Surely no one in Melbourne noticed, but a certain Spanish-German blogger based in Brussels spent the whole night in front of the TV watching the Day Session of Day 3 of the Australian Open, his favourite tournament.
He was pleased with Nadal's win, but also with the performance of his opponent, Tommy Haas. The German put up a brave fight, never resigned and won some wonderful points. It is a pleasure to watch him play Tennis, and I think every fan hopes he can stay on the Tour for another couple of years. He deserves some injury-free seasons.
Alejandro Falla's win against a surprisingly bad-tempered Mardy Fish was also very pleasant, I like the game of the Colombian. At a time when Europeans dominated the sport, he could give Tennis a little push in his country. It is also great to see Kohlschreiber finally win a couple of Grand Slam matches, and Feliciano power himself through the draw so far.
So far, so good. I tucked myself into bed, slept for 90 minutes, and went to University.
I came home seven hours later, slept four hours, and here I am now watching two highlights from the men's side I had missed: Isner vs Nalbandian and Wawrinka vs Baghdatis.
It seems incredible that these are second matches of a Grand Slam, because all four guys are exceptional tennis players. But success in Tennis means being consistent, and neither Nalby nor Baghy were able to do that, for several reasons I am not gonna focus on now. Fact is: Both are former GS finalist, and both are outside the Top 32. AND both lost their matches today. That's allright. It can happen. But do it with style!
Apparently, both players left their manners in the locker room.
Nalbandian's match will be remembered for the hawkeye controversy at the end of the match. It's 8-8 in the fifth set, Big Isner serves, and Nalbandian has his third break point. This point would then decide the game: Isner serves, ball touches the net, just falls inside the service box. Nalbandian isn't sure if the ball wasn't out, looks at the umpire Kader Nouni, hesitates, but remains calm and awaits another first serve.
Isner then bombs one of his routine first serves down the line. Linesperson calls it out, Nouni overrules. Nalbandian looks at Nouni, can't believe his ears. He walks to the line, observes it for any trace of the ball (there must be a crack on the surface...) , thinks for a long while, and as Nouni calls "Deuce!", suddenly Nalbandian asks for a challenge. Nouni refuses. Nalbandian goes berserk. Discusses with Nouni, calls for a supervises, stops playing for 3 or 4 minutes. The rest is history. Isner wins the service game, and breaks Nalbandian to secure the victory as Nalbandian uncontrollably throws his racket away (again!).
Was Nouni wrong to make the call? Well, it was a bit risky overruling the serve. He was successful overruling minutes before, but then the serve was clearly out, and it was closer to his chair, giving him a good look. That was not the case with this controversial point. It's impossible for the naked eye to see a 240 km/h serve touching the middle line from his position.
He had however the right to overrule, because his gut feeling told him that the ball was in. No problem in modern times, right? We have hawkeye. If the player doesn't like the decicion, just call for technology.
But Nalbandian waited too long. The rules clearly indicate that a player must ask IMMEDIATELY for the review. No one can first seek the mark and then ask for hawkeye whenever he pleases. The players know that, but they believe that they are above the law. Nouni was acting according to the rules when refusing the hawkeye at the moment, although the TELEGRAPH doesn't seem to agree. The tight score screamed for the technical review. But the score shouldn't matter. Rules are rules.
Nalbandian's comments after the match do not deserve any mention. Tennis refs are doing a good and complicated job. Basta.
Rules are rules, and one basic rule is to give players a warning when they abuse their racket.
However, I am not sure how a player should be penalized if he abuses four rackets in half a minute. Yep, after losing his serve in the third set, Baghdatis destroyed his racket during the changeover, smashing it 7 (!!!) times on the floor, then handed the remains of the racket to a ballboy (a custom I don't like.. ballboys shouldn't handle players rackets when they are destroyed... with a bit of bad luck their hands might be injured. Here's the video... Just look at Baghdatis' RACKET.
Then, he took three more rackets, some of them still inside their plastic, and smashed them too.
The ref waited until the madness stopped, then handed Baghdatis a warning. The Cypriot reacted by smiling and shaking his head.
Yo, Bad Boy Baghy, what do u expect? You know the rules right? You were lucky not to receive a point penalty, in my eyes. That behaviour is unacceptable, there can be no excuses.
Where I am getting at: We think that only football refs are being disrespected, but Tennis refs endure a similar level of disrespect. It's human to lose your temper, but then you have to deal with the consequences.
I know that the ATP has other issues to deal with right now, but I believe it's time to protect the umpires. Very often, umpires don't apply the strict rules (repeatedly warning a player for taking too much time) because either they fear the player's reaction, or the believe they will be ridiculized by being the only ref sticking to the rules. Refs need to step up and remind players of each other's respective roles. And when they do, the ATP must support them.
No comments:
Post a Comment