Wimbledon Day 6 - Young Winston (Kerber Enthusiasm)

First topic message reminder :

Order of play

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/22713811

Rule bending has been going on since the dawn of time! I don’t believe it can be ‘solved’ as such which is why people should just accept it and move on

:picard:double sigh.

Please do not indulge or patronise me LK

Post this pearl of wisdom on the Time Violation Sticky thread


But then it does not apply to some players  does it??  well not on this forum at any rate

Im not going on the same old merry go round LK
its a hiding to nothing

I beg of you, not on middle Monday! Lk I imagine is on the same page as me, doesnt really care if any rule is being bent a little, accepts thats part of the professional game

Don't beg it doesn't suit you..
Try telling it to the umpires

Yes I have noticed that interest in bending the rules seems to depend a fair bit on who breaks it, and not the rule itself.As for Lk him/herself though I dont know what their opinion is in general

temporary21 wrote:Yes I have noticed that interest in bending the rules seems to depend a fair bit on who breaks it, and not the rule itself.As for Lk him/herself though I dont know what their opinion is in general

As I said a few posts ago the duplicity on this forum beggars belief.
I only know, leaving a certain player out of my argument, that there have been players, not least of all Novak who have taken a great deal of stick for MTO, rule or no rule, its cheating  if it is being used to simply gain advantage..and if certain rules that are broken can be seen as cheating i.e. coaching on court. what the hell is the difference... BUT ENOUGH..I say no more.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

temporary21 wrote:Yes I have noticed that interest in bending the rules seems to depend a fair bit on who breaks it, and not the rule itself.As for Lk him/herself though I dont know what their opinion is in general

As I said a few posts ago the duplicity on this forum beggars belief.
I only know, leaving a certain player out of my argument, that there have been players, not least of all Novak who have taken a great deal of stick for MTO, rule or no rule, its cheating  if it is being used to simply gain advantage..and if certain rules that are broken can be seen as cheating i.e. coaching on court. what the hell is the difference... BUT ENOUGH..I say no more.

So it seems you say there was naff all wrong with Murray's shoulder. So that being the case why was the physio vigorously manipulating the shoulder. Even the commentators remarked at the time at how painful the treatment looked.

Can't believe they said that was painful, that was standard chiropractor manipulation, most relaxing thing you can have (esp the bit where he popped his spine, that sounds like Hell and feel great).

So it seems you say there was naff all wrong with Murray's shoulder. So that being the case why was the physio vigorously manipulating the shoulder. Even the commentators remarked at the time at how painful the treatment looked.

If that is aimed at me CC forget it I am not singling any one player out only that it appears that such incidents, whilst they can be used as gaining advantage, appears to be acceptable by some posters. As said I am not in a position to judge whether Andy's mto was legitimate or not I did not see the match Im talking in general terms.

temporary21 wrote:Yes I have noticed that interest in bending the rules seems to depend a fair bit on who breaks it, and not the rule itself.As for Lk him/herself though I dont know what their opinion is in general

My view is simple.

Some of the rules are easier to bend/manipulate. For example the MTO. It would be very difficult to give discretion to the umpire given he/she is not medically trained (to my knowledge). That rule is soley on the players and the trust is with them not abuse it. I am not singling any player out. It is what it is. There might be some players who 'cry wolf' and use it for a different purpose. Again it's all speculation. I didn't see the Murray MTO as I didn't see the match so can't comment. What is clear is that there isn't any way the umpire can challenge the 'health' of a player any as much as a referee in football can challenge a player's health. The only real proof is if an athlete is noble and stupid enough to admit to bending the rule. Which is unlikely. I remember a certain match in where a certain individual called an MTO. The fans in the stadium were enraged. This forum was enraged. What transpired after that MTO was a drop in that said player's form and mobility. Which kinda prompted an "oh crap he must be really injured" from the forum and probably from the paying public. So it goes to show that MTO has a genuine need, however it is far too simplistic to think that the intent a player calls on one can be controlled with tariffs. It can't.

The TV comparison was ludicrous because the chief complaint is it's enforcement. The MTO is something that can be abused. It's like anything in the remote same nature to an MTO in any sport that can be abused. There are too many to mention. No sport is absolved of any rule bending.

I am not advocating rule bending. Just saying it's been there from the off. Depending who you dislike, it bothers some to large degrees. If it really bothers people that much, turn off the TV.

Haddie-nuff wrote:So it seems you say there was naff all wrong with Murray's shoulder. So that being the case why was the physio vigorously manipulating the shoulder. Even the commentators remarked at the time at how painful the treatment looked.

If that is aimed at me CC forget it I am not singling any one player out only that it appears that such incidents, whilst they can be used as gaining advantage, appears to be acceptable by some posters. As  said I am not in a position to judge whether Andy's mto was legitimate or not I did not see the match Im talking in general terms.

The way of tennis is that MTO's are within the rules so no rule bending there unless it can be proven irrefutably that the player is/was not injured. Time violations is breaking the rules though.

Both are examples of rules being bent though. If its about integrity of the game, they are both important talking points, Haddies frustration comes from specific rules, or specific players of the rules being talked about at length but others seemingly ignored. That doesnt though mean that LK shares that opinion, ergo LK in particular isnt being inconsistent.

In short i see it both ways, the only solution is to let it go

temporary21 wrote:Both are examples of rules being bent though. If its about integrity of the game, they are both important talking points, Haddies frustration comes from specific rules, or specific players of the rules being talked about at length but others seemingly ignored. That doesnt though mean that LK shares that opinion, ergo LK in particular isnt being inconsistent.

In short i see it both ways, the only solution is to let it go

The MTO rule in my opinion is bending the rules only if it can be proven there were no injuries. I am not here to apportion blame or attack any player for rule violations though. Anyway back to the tennis.....

It doesn't need to be proven CC.

The rule can be bent. That's the point. No-one can prove someone feigns injury, unless of course the athlete admits so himself. I'd be gobsmacked if every MTO called by any tennis pro was legit.

Miss the point...ugh!!! keep focus on TV's why not. Both are classed as CHEATING !!! for some

both are cheating - the problem is how do you prove an MTO is cheating - you just have to make a judgement - which may be incorrect. that's why there should be a stricter rule for MTOs e.g. lose a point/game - better than defaulting through injury, but prevents the abuse of the rule

Yes JhM that sounds like a really good idea. That being the case the ATP won't adopt it.

I am not advocating rule bending. Just saying it's been there from the off. Depending who you dislike, it bothers some to large degrees. If it really bothers people that much, turn off the TV

I was on board until the last sentence Here is where you lose your argument,
. This is a forum for discussion, we all turn off the tv there would be no discussion,


t

Haddie-nuff wrote:I am not advocating rule bending. Just saying it's been there from the off. Depending who you dislike, it bothers some to large degrees. If it really bothers people that much, turn off the TV

I was on board until the last sentence Here is where you lose your argument,
. This is a forum for discussion, we all turn off the tv there would be no discussion,

Errrr. No that's not where I lose the argument.

If rule bending annoys that much, people have a choice whether to continue watching and supporting that product or not. Simples.

The phonebox is all yours. It's empty