A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
I agree with Djokovic and Evert that the ump could/should have used more restraint. But also agree with Navritilova and Carillo that Williams could have nipped this in the bud instead of lashing out.
Anybody watching Serena go off?!
- Thread starter Custerdome
- Start date
I agree with Djokovic and Evert that the ump could/should have used more restraint. But also agree with Navritilova and Carillo that Williams could have nipped this in the bud instead of lashing out.
It's not foolish. If the racket abuse (which is an independent incident) hadn't occurred, there would have been no impact on the match. If anything, the warning should have made her LESS likely to smash her racket, because she knew that would be a point penalty.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Right. I think Serena smashed her racket thinking it would be a warning, since she assumed from her earlier conversation with Ramos that he agreed with her that she wasn't cheating as far as the coaching went. When he did that, I think she thought the warning was rescinded, and thus the racket smash (she was thinking it was fine since it would only be a warning). That's where everything went off the rails.
Without the first call (the warning), the second (racket abouse) wouldn't have been a penalty point. To say it had no direct impact makes no sense.
You say "right" that the statement isn't foolish, then the rest of your paragraph talks about how the first call made the second a penalty and not a warning, exactly the direct impact that the first call caused.
Assuming I didn't miss the sarcasm, if that was your intent.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
No, sorry - I agree with you. The coaching penalty is important because if it's not called, Serena gets away with a smashed racket and a warning (and that's probably that). My point was that she was confused about whether or not she was given a warning for the coaching since her subsequent discussion with Ramos sort of suggested he agreed that she wasn't cheating. I believe here she thinks the coaching warning has been removed, and she has a 'free' outburst in the bag. See below:
During the next changeover, Williams and Ramos had a civil conversation. Calling him, “umpire,” Williams explained to Ramos that she understood why he may have thought Mouratoglou was coaching, but she stressed that she never did that.
Williams, with more championships than any other player in the Open era, has often said she dislikes in-match coaching, even the legal variety on the WTA Tour, and it would be in her interest to do so. She has more experience and more understanding of the game than virtually all of her opponents. Coaching would only level the playing field.
Williams calmly said again that she did not cheat, and Ramos said, “I know that.”
It was the final moment of calm, and Williams said, “O.K., thank you so much.”
No, I'm not proposing that M and F compete against each other in tennis, I'm just noting that the fact that F don't compete against M is what allows F to make money doing it. Serena is a great in terms of F players but not in terms of all players. That's just reality.
BTW, Bobby Riggs was in his mid-50s when those matches occurred and he went 1-1 against two of the top women players in the world so that kinda illustrates my point.
I have nothing but respect for Serena in terms of her athleticism, what she's done for her sport, the money she makes, and advancing the causes for both women and african americans.
But she has developed a certain sense of hubris. This is completely understandable. You are young, make millions, have been coddled most of your life and are insulated from the "great unwashed" of the real world. This isn't much different than James or Gronk or A-rod. Eventually, they feel that they can get away with anything. At some point, they are not as good as they once were and struggle with that lack of relevance.
IMHO, this is where Serena is. She has been awesome and is still very, very good. But she is no longer dominant. So, a young Japanese gal is taking her to the woodshed and she lashes out at someone else because a) it can't be her and b) she can't beat her opponent. Who is left? The official. So the official gives her a very minor reprimand and in her hubris, entitlement and anger about being beaten, she can't let it go. So she, and the umpire, escalate until we have that ugly situation. Now, the problem is, all of her handlers will externalize it. No, Serena, its on you. And the sooner you make adjustments to your lifestyle and attitude, the better off you'll be. The good news its not like she was texting her stuff to someone (Favre) or hanging with the hooker class (Woods) or shooting up drugs in her bathroom (name one of 20 entertainment stars dead from OD's in the last 12 months).
Oh her money; God bless her, made as much as you can. On her race and gender; you've done so much, God bless you. But you can go one of two ways now, don't screw up your legacy like Tiger did.
But she has developed a certain sense of hubris. This is completely understandable. You are young, make millions, have been coddled most of your life and are insulated from the "great unwashed" of the real world. This isn't much different than James or Gronk or A-rod. Eventually, they feel that they can get away with anything. At some point, they are not as good as they once were and struggle with that lack of relevance.
IMHO, this is where Serena is. She has been awesome and is still very, very good. But she is no longer dominant. So, a young Japanese gal is taking her to the woodshed and she lashes out at someone else because a) it can't be her and b) she can't beat her opponent. Who is left? The official. So the official gives her a very minor reprimand and in her hubris, entitlement and anger about being beaten, she can't let it go. So she, and the umpire, escalate until we have that ugly situation. Now, the problem is, all of her handlers will externalize it. No, Serena, its on you. And the sooner you make adjustments to your lifestyle and attitude, the better off you'll be. The good news its not like she was texting her stuff to someone (Favre) or hanging with the hooker class (Woods) or shooting up drugs in her bathroom (name one of 20 entertainment stars dead from OD's in the last 12 months).
Oh her money; God bless her, made as much as you can. On her race and gender; you've done so much, God bless you. But you can go one of two ways now, don't screw up your legacy like Tiger did.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
I’d note she grew up practicing tennis with her sister and father on public courts in Compton. Not quite the Bollettieri Academy.
I understand. But she played her first pro tournament at age 15, almost a year after she tried to play at age 14 but the WTA turned her down and she filed a lawsuit (which she later dropped, many say that the settlement was that the WTA let her play at age 15). Having a 14 year old, I can tell you that they have no idea of the world and their viewpoints are not completed. As such, I think her awareness has been someone that has been warped by her life experiences. And, just to be clear, I don't blame her. Her reality is being a star tennis player and her values have been shaped by that. Just as all of our realities are based upon our prior experiences.
Her achievements are certainly well learned but your stats above indicate Less competition at the very top Imo
Oh now I would equate women's tennis with children's tennis is that what you're doing? Course you're not and everyone of a certain age certainly remembers righsagainst King at riiggs against court
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Floyd Mayweather would never step in the ring with a heavyweight, yet people pay a lot of $ to see him box...
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Jeez for the last time. The point is not that she could have (should have) moved on. The point is that Ramos would not have (shown by his own history) given a game misconduct to a male player in similar circumstances. Personally, I don't think he would have given a game misconduct to any other woman either. I keep pointing out that the only coaching violations he has given out in a grand slam final has been to Serena and Venus.
You're welcome to focus on the points and issues you want to. And I appreciate the fact that it's the last time.
I think your statements suffer from two different statistical biases.
1) You said "he point is that Ramos would not have (shown by his own history) given a game misconduct to a male player in similar circumstances."
How many game misconducts have been given in grand slam finals in the last decade? I'm guessing it's very, very few (if any). My opinion (having played and followed tennis all of my life), is that when a player in a final gets their first conduct violation (warning), unless they are completely unhinged, they are on their best behavior for the rest of the match. Furthermore, there are only 8 grand slam finals (4 men, 4 women; I guess there are more if you count doubles, but no one except me cares about doubles). How many of those has Ramos officiated? Even if he has officiated more than his share of those matches in his career, he's maybe done 10? That's hardly a statistically significant sample size.
2) You also wrote "I keep pointing out that the only coaching violations he has given out in a grand slam final has been to Serena and Venus" So what? He's given out coaching violations to others in other situations. Officiating shouldn't be any different in a GS final. But getting back to statistics, how many GS slams have involved at least one of the Williams sisters over the past 10 years? Right there that biases your analysis and you would EXPECT to have more violations for those who are "sampled" more frequently.
Here is a record of many ticky tack code violations called against prominent male players by Ramos. http://larrybrownsports.com/tennis/...istory-code-violations-serena-williams/463180
Williams is a whimp and a poor competitor. Imagine Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Rafael Nadal or Roger Federer after the original call. At worst, they would have briefly made their argument and then gone on and competed and tried to win the match. Williams threw a snit-fit worthy of a 12-year-old.
Also, she was playing a fake victim. Calling a rule violation is not accusing someone of cheating. For instance, it is a 2-shot penalty in golf to remove a loose impediment from a sand trap even if it doesn't improve your lie and is 20 feet away from your ball. If a golf official were to make the call, there is zero inference of cheating. Since apparently everyone is coached, Williams got no competitive advantage from the coaching she received, and it was obvious the umpire was calling a rule violation that he didn't view as cheating.
Also, of course, Williams in saying that she never cheated (wrongly in my mind equating a rule violation with cheating) lied about what she said was cheating. Her own coach admitted that he was coaching and said everyone did it all of the time. Meaning of course, that Williams has received coaching for a long time and was lying about it during her snit-fit with the umpire.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Right. But dailybuck said she was lying about cheating, and she wasn't, and even got verbal confirmation from Ramos of the same. Her coach still coaching is a violation.
Which was my point. Rule violations are quite often technical and don't involve cheating or an unfair competitive advantage. She created a straw-person fake argument about cheating to support her childish snit fit.
From her own fake point of view (transforming a rule violation call into a cheating call) she was lying about cheating. I don't think she was cheating, but she said coaching was cheating, which I don't agree with. She was being coached and knew it.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Him coaching and her cheating are two separate things. In her mind, getting the violation for coaching implied cheating, which isn't necessarily the case.
So you think she had no idea that her coach was giving her signals?
If that's the case, and she is as anti-cheating as she says she is, she needs to fire her coach immediately.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
I don't have a good reason to believe she's lying about cheating; no idea if she knew he was signaling her or not. She says she doesn't accept coaching during matches. So, agree - fire him if he doesn't know better.
I think she smashed it not thinking. If she smashed it, consciously thinking it would be a freebie, well then that really would be infantile, poor sportsmanship, and probably intended as a mind **** with her opponent.
I blame nike for enabled athletes. Think woods, Jordan, armstrong, etc. I suspect if you dig deep enough you’d find a whole network of dealers pimps lawyers guns and money in their employ.
When you've played tennis for as many years as she has, you are able to control yourself better than that.
I've smashed rackets while playing. I don't do it anymore, but there are certainly times that I want to, but I can restrain myself. And that is for meaningless USTA league matches with no chair umpires, not the US Open.
It is agreed that everyone receives coaching and that the rule is very rarely enforced. If her coach was coaching (do you think he would do it, if she didn't want him to and wasn't accepting the coaching), she knew he was coaching and was lying about it during her childish snit.
Midnighter: Don't inconvenience Buck with actual facts when he's got a political point to make here. Jeebus.
This coming from a lawyer who doesn't know that judgement is spelled two ways.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
McEnroe couldn’t resist - even late in his career. Of course, he played better when he got pissed. Williams doesn’t.
She acted like a spoiled brat and then played the woman card. How about respecting her opponent who was a woman also, but behaved impeccably? Serena knew she would lose and wanted something to blame it on rather than her own play.
Similar threads
