Carlos Bernardes Withdrawn for Nadal Matches

[Front242]

Well many of us feel the same way about players who have failed drug tests but let's be real here, the general public seem to have exonerated Cilic and basically most players who have failed drug tests. I haven't and many others haven't but this and other forums have. They're hardly all innocent but we're not allowed discuss that here so there's nothing really weird about it at all. We are, however, free to discuss the indisputable issue of time wasting and twisting rules regarding umpires.

 

[Riotbeard]

I haven't really heard any other nadal fans say this. Where the non-nadal fans depart from Broken and it makes sense, is that we don't like Nadal generally and maybe this a direct action, that we feel fits with his character, and we already didn't like him. I wouldn't ask anybody to change their fandom. If it were Novak, he would still be my favorite player, but I would say that I did not like his actions. I don't think anybody is asking Rafa fans to change sides

That's also why I don't think it's character assassination. The people who disliked him already, dislike him more. Nobody is saying he committed genocide...

See that's where I disagree. Dislike is never my issue. I've been here long enough for everyone to know that I couldn't care less if people like Nadal. DarthFed and Haychew flat out say they despise the guy and I never ever respond to their posts negatively. If you dislike someone, anything negative he does will make you dislike him more. It's human nature and I wouldn't expect anything else.

But go back through this thread and tell me that Nadal being referred to as a *Word I won't type as a mod PM'd me and asked me not to* and a piece of garbage, yada yada yada...is not going overboard. This was portrayed as a case of corruption with Nadal instigating it (or at least, it was likened to cases of corruption). Also, it was clearly likened to cheating through similarly baffling analogies. I don't know about you but when you accuse someone of being corrupt or a cheat, that's pretty much a character assassination (I know some implied the ITF/ATP are corrupt, but by proxy, this would also include Nadal, who triggered the whole thing).

If this sounds redundant, it's because it is. I mentioned this before, and you thought it was an "interesting interpretation." But, as I'm sure you know, all of this is simply factual.

I said it's corruption and I still believe that. Any governing body that allows the policed population to choose who can and can't judge them will inevitably be corrupt in the way it enforces rules. As far as Cillic goes, he was penalized and fairly harshly (Now, his penalty shouldn't have been commuted IMO), so to me that would be different from this situation. Nadal does something I don't like (obviously much less serious than doping), and instead of being penalized, he is allowed to chose not to be judged by the one who would actually enforce what he is clearly guilty of. That is clearly a corrupt system. Whether or not Rafa is corrupt is a more difficult point. He is certainly using a corrupt system to the best of his advantage, but I don't know how other players interact with the ATP, so maybe this normal and a part of the game (If that is the case, it should be stopped IMO). On Cillic again, he did his time, so there is no point in disliking him anymore. As a player, I am generally indifferent towards him.

In terms of overarching insults of rafa, in my opinion they were a little bit over the top, but people can certainly feel that way (within language restrictions). I don't like Rafa. I can't stand his public persona, but I don't on any real level know the guy. Beyond tournament outcomes, I don't wish him any ill will.

 

[Moxie]

That's also why I don't think it's character assassination. The people who disliked him already, dislike him more. Nobody is saying he committed genocide...

See that's where I disagree. Dislike is never my issue. I've been here long enough for everyone to know that I couldn't care less if people like Nadal. DarthFed and Haychew flat out say they despise the guy and I never ever respond to their posts negatively. If you dislike someone, anything negative he does will make you dislike him more. It's human nature and I wouldn't expect anything else.

But go back through this thread and tell me that Nadal being referred to as a *Word I won't type as a mod PM'd me and asked me not to* and a piece of garbage, yada yada yada...is not going overboard. This was portrayed as a case of corruption with Nadal instigating it (or at least, it was likened to cases of corruption). Also, it was clearly likened to cheating through similarly baffling analogies. I don't know about you but when you accuse someone of being corrupt or a cheat, that's pretty much a character assassination (I know some implied the ITF/ATP are corrupt, but by proxy, this would also include Nadal, who triggered the whole thing).

If this sounds redundant, it's because it is. I mentioned this before, and you thought it was an "interesting interpretation." But, as I'm sure you know, all of this is simply factual.

I said it's corruption and I still believe that. Any governing body that allows the policed population to choose who can and can't judge them will inevitably be corrupt in the way it enforces rules. As far as Cillic goes, he was penalized and fairly harshly (Now, his penalty shouldn't have been commuted IMO), so to me that would be different from this situation. Nadal does something I don't like (obviously much less serious than doping), and instead of being penalized, he is allowed to chose not to be judged by the one who would actually enforce what he is clearly guilty of. That is clearly a corrupt system. Whether or not Rafa is corrupt is a more difficult point. He is certainly using a corrupt system to the best of his advantage, but I don't know how other players interact with the ATP, so maybe this normal and a part of the game (If that is the case, it should be stopped IMO). On Cillic again, he did his time, so there is no point in disliking him anymore. As a player, I am generally indifferent towards him.

In terms of overarching insults of rafa, in my opinion they were a little bit over the top, but people can certainly feel that way (within language restrictions). I don't like Rafa. I can't stand his public persona, but I don't on any real level know the guy. Beyond tournament outcomes, I don't wish him any ill will.

But this is where you haven't read carefully the source of the dispute, or the anecdotal reporting of how players and umpires can both call a time-out from each other. Nadal asked for time to go back to the locker room and put his shorts back on right. Bernardes said he'd give him a time violation if he went off court. This was the beginning of the irritation on that day, if you believe cited articles. You're fine to dislike Rafa for doing something you don't like, and he does take more time over than anyone, but do read what happened. And as to players (or umps) deciding they should take a break from someone, it is declared to be "not uncommon" on the posted source articles, so it's not a corruption of the system to do it, and neither does it make the system corrupt. Human beings umpire matches played by other humans. Perhaps they need some distance from each other on occasion. Perhaps that never happens in your work environment? I think there is a level of moral outrage over this that is misplaced.

Sure, listening to Rafa tell Carlos Bernardes off in the video is unappealing. He tells him that he'll prevent him from umpiring his matches. High-handed and angry. Do I wish he hadn't lost his temper? Yes. As to the fall-out: as you've said, you don't like him anyway, and now you like him less. No surprise. You also said that if Nole did the same you'd disagree with it but still like him as your favorite player. I still like Rafa as my favorite player. I should be allowed to react in my own way, too, and I see it as an incident raised to the level of grievous sin by those that are already inclined to see it that way.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I see that "operation rewrite narrative" is undergoing.

Let us make it clear. This is not about "likes" and "dislikes". There are two separate
threads for it.

This is about "right" and "wrong".

 

[brokenshoelace]

I see that "operation rewrite narrative" is undergoing.

Let us make it clear. This is not about "likes" and "dislikes". There are two separate
threads for it.

This is about "right" and "wrong".

OK, show me a person who said this isn't wrong, except for maybe Carol.

But you know what I can show you? Countless posts who think this "wrong" makes Nadal a piece of garbage. It's not re-writing narratives, it's simply stating facts. You really think all this thread did, for 21 pages, is debate whether this was right or wrong? No comments about Nadal, his personality, etc... has been made? Really? Things that are totally unrelated to this incident?

You compared it to Deflate Gate dude. Speaking of rights or wrongs, that would fall under the "wrong" category.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I certainly did not call Rafa a dirtbag or scum or million other similar things. I have always maintained that his action is wrong and argued so. You can dig all my posts in this thread and
show me where I am foulmouthing.

On the other hand, there were even some posters who have almost explicitly stated
that javascript:Thread.multiQuote(136578)

 

[GameSetAndMath]

A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively. He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:

She: What kind of woman do you think I am?

He: We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling over the price.

 

[Federberg]

A man asks a woman if she would be willing to sleep with him if he pays her an exorbitant sum. She replies affirmatively. He then names a paltry amount and asks if she would still be willing to sleep with him for the revised fee. The woman is greatly offended and replies as follows:

She: What kind of woman do you think I am?

He: We’ve already established that. Now we’re just haggling over the price.

:laydownlaughing
Oscar Wilde. Luv it!

 

[Puppet Master]

Legend says that if you log on at the right time, one can see Novak and Fed fans getting along, enjoying a quality Nadal bashing in their natural habitat. Careful, do not disturb them, as they will swiftly jump to another thread.

 

[Kirijax]

Legend says that if you log on at the right time, one can see Novak and Fed fans getting along, enjoying a quality Nadal bashing in their natural habitat. Careful, do not disturb them, as they will swiftly jump to another thread.

:laydownlaughing

 

[brokenshoelace]

OK guys, so put on your sweat pants, go to the situation room, because "Operation Re-Write Narrative" is on. I'm going to make up some quotes in order to re-write the narrative. Remember everyone, all this thread did for 21 pages is address whether Rafa's actions re: Carlos were "right or wrong." Everything else is made up and false narratives.

Here goes, first made-up quote puts in question the legitimacy of Nadal's wins:

He's stolen many a match and championship; esp. at the FO against Federer in a few of those finals! It's one of the reasons Nadal's never been a fave; even as a kid! His whole act is so offensive, it's hard to describe! :cover :speechless:

Second made-up quote questions Rafa's saint-hood (<3 britbox):

^Of course not mate... Rafa was tucked up in bed dreaming of signing autographs for the homeless.

Made-up quote about Uncle Toni's coaching being brought up out of the blue:

How about Toni's coaching? Why does he keep doing it? He was warned a few times, but he does it anyway? There have been cases of players complaining about Toni and Rafa's talks during matches..

Made-up quote that seems to confuse Rafa's age a tad:

Whinging little baby.

Medical time-outs from years ago brought up out of the blue (also a made-up quote, of course):

No, he's taken dubious medical timeouts in a few of those.

No moral judgments on the subject were passed during the making of this product:

A true sportsman right there and a great role model for everyone.

How stalling, p1$$ing off the opponent and spectators is the act of a good role model I've no idea but in my eyes it's the polar opposite.

No hyperbole was used in the making of this product either:

Nadal's time wasting on the other hand is just about the worst example of bad sportsmanship

No further takes on coaching were made either:

And we don't even have to reintroduce the issue of the on-court coaching, which Rafa and Uncle Toni have singlehandedly introduced to the ATP tour lol (and which is VERY rarely challenged by the chair and/or the ATP tour).

And perhaps, my favorite (made-up) gem of this thread. I wonder if logical fallacies were taught in English 101 classes or did they limit the curriculum to Oscar Wylde literature.

Now, perhaps Tom Brady should try to get the NFL chief fired as the ball was deflated only by small amount and it probably did not make any difference who won the super bowl.

OK, I lied, this is my favorite quote of the thread. Toni Nadal...the REAL King of Clay.

Coaching is wrong, Rafa has received coaching numerous times. For an all time great it's a bit sad that Uncle Toni does this, it just puts Rafa's legacy to question. Can he do it by himself or not??

No overreactions were observed in the making of this product. No name-calling either:

Even if the guy had zero slams there's enough about him for me and many others to still consider him a complete t**t

And further:

The time wasting is just one thing but there are many reasons I consider him a complete t**t.

An issue that was openly acknowledged by all parties is being likened to silent bans, further putting in question the curriculum of that English 101 class:

The primary culprit here is ATP?ITF the governing bodies of professional tennis. They
try to keep everything a secret. This is the same problem they had with drugs/doping/silent ban
issues.

Channeling his inner Jennifer Lawrence, GSM was on fire.

Corruption by governing bodies of sports is not uncommon. Just today, the FBI is closing in on
corruption charges against FIFA Officials. Read more about this on CNN.

I understand that Tennis Froniter wants to be on good books of ATP/ITF. But, that does
not mean we should blindly accept whatever they do without looking into whether it is
reasonable or at least talking about it to raise awareness.

Again, moral takes were in no way noticed during the making of this product. This is all re-writing narratives on my part:

This! Just have the moral courage to admit he's not a saint. It's like some of these people believe because he's an awesome player than means he's an angel. It is utterly bizarre and says more about them really :nono

In fact the above quote seemed to have a similarly hot take on Nadal fans too, whose admiration for the ass fingering, hair thinning, time wasting Spaniard speaks volumes about the kind of people they are, apparently.

Further proving that all anti-Nadal takes in this thread were simply about whether what he did was right or wrong, and in no way about dislikes or "state why you think he's human scum" takes, we get the following:

He's immature, acts like a 5 year old. Whining when umpires enforce rules, potty breaks, all those selfserving comments (WTF needs to be on clay, 2 year ranking system, etc etc etc). He also sleeps with the lights on, and needs to do all kind of movements before he can hit a ball. These are all things spoiled little children do on the tennis court.

Not the ambassador of the sport you would like.

Note: The above was in fact NOT made-up, as I'm sure you would have guessed by now. All of it is taken directly from this thread, and that was only 10 pages in. Sunday mornings might be the most boring time of the week for me but it's not boring enough to go through the subsequent 10 page, but all of you are smart enough to guess that they would have contained much of the same "narratives" (buzz word of the week). Well, that and some epic pieces of Oscar Wylde literature.

So, perhaps I can go through them later, but I don't think some posters above could afford to have both feet in mouth as it would be too physically impairing and would rob these forums from further valuable, golden posting.

 

[Riotbeard]

See that's where I disagree. Dislike is never my issue. I've been here long enough for everyone to know that I couldn't care less if people like Nadal. DarthFed and Haychew flat out say they despise the guy and I never ever respond to their posts negatively. If you dislike someone, anything negative he does will make you dislike him more. It's human nature and I wouldn't expect anything else.

But go back through this thread and tell me that Nadal being referred to as a *Word I won't type as a mod PM'd me and asked me not to* and a piece of garbage, yada yada yada...is not going overboard. This was portrayed as a case of corruption with Nadal instigating it (or at least, it was likened to cases of corruption). Also, it was clearly likened to cheating through similarly baffling analogies. I don't know about you but when you accuse someone of being corrupt or a cheat, that's pretty much a character assassination (I know some implied the ITF/ATP are corrupt, but by proxy, this would also include Nadal, who triggered the whole thing).

If this sounds redundant, it's because it is. I mentioned this before, and you thought it was an "interesting interpretation." But, as I'm sure you know, all of this is simply factual.

I said it's corruption and I still believe that. Any governing body that allows the policed population to choose who can and can't judge them will inevitably be corrupt in the way it enforces rules. As far as Cillic goes, he was penalized and fairly harshly (Now, his penalty shouldn't have been commuted IMO), so to me that would be different from this situation. Nadal does something I don't like (obviously much less serious than doping), and instead of being penalized, he is allowed to chose not to be judged by the one who would actually enforce what he is clearly guilty of. That is clearly a corrupt system. Whether or not Rafa is corrupt is a more difficult point. He is certainly using a corrupt system to the best of his advantage, but I don't know how other players interact with the ATP, so maybe this normal and a part of the game (If that is the case, it should be stopped IMO). On Cillic again, he did his time, so there is no point in disliking him anymore. As a player, I am generally indifferent towards him.

In terms of overarching insults of rafa, in my opinion they were a little bit over the top, but people can certainly feel that way (within language restrictions). I don't like Rafa. I can't stand his public persona, but I don't on any real level know the guy. Beyond tournament outcomes, I don't wish him any ill will.

But this is where you haven't read carefully the source of the dispute, or the anecdotal reporting of how players and umpires can both call a time-out from each other. Nadal asked for time to go back to the locker room and put his shorts back on right. Bernardes said he'd give him a time violation if he went off court. This was the beginning of the irritation on that day, if you believe cited articles. You're fine to dislike Rafa for doing something you don't like, and he does take more time over than anyone, but do read what happened. And as to players (or umps) deciding they should take a break from someone, it is declared to be "not uncommon" on the posted source articles, so it's not a corruption of the system to do it, and neither does it make the system corrupt. Human beings umpire matches played by other humans. Perhaps they need some distance from each other on occasion. Perhaps that never happens in your work environment? I think there is a level of moral outrage over this that is misplaced.

Sure, listening to Rafa tell Carlos Bernardes off in the video is unappealing. He tells him that he'll prevent him from umpiring his matches. High-handed and angry. Do I wish he hadn't lost his temper? Yes. As to the fall-out: as you've said, you don't like him anyway, and now you like him less. No surprise. You also said that if Nole did the same you'd disagree with it but still like him as your favorite player. I still like Rafa as my favorite player. I should be allowed to react in my own way, too, and I see it as an incident raised to the level of grievous sin by those that are already inclined to see it that way.

I knew all this when I wrote my post. I still think it's a corrupt system, when you can ask not to be officiated by someone for enforcing the rules, and then you got into a dispute with them and they didn't back down.

 

[I.Haychew]

I don't think "everyone else" has made this point, because most of those have come with some degree of moral outrage. On the other hand, I don't know what group point you think Nadal fans are making, or not making. I have said that I don't think we should be required to join in on the "he's a dirtbag" chorus. That choir is big enough. It inclines folks to defend.

In response to the britbox's post which people liked so much, I, for example, merely pointed out that the OP'd article had no quotes or citations, and an inflammatory headline to go with it. I have made such points before. I never called it a rag, though Front accused me of that. I merely said that we should wait for more information before running off making assumptions, which many were happy to do, immediately. And some of those are still wrong, even as the information comes out. I don't think that Nadal fans have been the only ones, by far, marring the otherwise considered and unbiased opinion making on this thread.

I haven't really heard any other nadal fans say this. Where the non-nadal fans depart from Broken and it makes sense, is that we don't like Nadal generally and maybe this a direct action, that we feel fits with his character, and we already didn't like him. I wouldn't ask anybody to change their fandom. If it were Novak, he would still be my favorite player, but I would say that I did not like his actions. I don't think anybody is asking Rafa fans to change sides

The people who disliked him already, dislike him more.

Not true in my case. Nothing Folks does can make me "H-word" him more than I already do.

 

[Federberg]

^I don't dislike the man. Don't know him I see what I see and I discuss it. I would (and have) done the same when I've seen Roger do something wrong. It's just that his wrong doings are generally not to the detriment of other tennis players. I do recall him trying to con the umpire to close the roof in China when Andy had the beating of him, and I wasn't happy to see that. Clearly as a fan I might miss somethings as we all have a tendency to see what we want to see, but when it's blatant, I don't try to deny or delude myself. Terrible double 'd's on these boards. I like another kind

 

[lacatch]

See that's where I disagree. Dislike is never my issue. I've been here long enough for everyone to know that I couldn't care less if people like Nadal. DarthFed and Haychew flat out say they despise the guy and I never ever respond to their posts negatively. If you dislike someone, anything negative he does will make you dislike him more. It's human nature and I wouldn't expect anything else.

But go back through this thread and tell me that Nadal being referred to as a *Word I won't type as a mod PM'd me and asked me not to* and a piece of garbage, yada yada yada...is not going overboard. This was portrayed as a case of corruption with Nadal instigating it (or at least, it was likened to cases of corruption). Also, it was clearly likened to cheating through similarly baffling analogies. I don't know about you but when you accuse someone of being corrupt or a cheat, that's pretty much a character assassination (I know some implied the ITF/ATP are corrupt, but by proxy, this would also include Nadal, who triggered the whole thing).

If this sounds redundant, it's because it is. I mentioned this before, and you thought it was an "interesting interpretation." But, as I'm sure you know, all of this is simply factual.

I said it's corruption and I still believe that. Any governing body that allows the policed population to choose who can and can't judge them will inevitably be corrupt in the way it enforces rules. As far as Cillic goes, he was penalized and fairly harshly (Now, his penalty shouldn't have been commuted IMO), so to me that would be different from this situation. Nadal does something I don't like (obviously much less serious than doping), and instead of being penalized, he is allowed to chose not to be judged by the one who would actually enforce what he is clearly guilty of. That is clearly a corrupt system. Whether or not Rafa is corrupt is a more difficult point. He is certainly using a corrupt system to the best of his advantage, but I don't know how other players interact with the ATP, so maybe this normal and a part of the game (If that is the case, it should be stopped IMO). On Cillic again, he did his time, so there is no point in disliking him anymore. As a player, I am generally indifferent towards him.

In terms of overarching insults of rafa, in my opinion they were a little bit over the top, but people can certainly feel that way (within language restrictions). I don't like Rafa. I can't stand his public persona, but I don't on any real level know the guy. Beyond tournament outcomes, I don't wish him any ill will.

But this is where you haven't read carefully the source of the dispute, or the anecdotal reporting of how players and umpires can both call a time-out from each other. Nadal asked for time to go back to the locker room and put his shorts back on right. Bernardes said he'd give him a time violation if he went off court. This was the beginning of the irritation on that day, if you believe cited articles. You're fine to dislike Rafa for doing something you don't like, and he does take more time over than anyone, but do read what happened. And as to players (or umps) deciding they should take a break from someone, it is declared to be "not uncommon" on the posted source articles, so it's not a corruption of the system to do it, and neither does it make the system corrupt. Human beings umpire matches played by other humans. Perhaps they need some distance from each other on occasion. Perhaps that never happens in your work environment? I think there is a level of moral outrage over this that is misplaced.

Sure, listening to Rafa tell Carlos Bernardes off in the video is unappealing. He tells him that he'll prevent him from umpiring his matches. High-handed and angry. Do I wish he hadn't lost his temper? Yes. As to the fall-out: as you've said, you don't like him anyway, and now you like him less. No surprise. You also said that if Nole did the same you'd disagree with it but still like him as your favorite player. I still like Rafa as my favorite player. I should be allowed to react in my own way, too, and I see it as an incident raised to the level of grievous sin by those that are already inclined to see it that way.

Moxie--I don't know why you are quoting articles about it not being "uncommon" for players to request that an ump doesn't officiate their matches. This comes from the same ATP who capitulated to Rafa's demands and is practicing damage control. More relevant: when Roger, Novak and Andy were each asked (live), NONE of them agreed with this characterization of requests like Rafa being common, and there are NO other examples of umps not working a match of any of the top players FOR MONTHS other than Bernardes, at the request of Rafa (and apparently agreed to by the ATP and the French Open--so far). I believe this is less about the backward shorts, and more about Rafa not liking the one ump who has been the most strict about his slow play. And Rafa said in his presser at the French that sometimes it's better to take a break---I say: give ME a break---these are adults. Rafa can't get over the fact that Bernardes "disrespected" him 4 months ago? I think he's being petulant, and the tennis powers are capitulating to the whims of one of their top stars. I bet there is PLENTY of discussion going on behind the scenes among players/their agents and the ATP!

 

[Moxie]

Moxie--I don't know why you are quoting articles about it not being "uncommon" for players to request that an ump doesn't officiate their matches. This comes from the same ATP who capitulated to Rafa's demands and is practicing damage control. More relevant: when Roger, Novak and Andy were each asked (live), NONE of them agreed with this characterization of requests like Rafa being common, and there are NO other examples of umps not working a match of any of the top players FOR MONTHS other than Bernardes, at the request of Rafa (and apparently agreed to by the ATP and the French Open--so far). I believe this is less about the backward shorts, and more about Rafa not liking the one ump who has been the most strict about his slow play. And Rafa said in his presser at the French that sometimes it's better to take a break---I say: give ME a break---these are adults. Rafa can't get over the fact that Bernardes "disrespected" him 4 months ago? I think he's being petulant, and the tennis powers are capitulating to the whims of one of their top stars. I bet there is PLENTY of discussion going on behind the scenes among players/their agents and the ATP!

I was given a hard time for mentioning that the original article posted from the Telegraph had no citations or quotes. Then I quoted a tennis.com article posted by GSM, who is absolutely not on my side, and you complain about that because you don't believe the source. You also don't believe that the source of Rafa's anger was the backward shorts in that particular match, even though he is rarely seen to lose his temper so badly. It's fine for you to believe whatever you want, but I'm quoting articles from reasonable sources that other people posted, so you can't really fault me for it. And I don't find quotes from Andy or Roger that say that it is not common, and their comments are mostly about themselves, and fairly mild, as one would imagine. Feel free to post them, though.

What I did find from Roger was this:

'I do not want to be treated differently,' Federer said. 'If you get angry or you break a racket, you don't want to get a warning right away. If the umpire does, then all players should be treated equally. Things have to be clear. I hope there are no bonuses. Big tournaments, umpires with a lot of experience, they know how to manage difficult situations.

'On Court 15 you can be stricter to educate players, but that has nothing to do with who is playing. On centre courts you can give a little more leeway to make sure the match goes well.'

Also:
Nadal's frustration in Rio was accentuated after he requested to change his shorts, which he had put on the wrong way round, but was warned it would cost him another violation to do so.
'In his situation there are maybe enough umpires out there that it's not such a big problem for the ATP or the umpire or the player,' Federer said.

The bolded contradicts the notion that some players should be given preferential treatment, it seems to me. Top players play on centre courts and not on court 15. And the last quote from Roger seems to indicate that he has no problem with separating a player and umpire for a period of time.

 

[Front242]

Fine, ban Carlos Bernades from his matches then but tell all the others they better start enforcing the rules. Nadal and uncle phony can't ban them all!

 

[Moxie]

Fine, ban Carlos Bernades from his matches then but tell all the others they better start enforcing the rules. Nadal and uncle phony can't ban them all!

Perhaps you'd like to tell "them." As tented mentions, Pascal Maria has docked him first serves more than once. Look, I like Bernardes, as I've said. I think he's good and fair. A lot of folks here agree that there has to be consistency in enforcement of the rules. I don't know why you and so many have a hard time believing that it's a spat about being pushed hard by an ump, yes, but also about being given no leniency for a situation that was unusual and embarrassing, which I think pushed it over the edge for Nadal.

 

[Front242]

I'd gladly tell "them" but I somehow doubt they'd listen. It's pretty shameful and cowardly that so many umpires are scared to enforce the rules and probably given how this scenario with Bernades has panned out, the rest of them are now even less likely to grow a pair. And even more shameful how they handled this situation. It's not like tennis fans have much faith in the ATP/ITF to begin with on other more important issues. They bend the rules on so many things it's a complete shambles.

 

[lacatch]

Moxie--I don't know why you are quoting articles about it not being "uncommon" for players to request that an ump doesn't officiate their matches. This comes from the same ATP who capitulated to Rafa's demands and is practicing damage control. More relevant: when Roger, Novak and Andy were each asked (live), NONE of them agreed with this characterization of requests like Rafa being common, and there are NO other examples of umps not working a match of any of the top players FOR MONTHS other than Bernardes, at the request of Rafa (and apparently agreed to by the ATP and the French Open--so far). I believe this is less about the backward shorts, and more about Rafa not liking the one ump who has been the most strict about his slow play. And Rafa said in his presser at the French that sometimes it's better to take a break---I say: give ME a break---these are adults. Rafa can't get over the fact that Bernardes "disrespected" him 4 months ago? I think he's being petulant, and the tennis powers are capitulating to the whims of one of their top stars. I bet there is PLENTY of discussion going on behind the scenes among players/their agents and the ATP!

I was given a hard time for mentioning that the original article posted from the Telegraph had no citations or quotes. Then I quoted a tennis.com article posted by GSM, who is absolutely not on my side, and you complain about that because you don't believe the source. You also don't believe that the source of Rafa's anger was the backward shorts in that particular match, even though he is rarely seen to lose his temper so badly. It's fine for you to believe whatever you want, but I'm quoting articles from reasonable sources that other people posted, so you can't really fault me for it. And I don't find quotes from Andy or Roger that say that it is not common, and their comments are mostly about themselves, and fairly mild, as one would imagine. Feel free to post them, though.

What I did find from Roger was this:

'I do not want to be treated differently,' Federer said. 'If you get angry or you break a racket, you don't want to get a warning right away. If the umpire does, then all players should be treated equally. Things have to be clear. I hope there are no bonuses. Big tournaments, umpires with a lot of experience, they know how to manage difficult situations.

'On Court 15 you can be stricter to educate players, but that has nothing to do with who is playing. On centre courts you can give a little more leeway to make sure the match goes well.'

Also:
Nadal's frustration in Rio was accentuated after he requested to change his shorts, which he had put on the wrong way round, but was warned it would cost him another violation to do so.
'In his situation there are maybe enough umpires out there that it's not such a big problem for the ATP or the umpire or the player,' Federer said.

The bolded contradicts the notion that some players should be given preferential treatment, it seems to me. Top players play on centre courts and not on court 15. And the last quote from Roger seems to indicate that he has no problem with separating a player and umpire for a period of time.

Moxie--Your are selectively responding to my statements and ignoring others. Again: 1)Look at what Novak said (see the French Open or ATP website to get the video--was also widely quoted in the press)---umpires are just doing their job--sometimes I don't like what they do/say, but I would NEVER ask to have one removed from my matches. That's not fair---he's just trying to do his job the best way that he can, etc. And Andy echoed the sentiment. 2)The "shorts" incident happened in February. You mean to tell me that Rafa, a grown man, is still in a lather about an incident several months ago? Seriously? And the ATP/whomever is acceding to his wishes? YES then, as someone said, the system is broken, Rafa is being unfairly catered to, and it only compounds the lack of enforcement about his slowness, unfairly disadvantaging his opponents. Although so far, it obviously hasn't helped his results any this year.