US Open [Men] - Grand Slam

[calitennis127]

I put that poster on my Ignoring list, he makes NO sense even front242, is better so I dont have see hes trash, its great a high IQ tennis lover like yourself can easy debunk him and the trash he posts keep up the great posts.

Did you enjoy the 2019 Australian Open final?

 

[kskate2]

I know people are conflicted about what happened to Novak. They can't make concessions because he's the top seed. Other players already feel there is favoritism and more latitude shown toward the top ranked guys. If they gave him a pass for this incident, it would be anarchy. Competing at a slam is stressful enough, add the fact you are chasing history. In these situations you can't give the refs any ammunition.

 

[Moxie]

One thing I don't understand is how many times the commentators kept saying, "he didn't mean to hit her." It is almost never the case that the player meant to hit a specific person or anyone at all. Renae Stubbs is right...as soon as you hit a ball in anger on a tennis court and you hit a person.

It doesn't matter the intentions. He knows what can be the cost of ball slamming. 2 minutes before he slams the ball hard after Busta dropsho and that he hit the line judge. He should slam the racket instead of the ball, that's it. Very stupid way to go out of the tournament.

Exactly...it doesn't matter the intention. A lot of the commentators were saying, during the debating on court, that he didn't mean to hit the woman. Of course he didn't! The matter is not the intention but the result. As Renae Stubbs rightly said, "if you strike a ball in anger on court and you hit someone, it's an automatic default." And he hurt her. There was no option for the tournament director, even though it's hard to put out the top player.

 

[tented]

A screenshot from my TV of the USTA’s statement:

 

[Moxie]

Am I out of line saying that the reaction of the lineswoman was out of proportion to the pace he hit the ball? Looked underarm to me

He hit her in the trachea...did you see how badly she was hurt? I was on the phone and watching on mute, and I actually thought she'd had some kind of seizure or attack. I didn't even know what had happened. It seemed an honest reaction, and she was gasping. The ball didn't seem to be struck hard, but if a pro tennis player hits a ball in any version of anger and it catches you in the neck, that's gonna hurt. Even still, it's not much of a fine-point, do you think? She was clearly in distress.

 

[kskate2]

One thing I don't understand is how many times the commentators kept saying, "he didn't mean to hit her." It is almost never the case that the player meant to hit a specific person or anyone at all. Renae Stubbs is right...as soon as you hit a ball in anger on a tennis court and you hit a person.

Exactly...it doesn't matter the intention. A lot of the commentators were saying, during the debating on court, that he didn't mean to hit the woman. Of course he didn't! The matter is not the intention but the result. As Renae Stubbs rightly said, "if you strike a ball in anger on court and you hit someone, it's an automatic default." And he hurt her. There was no option for the tournament director, even though it's hard to put out the top player.

They're commentators. It's their job to talk even when they're being stupid. Of course he didn't mean to hit her. But he did. He has to take responsibility for his actions no matter the intent.

 

[tented]

Exactly...it doesn't matter the intention. A lot of the commentators were saying, during the debating on court, that he didn't mean to hit the woman. Of course he didn't! The matter is not the intention but the result. As Renae Stubbs rightly said, "if you strike a ball in anger on court and you hit someone, it's an automatic default." And he hurt her. There was no option for the tournament director, even though it's hard to put out the top player.

Agreed. I don’t even think Nalbandian had malicious intent when he kicked that box and caused the line judge’s leg to bleed. It was stupid to get that emotionally out of control, but he did not intend to hurt that guy, however the default was correct.

 

[Jelenafan]

Agreed. I don’t even think Nalbandian had malicious intent when he kicked that box and caused the line judge’s leg to bleed. It was stupid to get that emotionally out of control, but he did not intend to hurt that guy, however the default was correct.

You had to say Nalbandian, didn't you?

 

[Moxie]

They're commentators. It's their job to talk even when they're being stupid. Of course he didn't mean to hit her. But he did. He has to take responsibility for his actions no matter the intent.

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that they were defending him. I wrote a longer version of that post earlier, and didn't manage to get it up before I lost it. I agree that they have to debate and explore all sides. But the point to this thread, and overall, is that "intent" isn't part of the offense.

 

[Nadalfan2013]

One thing is for sure the Novak incident is up there with the drama of the Serena versus Osaka final a couple of years ago. Everyone even outside of tennis will talk about it.

 

[kskate2]

So how much time will pass before Fiero shows up?

 

[Nadalfan2013]

And there you have it:

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

Does he lose his 180 points from last year?

Sorry for the late reply,I have been watching women match

Novak will keep his points between 2019 and 2020.so he keeps his 2019 Rd 4 points/

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

And there you have it:

He has a point lol!

 

[calitennis127]

They're commentators. It's their job to talk even when they're being stupid. Of course he didn't mean to hit her. But he did. He has to take responsibility for his actions no matter the intent.

I think you’re setting up a straw man. It’s not just that Djokovic did not try to hit her. It’s that he wasn’t even in a state of rage. He was just a bit annoyed and flicked the ball. If you think that is worth banning someone from a tournament entirely, then you are only proving the stereotype that it mostly pussies who like tennis.

Have you ever watched the NBA? I have on a regular basis, with basketball being my favorite sport, and I have seen far worse on repeated occasions.

I think in this situation you could fine the player and give the opponent a game. You don’t have to ban them from the tournament entirely. (And what Nalbandian did was far worse; there is no comparison there.)

 

[Moxie]

Yes, so Bonaca does have a point. There was a subjective element here. And I don’t think it met the standard of “egregious” since he was not even looking at the person. But, by the same token, Djokovic has played with fire many times and been lucky not to hit anyone.

It's not that subjective, though. He injured that woman. "Intent" is not part of the standard. You mentioned above that maybe they should take into account a history of behavior, and in that, as you even say, Novak is already on the line there. But you know what was done to Nalbandian at Queens, even though there was no bad intention. And Shapovalov in DC. What Nalbandian did to make that person's shin bleed was probably less dangerous than hitting the woman today in the neck. The rules are pretty clear...use your body, racquet or a ball to hurt someone, intentionally or not, and if it is done in anger, you're out.

 

[calitennis127]

He has a point lol!

No he doesn’t. I like Kyrgios but that is downright stupid of him to say. He has a history that Djokovic does not.

 

[Andy22]

D.thiem is going to win the us open now

 

[MargaretMcAleer]

No he doesn’t. I like Kyrgios but that is downright stupid of him to say. He has a history that Djokovic does not.

Lighten up I was joking.

 

[AnonymousFan]

Time for the moustache vs. Coric for their first QF