Tick tock, tick tock ...
It's all getting a leetle bit serious now, isn't it? Now here's the thing. I've been indulging in a little hobby horse of late, and that's timing Rafa. I wrote about it a couple of posts ago. I did it because I needed to see for myself just how big this "problem" really was. Because when I watch a match, I can honestly say that for me, it doesn't detract from the spectacle at all. I remember Peter Fleming once making the point that when watching tennis live, there are so many other distractions such as spectators moving, applause, the ball kids and general meleé that you barely notice the time between points. However, sat on your sofa in front of the telly (or more to the point in a commentary booth or a TV studio) ... well, it just feels different.
When discussing this tedious topic previously, I tried to be a "balanced poster". That's a bit of an in-joke by the way because you were once slightly forgiven for the crime of being a Rafa fan if you were seen to be able to criticise him. And the fact is, well ... you can't walk away from the facts. Rafa persistently overshoots the 25 second mark. Most of the time it's by a couple of seconds, but the more serious the point is, is when the time starts hitting around the 30 mark. So you think that really, he's not giving the umpire much option. However, is Rafa the sole perpetrator? It's often pointed out by Rafa fans that he's not, so I thought I'd put the timer on that too. And the Miami final with Djokovic and Murray was the match I timed - only the hour's worth of highlights I watched I hasten to add - I'm not totally torturing myself in the name of Rafaresearch!! LOL
Now whilst both players don't necessarily routinely take up to the 25 seconds on each point, they do break it. Djokovic taking 28 seconds when facing a break point; 31 and 33 seconds in the tie-breaker; 36 seconds when facing set points in the 2nd set; 32 seconds when holding match point. And as for Murray ... 30, 30 and 34 when facing deuce, ad and break points; the odd 29 seconds here, 26 seconds there; 27 and 32 seconds in the tie-breaker; 34 seconds, 27 seconds; 32 seconds when he lost his first service game of the third set; 28 when he lost his second service game ... interesting that both seem to take a bit longer on the big points but oh, Murray did get a warning, as he did in his previous match ... and he didn't like it.
Taking longer between points is not exclusive to Rafa, however taking the easy way out of ignoring other players' transgressions because Rafa "does it the most" is lazy and unjust. I doubt that I shall ever see a Sky Sports studio discussion on Murray's time-keeping, but never a match goes by when Marcus Buckland doesn't lead the charge to discuss it regarding Rafa. Of course the simple thing to do to shut this whole subject up is if Rafa just played within the rules. Yep agreed. Please stop it Rafa ... I know you're not going to, but please stop.
But then again, we are dealing with an entirely unique specimen in Rafa. He's always been different. Why not cut your hair when you were young Rafa, and stop wearing those silly clothes that you first turned up in. Why did you have to wear tops with no sleeves, and why did you have to cry rebel yells with fist pumps and raise your leg and bounce up and down at the net before a match? Why did you have to hit a ball high over the net with an amazing amount of topspin and turn defence into an art form? Why did you start playing the game at a slow pace from a very young age and ingratiate so many rituals and tics into your routine that it's slowed you down even further? Yes Rafa ... stop being you, because a rule that had been latent over so many years suddenly became the most important and talked about and so damaging were you in your abuse of it that they had to introduce extended penalties into the rule book while you were absent from the game. Not to sort an epidemic out, but to sort you out! Yep, you're unique, you're a one off, and it doesn't matter that others don't comply too because the focus of what they do will never be placed on them because this rule is all about you!
OK, I lost myself there. But lifelong ingratiated habits are not easy to change ... and do you know what? As much as I want him to stop because of the hassle it brings him and the tediousness of it all, it's so much a part of the uniqueness of Rafa that I sort of quite like it. *blush* And playing slow does not = bad, and playing fast does not = good. Remember that people.
When I first thought I'd start doing this timing thing, I did it without checking out the specific rules of its application, ie. at what point does the clock start to tick. Because if you watch a match and you see the end of a point, there's applause and stuff and noise and movement but when the umpire calls the score, it feels like right, this is where it all starts because this call seems to calm it all down and make it known that it's time to become ready to play the next point. And I timed endless points from when the umpire gave the score to Rafa hitting the serve and thought, what the hell is the problem? Barely near, never mind over the 25 seconds. But of course when this silly fangirl read the actual rule, the clock starts from the moment the ball goes out of play. So from the second the ball is out, the clock starts to tick and takes account of the time it takes to walk back to the baseline, the odd towel down, getting the balls from ballkid, walking to the service line, preparing yourself to do the service motion and stops when you actually hit it. And what does for Rafa is the tics at the baseline. The tug of the shorts, the hair behind the ears, the touching of the face ... so often he hits 27 and 28 seconds which he wouldn't if he simply didn't do this. Yes, I know you're touching your face and messing with your hair and counting in your head how long 2 seconds is. Lol. But that really does make the difference between the umpire being able to do rock all about if you chose to play "slow" and take the full allocation between points and what tips you over.
So where am I going with this particular rambling? Well the thing is, having a "rule" about the time between points is to encourage continuous play and to ensure that a player does not deliberately delay, assuming not to either disrupt the opponent or to gain a personal advantage. So quoting from the rule book it says that "... play shall be continuous
and a player shall not unreasonably delay a match for any cause." and then it goes on to explain when the clock starts and stops. Interesting, a player shall not unreasonably delay a match for any cause. Do his tics cause an unreasonable delay? Does this behaviour actually delay the match, I mean, really? I still even at this point need to make myself clear in that Rafa can only help himself if he kept it all within 25 seconds. If he did, then it would all go away. But I think from what we've seen of late and what was again evident today, is the point of penalising by the umpire. Which is now just plain wrong. If the rule is strict at 25 seconds then Rafa gives an umpire plenty of opportunities during a match to issue a time violation. But to continuously choose to issue such violation as he is preparing to serve at break point down at a crucial point in the match where his eventual loss of serve could mean the loss of a set is just wrong - and for me goes against the grain of why the rule was introduced in the first place. As my actual evidence from the Miami final shows, both Djokovic and Murray flaunted the rule when serving at crucial points. Don't not penalise them at crucial points yet go and penalise Rafa. That is bad, bery bad, as Rafa might say. When I'm at work and delivering a presentation and I'm nervous, what do I do? I slow down my breathing, I take my time, I exhale ... and then I speak. The steadying yourself at a crucial stage is not unreasonably delaying a match for any cause. It's just nerves, and that is normal.
What I fear I am seeing today is an umpire ingratiating himself on a match and potentially directly influencing it. That's not what this bloody rule was introduced for ... but that's what it is coming to.
Rafa got rattled yesterday when the umpire penalised him and I believe the same happened today and influenced him losing the second set. Yes it is Rafa's responsibility to play within the rules and he should not unreasonably delay a match. But then an umpire should also not unreasonably influence it either - just because he's officiating Rafa Nadal.
I expect this to run and run ...
Totally agree and from a fans perspective this rule looks unfair. However there is a lot of money involved in tennis and there is as you have discovered yourself enough evidence to show how this rule is being targeted at one player in particular. To do so looks a little bit more than unfair it looks corrupt. Nadal has lost sets and matches after being given penalties on crucial points. Someone independent of the ATP should do a thorough investigation.
ReplyDeleteThis will run and run until Rafa retires and beyond - and nothing will change. Abolishing or amending the 'maximum time between points' rule is just not going to happen when the regulating body and the major sponsors want a faster game. Besides, when has any sports rule or regulation been uniformly and universally applied when megabucks are involved? Think football, boxing, Formula 1, etc, etc. Tennis is not on its own here. And the bigger the name, the bigger the the spotlight on their conduct.
ReplyDeleteSome observers will legitimately wonder why most low ranked players can play within the rules but one of the greatest of all time players (and earners) can't seem to do it - largely because of all of his tics and rituals.
Yes, it is unjust that Rafa is penalised persistently by umpires when he is not alone in infringing the rule - and yes, I agree that it is the ATP's responsibility to do something to try to ensure that penalties are applied in a more fair and transparent way. But Rafa remains fundamentally to blame for his plight and therefore my sympathies only stretch so far. The answer to this problem lies primarily in the hands of the players who could speed up but choose not to.
I really understand what you say about your sympathies, it's correct ... when you see him routinely go over that 25 second mark - even when it's just 2 seconds - it's really hard to offer anything up in defence and taking those couple of seconds out would then really lay weight to a more solid argument of him being victimised for taking longer on those big points because that is what other big name players do too.
ReplyDeleteAnd it is striking that seemingly every other single player in the sport today can play "within the rules" bar one - but then that is the total uniqueness of Rafa. There never has been anything like him before and the sport struggles with how to deal with him on so many levels.
But all that said, I am still struggling with how umpires can now potentially influence the outcome of sets and matches by interfering at crucial points in order to instigate a rule that is there so that a player may not unreasonably delay the match for any cause. What constitutes unreasonable delay? You can't offer any excuse for every single point of the game, but you would like to think that common sense has to prevail with an umpire on certain match changing points. They are not there to influence.
When there was once all this talk of putting a shot clock on the court I used to scoff at it as being a totally ridiculous idea, and that you should never take away the human element and the discretion that an umpire can bring. But now I support it. I would rather a clock call the time because this mechanical feature would be fair to all players and calll them out accordingly.
But the thing is, this subject goes away with Rafa. It's never dicussed when he's out of the game and it will be a rule that will gather dust when he's not playing any more. It only has airtime in association with him and it's what he does in his service preparation that gives him the issues. It's a pity that there isn't more of gentle word, called by his team, not the umpire.
So, it has been the consensus on the Rafa fansite I frequent, put forth by individuals in mental health care field(s), that Rafa exhibits tendencies of obsessive-compulsive behavior. People with these disorders, when learning to cope successfully in life, sometimes channel their tics into calming routines in order to focus. If this is the true [to paraphrase Rafa], he has been very successful in developing extraordinary powers of concentration in his career. The repetitive gestures (which actually have not been _added onto_ per se, but amended over the years - [i.e. when he wore the piratas, he always folded his socks down a certain way, and that was one of his tics, straightening the socks...which he no longer does]) - are what help him to focus - he is not stalling, it is not gamesmanship, it is his calming ritual....according to those familiar w/this behavior.
ReplyDeleteIt is also not Rafa's fault that he sweats so profusely; this is obvious to all who watch his matches. He has tried to speed things up wrt this - that is why he now has two towels at the end of the court, where most people have one. Thus whether he is in ad or deuce court, he has towel nearby. He HAS to towel off more often than some sweatless players; when he does not do this (as sometimes occurred in recent matches) the sweat is literally POURING down his face, into his eyes, off his nose - whilst he attempting to serve!
He is trying his best, I am sure; it's a shame that the chair umpires don't do likewise, in the best spirit of the sport. I see their behavior at best as petty, at worst, as an abuse of power. A biased abuse, at that, given the blind eye they turn to other players. Other players just as 'guilty', if such a thing can be said of infringement of a rule purportedly instituted to abolish the long-winded, time-wasting rants and tantrums of players from another era (whose names I shall not mention here; I think most probably know of whom I speak ;-) )