French Open 2015 - Day 5 and 6

First topic message reminder :

Day 6 - Friday 29 May 2015

Philippe-Chatrier Court - 11:00 AM

Women's Singles - Round 3

Alize Cornet (FRA) [29] vs. Mirjana Lucic-Baroni (CRO)

Men's Singles - Round 3

Damir Dzumhur (BIH) vs. Roger Federer (SUI) [2]

Women's Singles - Round 3

Samantha Stosur (AUS) [26] vs. Maria Sharapova (RUS) [2]

Men's Singles - Round 3

Jo-Wilfried Tsonga (FRA) [14] vs. Pablo Andujar (ESP)

Suzanne-Lenglen Court 11:00 AM

Women's Singles - Round 3

Ana Ivanovic (SRB) [7] vs. Donna Vekic (CRO)

Not Before: 12:00 PM
Men's Singles - Round 2

Richard Gasquet (FRA) [20] vs Carlos Berlocq (ARG) To Finish 3-6 6-3 6-1 4-6

Men's Singles - Round 3

Nicolas Mahut (FRA) vs.Gilles Simon (FRA) [12]

Men's Singles - Round 3

Gael Monfils (FRA) [13] vs Pablo Cuevas (URU) [21]

Women's Singles - Round 3

Carla Suarez Navarro (ESP) [8] vs. Flavia Pennetta (ITA) [28]

Court 1 11:00 AM

Men's Doubles - Round 2

Bob Bryan (USA) [1]
Mike Bryan (USA) [1]
vs.

Thanasi Kokkinakis (AUS)
Lucas Pouille (FRA)

Women's Singles - Round 3

Lucie Safarova (CZE) [13] vs. Sabine Lisicki (GER) [20]

Men's Singles - Round 3

Stan Wawrinka (SUI) [8] vs. Steve Johnson (USA)

Men's Singles - Round 3

Benoit Paire (FRA) vs. Tomas Berdych (CZE) [4]

Court 2 11:00 AM

Men's Singles - Round 3

Lukas Rosol (CZE) vs. Teymuraz Gabashvili (RUS)

Not Before: 12:30 PM

Women's Singles - Round 3

Elena Vesnina (RUS) vs. Ekaterina Makarova (RUS) [9]

Women's Singles - Round 3

Garbine Muguruza (ESP) [21] vs. Angelique Kerber (GER) [11]

Mixed Doubles - Round 1

Alize Cornet (FRA)
Eric Butorac (USA)

vs.

Caroline Garcia (FRA) [5]
Bob Bryan (USA) [5]

Read more at http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/schedule/index.html#GjkQzAtVTCyFOWHd.99


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Day 5 - Thursday - Paris Time 11am

Court Philippe-Chatrier

Women's Singles - Round 2

Julia Goerges (GER) vs. Caroline Wozniacki (DEN) [5]

Men's Singles - Round 2

Nicolas Almagro (ESP) vs. Rafael Nadal (ESP) [6]

Men's Singles - Round 2

Andy Murray (GBR) [3] vs. Joao Sousa (POR)

Women's Singles - Round 2

Danka Kovinic (MNE) vs. Kristina Mladenovic (FRA)

Court Suzanne-Lenglen

Women's Singles - Round 2

Petra Kvitova (CZE) [4] vs. Silvia Soler-Espinosa (ESP)

Women's Singles - Round 2

Serena Williams (USA) [1] vs. Anna-Lena Friedsam (GER)

Men's Singles - Round 2

Novak Djokovic (SRB) [1] vs. Gilles Muller (LUX)

Men's Singles - Round 2

Richard Gasquet (FRA) [20] vs. Carlos Berlocq (ARG)

Read more at http://www.rolandgarros.com/en_FR/scores/schedule/schedule10.html#98LB7tf3RrrTsRUb.99

Relieved that Murray was able to rise above the TV disturbances to win his match like a big boy. Well-done. 

Does that men if you wait for the crowd to stop being rowdy, youre going to get called a tv?

Yeah!

Anyway, nobody can say Murray is getting preferential treatment.

I'm sure Andy will roll with it and not make a fuss, it's in everyone's best interests that they make the rules work.

Coric just has one of those faces you want to punch.

temporary21 wrote:Does that men if you wait for the crowd to stop being rowdy, youre going to get called a tv?

No, because I'm sure the Umpire will be telling them to be quiet.

French crowds dont respond well to that, what if that takes too long and they try to steady themselves?

Well the Ump does tell them to settle, even though they're French. I've never seen a player encouraged to play through noise.

Pascal and Andy won't lose any sleep over it anyway. You live you learn. Andy didn't get shirty over his 2 TVs and that shows respect. I am sure in the past his reaction might have been different

temporary21 wrote:French crowds dont respond well to that, what if that takes too long and they try to steady themselves?

Taser the crowd!

This is hilarious. How dare they give Murray a time violation. It was windy, the crowd was moving, it wasn't a good time, other players didn't get one and they were slower... dam it Rafa didn't even get one. I can't wait to read all the indignant press reports about it. What did the commentators say? I bet they were furious?

I wonder if a few more players had to play within the rules and didn't make a mockery of them if this rule would still be popular  

I think you're somewhat isolated on this one hawkeye.

Murray hasn't made a fuss and Murray fans on here are philosophical.

If I were you I'd drop it; he's shown the way for mature professionals to handle it.

Your complaining about the press doing a HE?

The commentators basically said what many have said here and Petchey was spot on when he said the rule hadn't quickened play.

Least Murray's shorts were on the right way round

How's the gasquet match going?

1-1 in sets last time I saw, though that was an hour ago

Where's Jahu and his manjuice flow???

Comeback Jahu I need to be entertained!!

temporary21 wrote:How's the gasquet match going?

Gasquet leading 2 sets to one but trailing 5-4 in the 4th. Likely to finish tomorrow. Gasquet getting angry at the ref as well. Tense game.

2 sets all now. Game will resume tomorrow.

Can't stand the antics of Berlocq, the crowd are very annoying too, what is there to like in this tournament so far? My ears have died

Berlocq has basically one weapon which is the BHDL. He's barely made any impact with it crosscourt all match, yet Gasquet still wasn't covering the shot after four sets of tennis. What that says about Gasquet's tennis brain (or lack thereof) I'll leave to the rest of you...

As usual Gasquet ended playing 5 metres behind the baseline. Doesnt help either.

If Djokovic ever loses a point in a more bizarre way than this, I'll be amazed:

https://twitter.com/rolandgarros/status/603957395472064513

HM Murdoch wrote:If Djokovic ever loses a point in a more bizarre way than this, I'll be amazed:

https://twitter.com/rolandgarros/status/603957395472064513

Ooops!

Oh dear

Yeah i saw that one, no cost to him in the end. Did anyon see his MTO

Give us a smile Novak!

hawkeye wrote: This is hilarious. How dare they give Murray a time violation. It was windy, the crowd was moving, it wasn't a good time, other players didn't get one and they were slower... dam it Rafa didn't even get one. I can't wait to read all the indignant press reports about it. What did the commentators say? I bet they were furious?

I wonder if a few more players had to play within the rules and didn't make a mockery of them if this rule would still be popular  

I'm really disappointed HE. I was convinced that you'd bring your campaigning zeal to bear on this shocking injustice. This could have been an historic moment where Andy and Rafa fans (and all other right-thinking people!!!) united in their mutual hatred and disgust at the evil, and very possibly satanic, forces that have taken root at the heart of this sport we all love. We could have gathered in Hyde Park, held hands, sung songs, marched on ATP HQ. We could have rattled some cages, perhaps even rattled some sabres, and shaken the crooked tennis technocrats to their very core. Oh well, a missed opportunity, I guess.....

Roland Garros 2015: Day 5.

An historic day.

The day the Nadal tv victimisation theory fell apart, the day almost all leading players voiced their solidarity with the Umpires, and the day the sport embraced the radical concept of following the rules. And of wearing your shorts the right way round.

And so on to day 6; where Roger is playing a miniature Bosnian (never heard of him, how's he got to #87?) and the charismatic #4 seed is once again on a court with a number.

Lots of French guys playing too and at least some are going out.

Berdych not on a show court???

The response to Murray getting a time violation is rather different to when the player who this rule is targeted gets one.

The umpires and players at the French Open are locked in a weird waltz – slow-slow, quick-quick slow – over the exasperating issue of time violations for tardy serving, and Andy Murray found himself at the centre of the debate on day five.

Twice on Thursday the French chair umpire Pascal Maria warned him for not serving within the prescribed 20 seconds during his win over João Sousa – once when wind gusted to interrupt him, later when Murray paused because he was distracted by replayed highlights on the big screen.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/may/28/andy-murray-time-violations-french-open-win

What a mess tennis has got itself in over the time violation rule.

Thursday’s events were particularly baffling, as Rafael Nadal – the slowest player on the men’s tour – got away with multiple breaches while Andy Murray was penalised twice in his match against Joao Sousa and ended up being docked a first serve.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/frenchopen/11636845/French-Open-2015-Andy-Murray-sets-up-third-round-clash-with-Nick-Kyrgios-after-feisty-win-over-Joao-Sousa.html

Monsieur Maria issued the World No 3 with two separate time violation warnings in the course of this second round match, much like Carlos Bernardes had done to so enrage serial offender Nadal during his Rio semi-final in February. If anything Murray had even more reason to feel slighted. Not only is he one of the quicker players on the tour, but the second had occurred while he was waiting for the big screen replay of the previous point to finish.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/tennis/andy-murray-marches-on-despite-time-violation-trouble.127454808

It's actually all worked rather well for Murray. He doesn't have to protest himself in fact he can sit back and let the media do it for him. I would like to think that if the media have any criticisms about how this rule is used it won't just apply to one player. I'm not sure how Murray surviving a couple of well placed tv's indicates that the rule is being used fairly.

Interesting scoreline of Nadal vs Almagro, looked like a good win. All the top players cruising through. Federer's next opponent I've never even heard of. No shocks at all so far. Honestly not sure who is the highest men's seed to go out, I would have to look it up...

Murray getting a TV is different to Nadal getting one??

heard it all now.

hawkeye wrote:I'm not sure how Murray surviving a couple of well placed tv's indicates that the rule is being used fairly.

It doesn't show that. What it shows, along with a whole lot of other evidence, is that the rule is not targeted at one player. So at least we can put that crazy idea to bed, given the weight of evidence against it.

It looks to me like the sport is unanimous in supporting the umpires here. Even the media seems to acknowledge the need for change.

Well, almost unanimous.

Anyway - best move on to Day 6 on this thread. Any further tv discussion can head to the sticky.

Indeed.

Feel sorry for Berdman. Who the heck wants to see Simon/Mahut?!?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:I'm not sure how Murray surviving a couple of well placed tv's indicates that the rule is being used fairly.

It doesn't show that. What it shows, along with a whole lot of other evidence, is that the rule is not targeted at one player. So at least we can put that crazy idea to bed, given the weight of evidence against it.

I don't agree. Other players have got tv's in the past and will continue to do so. The response from the media is very different depending on who gets them. Why the concern for some players being disrupted and not for others? Why does the media talk about Nadal when another player has received a tv?

I agreed with this from the Simon Briggs article

There were strong comments from the pundits on ITV4’s French Open coverage. Mark Petchey referred to the time violation rule as “ludicrous, a bit of a joke”, while Jim Courier said it “doesn’t really speed the game up. And the second problem that we have is it isn’t implemented equally among the tours. When you come to these more physically demanding matches, no human can be ready in 20 seconds”.

But these concerns affect all players. I think it's great that these issues are being discussed and if Murray getting a tv makes people call for equal treatment then it's all for the good. But why no concern about equal treatment when Nadal had 8 matches affected by tv's on crucial points. If the media only makes a fuss when their home favorite gets penalized that is not equal treatment. So what happens now? There is still a rule in place that an Umpire can use if they want to deprive a player of a first serve on a crucial point if they so desire. Or if they are feeling understanding they can just ignore. There is no transparency.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Indeed.

Feel sorry for Berdman. Who the heck wants to see Simon/Mahut?!?

Let's wait for Wimbledon when Edmund v Bedene gets put on centre and (say) Ferrer is bumped... Home nation favouritism is within the remit of the organising committee.

Excellent stuff hawkeye, above & beyond the call of duty.

I only saw about less than half of the first set today but sounds like it Sousa played well and flustered Murray at times. Stats suggest Murray's serve was not great today so things for him to improve on. As for time violations well it does dismiss talk it is all geared to one player but Nishikori did escape the other day so consistency is needed so that it catches everyone. Anyway at least Murray didn't implode which may have happened a few years ago. On the playing front Andy will have to go up a level V Kyrgios.

MTO's? I suppose no ones bothered by them anymore

Agree with hawkeye. Other players do get TVs but only Rafa got mentioned. And yes, Rafa gets his TVs at BPs faced many times, as if they're deliberate.

Having said that, Rafa really ought to speed up, he's way too slow, just goes out there and serves without the need to think too much; he's good enough to know where to place his serves even when he's in autopilot mode.

Kokkinakis, Coric, Kyrgios still in - not too bad.

In round 3 we will start seeing some trickier match ups for the seeds. Kyrgios could cause trouble to Andy if Andy is not careful. Kyrgios can look like a lo0se cannon at times, but he is a big game clutch player. If Andy lets him get into the match, he could be in for a tough fight.

hawkeye wrote:The response to Murray getting a time violation is rather different to when the player who this rule is targeted gets one.

The umpires and players at the French Open are locked in a weird waltz – slow-slow, quick-quick slow – over the exasperating issue of time violations for tardy serving, and Andy Murray found himself at the centre of the debate on day five.

Twice on Thursday the French chair umpire Pascal Maria warned him for not serving within the prescribed 20 seconds during his win over João Sousa – once when wind gusted to interrupt him, later when Murray paused because he was distracted by replayed highlights on the big screen.

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2015/may/28/andy-murray-time-violations-french-open-win

What a mess tennis has got itself in over the time violation rule.

Thursday’s events were particularly baffling, as Rafael Nadal – the slowest player on the men’s tour – got away with multiple breaches while Andy Murray was penalised twice in his match against Joao Sousa and ended up being docked a first serve.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/frenchopen/11636845/French-Open-2015-Andy-Murray-sets-up-third-round-clash-with-Nick-Kyrgios-after-feisty-win-over-Joao-Sousa.html

Monsieur Maria issued the World No 3 with two separate time violation warnings in the course of this second round match, much like Carlos Bernardes had done to so enrage serial offender Nadal during his Rio semi-final in February. If anything Murray had even more reason to feel slighted. Not only is he one of the quicker players on the tour, but the second had occurred while he was waiting for the big screen replay of the previous point to finish.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/tennis/andy-murray-marches-on-despite-time-violation-trouble.127454808

It's actually all worked rather well for Murray. He doesn't have to protest himself in fact he can sit back and let the media do it for him. I would like to think that if the media have any criticisms about how this rule is used it won't just apply to one player. I'm not sure how Murray surviving a couple of well placed tv's indicates that the rule is being used fairly.

Tennis is fine. This post is a mess, as it makes zero sense still positing Nadal the only target given yesterday's evidence having completely overturning it. 

Give it up, HE, people know who the real culprit is  - the one who steps on his own feet but rather than accounting for his own missteps/failures, he blames others. It's always somebody's else's fault but his. of course, this way Nadal gets the most attention because he doesn't act like a champ with multi slams. I promise you, when he stops throwing tantrums and threat the RULES OF THE GAME and those assigned to enforce them with respect, demonstrating himself as a mature tennis professional, the press et al will return the favour.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:I'm not sure how Murray surviving a couple of well placed tv's indicates that the rule is being used fairly.

It doesn't show that. What it shows, along with a whole lot of other evidence, is that the rule is not targeted at one player. So at least we can put that crazy idea to bed, given the weight of evidence against it.

Unfortunately HE still insisting Nadal being targeted. You can take the horse to the pond but not make it drink the water. 

I request permission to post 2 replies to TV issues here. Will go to the sticky from now.

I understand the mix up but those are hawkeye posts, not HN.

Matchpoint wrote:
Tennis is fine. This post is a mess, as it makes zero sense still positing Nadal the only target given yesterday's evidence having completely overturning it. 

Give it up, HN, people know who the real culprit is  - the one who steps on his own feet but rather than accounting for his own missteps/failures, he blames others. It's always somebody's else's fault but his. of course, this way Nadal gets the most attention because he doesn't act like a champ with multi slams. I promise you, when he stops throwing tantrums and threat the RULES OF THE GAME and those assigned to enforce them with respect, demonstrating himself as a mature tennis professional, the press et al will return the favour.

Why do you say that Nadal is the "real culprit" if Murray getting a tv has proved that he isn't? I would say that Nadal gets the most attention because he IS a champ. I still don't know why he has been targeted multiple times with tv's at crucial times in matches. When another player gets one it's treated in an entirely different way. Excuses are made and it is made out that the rule is the problem and not the player. Murray's complaints to the press were backed up. ie he was watching the tv screen, he didn't know long he had taken and at the same time the press managed to have a little swipe at the real target. It stinks.

hawkeye wrote:

Matchpoint wrote:
Tennis is fine. This post is a mess, as it makes zero sense still positing Nadal the only target given yesterday's evidence having completely overturning it. 

Give it up, HN, people know who the real culprit is  - the one who steps on his own feet but rather than accounting for his own missteps/failures, he blames others. It's always somebody's else's fault but his. of course, this way Nadal gets the most attention because he doesn't act like a champ with multi slams. I promise you, when he stops throwing tantrums and threat the RULES OF THE GAME and those assigned to enforce them with respect, demonstrating himself as a mature tennis professional, the press et al will return the favour.

Why do you say that Nadal is the "real culprit" if Murray getting a tv has proved that he isn't? I would say that Nadal gets the most attention because he IS a champ. I still don't know why he has been targeted multiple times with tv's at crucial times in matches. When another player gets one it's treated in an entirely different way. Excuses are made and it is made out that the rule is the problem and not the player. Murray's complaints to the press were backed up. ie he was watching the tv screen, he didn't know long he had taken and at the same time the press managed to have a little swipe at the real target. It stinks.

Murray didn't complain!!! He just stated what he told the umpire.

At least try to state what actually happened than try and fictionalise the events.

hawkeye wrote:

Matchpoint wrote:
Tennis is fine. This post is a mess, as it makes zero sense still positing Nadal the only target given yesterday's evidence having completely overturning it. 

Give it up, HN, people know who the real culprit is  - the one who steps on his own feet but rather than accounting for his own missteps/failures, he blames others. It's always somebody's else's fault but his. of course, this way Nadal gets the most attention because he doesn't act like a champ with multi slams. I promise you, when he stops throwing tantrums and threat the RULES OF THE GAME and those assigned to enforce them with respect, demonstrating himself as a mature tennis professional, the press et al will return the favour.

Why do you say that Nadal is the "real culprit" if Murray getting a tv has proved that he isn't? I would say that Nadal gets the most attention because he IS a champ. I still don't know why he has been targeted multiple times with tv's at crucial times in matches. When another player gets one it's treated in an entirely different way. Excuses are made and it is made out that the rule is the problem and not the player. Murray's complaints to the press were backed up. ie he was watching the tv screen, he didn't know long he had taken and at the same time the press managed to have a little swipe at the real target. It stinks.

Well I've read the articles you have linked and feel that to say he was complaining to the press would seem a bit of a skewed opinion. The press obviously asked him about the violations and he gave what seems to me to be balanced answers. These indicated that he knows that he can play too slowly especially when under pressure at crucial stages of matches. He supports the rule although he feels that the way it is implemented leaves a lot of grey areas. He obviously thinks a shot clock would be beneficial. On yesterdays TV's he gave a reason for why felt the second one happened. That was what he discussed with the umpire at the time. The umpire didn't think his point was valid and gave the loss of serve. It was accepted and he got on with the match. So no real drama.

bogbrush wrote:I understand the mix up but those are hawkeye posts, not HN.

OOps, my bad, corrected. Apologies to HN and HE and thanks to BB 

Oh wait, I thought they're one and the same poster, in spirit anyway!