Surprised it isn't Murray tbh. Mouth like a toilet. I'm not surprised really but his fines have been completely disproportionate and they know it too.
Yeah I went for a long walk earlier and was actually thinking of Kyrgios and didn't bother Googling but was wondering if he was coming back for Wimbledon. In my head I was likening an ageing top player with today's Zverev v Nadal outcome to frankly ANY top player playing eg a healthy Kyrgios at Wimbledon in round 1. It's just not the kind of match anyone wants right away.
Okay Nick my lips are sealed for now on, Nick has also got other business interests as well since he has been off the tourNick Kyrgios gives angry reply when asked if he's about to retire from tennis
'Takes time you know...'www.thetennisgazette.com
Only 'cos I was reading comments on Nadal v Zverev (couldn't watch it 'cos of work) and was thinking of grass court season.
Atmane hit a ball into the crowd and it hit a woman on the knee but probably because he's French and not Djokovic, he wasn't disqualified. It's in the rules that if someone gets hit you have to be automatically disqualified.
The only video I'm able to see doesn't really show much, but I agree...if you hit the ball in anger, and strike someone, it's borderline for default. A bit of a sting on the knee, however, is not the same as a direct strike to the neck. That woman got hurt. Stop acting like the only person who has been defaulted is Djokovic. Just because he's your fellow-traveler in vaccination skepticism.
Yeah it doesn't show much at all but the rules are the rules. Henman was disqualified also for hitting someone. The rules were clearly not enforced 'cos he was French and they didn't want to face an angry mob. The French crowd are bad enough as it is. Pretty lame to mention vaccination skepticism btw. It's yesterday's news that the skeptics were not skeptics at all but proven 100% correct. The only vaccine that worked was Omicron...
If it doesn't show much, it's hard to get outraged about it. You've just decided why the tournament director and umpire made the decision they did. Without enough evidence, I think that's lame.
When did I say Djokovic shouldn't have been defaulted? I said Atmane wasn't and he also hit someone. If you check the rules, you'll see you're meant to be automatically disqualified for hitting someone with the ball in anger. This has nothing to so with what I think of his shady bottle. It's about the rules being bent for a French player and enforced equally across the board.
The incident with Altmane was hushed up and one of the tennis journalists made comment on it later in the day yesterday and I watched a replay
You said above, "No default because his name wasn't Djokovic." This implied that you disagreed with it. Not that the rules were unequally applied. As IF a top player would get shoddier treatment than a no-name. I'm pretty sure that's not true. Even far from it. You posted a video that is not very informational, and make an equivalency with Novak's situation. It's hard not to think that you didn't agree with the call. If you did, all good.
No doubt backlash from social media is the only reason 'cos he didn't seem to give a shit when it happened...
