good chance (well over 50%) the break point will be saved. Quite often there is a less than 50% chance of winning a point with a second serve. In men's tennis the serve is dominant and one break is often enough to secure a set. Therefore a time violation can be the tennis equivalent of awarding an opponent a football penalty. It can alter the course of the match.
There is enough evidence out there from recorded matches to show that this rule is not applied consistently and that it's corrupt use has altered the course of matches. I can thing of several matches were Rafa has lost a break, a set and even a match after such a penalty. Other players have not received penalties in the same circumstances. This could be dismissed as unfairness but there is a lot of money involved in tennis and on another level it looks a little like corruption.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete