This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

TSR Tennis Society

That was dramatic! Definitely the right decision though, I mean the linesman was so close to the board thing that it was obviously going to hurt him :frown:

feel bad for Cilic though, bit of a hollow victory

Reply 4301

Rachael.

8

Nalbandian is a ****ing idiot, I've always liked watching him play but I've lost all respect for him now. He kept digging himself into more of a hole with his interview aswell, it was almost painful to watch! :erm:

I think the right decision was made, but poor Cilic looked so awkward :laugh:

I have to say, Queens was a disaster this year!

OK, I guess I'll be one of the few to stick up for Nalbandian. Obviously what he did was wrong but when you're playing sport you're not always completely aware of your surroundings. Your mind is on the court. It's easy to forget where people are. He was angry and reacted. That's all.

The interview was a prefect example of why, in some cases, sports people shouldn't be expected to give an interview straight after the event. Nalbandian was still angry and he's going to say things he probably wouldn't if he was being interviewed a couple of hours later.

Reply 4304

Sirocco11

3

Nalby has always had a temper unfortunately, and although he didn't mean it in the heat of the moment it was right for him to have to default the match. He seriously injured someone and no matter what the crowd thought of it those are the rules to be enforced. As much of a disappointment it was that the match had to end, it would have reflected badly on the tournament if it continued. On the other hand the crowd was being very unforgiving about what they wanted - they wanted the match to continue but that would have been a bad atmosphere afterwards anyway with Nalbandian probably being booed every point. And then to make things worse Nalbandian made that rant about the ATP with a pretty weak apology mixed in there; just a completely unthinking decision, much as he had made to kick the advertisement board mere minutes before.

Felt sorry for Cilic having to win this way because he was starting to turn the match around before the event, but he gave a very temperate winner's speech to appease a pretty intransigent crowd.

Reply 4305

Sirocco11

3

Original post by TheMagicRat

OK, I guess I'll be one of the few to stick up for Nalbandian. Obviously what he did was wrong but when you're playing sport you're not always completely aware of your surroundings. Your mind is on the court. It's easy to forget where people are. He was angry and reacted. That's all.

The interview was a prefect example of why, in some cases, sports people shouldn't be expected to give an interview straight after the event. Nalbandian was still angry and he's going to say things he probably wouldn't if he was being interviewed a couple of hours later.

Yeah I agree - making him give an interview was another stupid decision that time on the part of the organisers; the embarassment of his action was enough and as a result he made a really bad decision to try and justify what he did when an apology would have sufficed. When athletes are pumped with adrenaline and are so convinced that they're right it's hard for them to be rational, and as wrong as Nalbandian was, people should respect that.

Reply 4306

lbsf1

2

I think possibly if it wasn't the final then maybe fair enough since the punishment wouldn't then be as strong. However the fact that it was the final and the amount of dissapointed spectators and the fact that the judge wasn't badly injured then I think they didn't have to disqualify him, a small fine would have done the job of punishing him while allowing the game to continue.

Competing in sport you are so highly stressed that you will get angry sometimes, and aslong as your action isn't malitious to someone then I think that only small punishments should be given. It is when you go out of your way to hurt someone or start a fight that serious reprimands should be given.

I completely agree with Nalbadian about the his view of the rules and the people in charge selectively choosing which ones to follow. I have been on the recieving end of this many times in karting and it is incredibly infurating when you are penalised heavily for an infringement where others arn't for different infringements.

Nalbadian was wrong with what he did however the scale of the punishment was not justifiable in my opinion.

(edited 11 years ago)

Reply 4307

Idle

2

Original post by lbsf1

I think possibly if it wasn't the final then maybe fair enough since the punishment wouldn't then be as strong. However the fact that it was the final and the amount of dissapointed spectators and the fact that the judge wasn't badly injured then I think they didn't have to disqualify him, a small fine would have done the job of punishing him while allowing the game to continue.

Competing in sport you are so highly stressed that you will get angry sometimes, and aslong as your action isn't malitious to someone then I think that only small punishments should be given. It is when you go out of your way to hurt someone or start a fight that serious reprimands should be given.

I completely agree with Nalbadian about the his view of the rules and the people in charge selectively choosing which ones to follow. I have been on the recieving end of this many times in karting and it is incredibly infurating when you are penalised heavily for an infringement where others arn't for different infringements.

Plenty of other people in the world have highly stressed jobs and if they went and kicked someone would get sacked.

Reply 4308

lbsf1

2

Original post by Idle

Plenty of other people in the world have highly stressed jobs and if they went and kicked someone would get sacked.

He didn't kick someone intentionally, he kicked something without realising there was someone behind it. When you are pumped with adrenaline, physically tired and fustrated you don't think straight. The guy wasn't badly injured so he didn't actually do much damage the punishment was more due to his action.

As I said, I think he should have been punished by a small fine however not disqualified as in my opinion was that not only to large a punishment for him but also uneeded to dissapoint that number of spectators.

Reply 4309

slaughterthedaises

I understand that it was mistake, but the rules are rules I guess, right? You can't just make an exception for one person.

This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

Reply 4310

Lamps08

14

Original post by lbsf1

I think possibly if it wasn't the final then maybe fair enough since the punishment wouldn't then be as strong. However the fact that it was the final and the amount of dissapointed spectators and the fact that the judge wasn't badly injured then I think they didn't have to disqualify him, a small fine would have done the job of punishing him while allowing the game to continue.

Competing in sport you are so highly stressed that you will get angry sometimes, and aslong as your action isn't malitious to someone then I think that only small punishments should be given. It is when you go out of your way to hurt someone or start a fight that serious reprimands should be given.

I completely agree with Nalbadian about the his view of the rules and the people in charge selectively choosing which ones to follow. I have been on the recieving end of this many times in karting and it is incredibly infurating when you are penalised heavily for an infringement where others arn't for different infringements.

Nalbadian was wrong with what he did however the scale of the punishment was not justifiable in my opinion.

This. What a pussy that line judge is though, rolling on the ground like a fag. He should have asked for a 5 minute break, and then demanded the match carried on.

Reply 4311

Hopple

18

Original post by Lamps08

This. What a pussy that line judge is though, rolling on the ground like a fag. He should have asked for a 5 minute break, and then demanded the match carried on.

Yeah, it could have gone on. Nobody wants a final decided on a freak accident like that, and it didn't need to be.

Reply 4312

member592149

11

Original post by Hopple

Yeah, it could have gone on. Nobody wants a final decided on a freak accident like that, and it didn't need to be.

It's in the rule book so it shouldn't have gone on. But the ATP don't stop Nadal and Djokovic cheating on the time limits between points so who knows what drugs the ATP take to decide how they enforce their 'rules'.

Reply 4313

Hopple

18

Original post by JaggySnake95

It's in the rule book so it shouldn't have gone on. But the ATP don't stop Nadal and Djokovic cheating on the time limits between points so who knows what drugs the ATP take to decide how they enforce their 'rules'.

They don't enforce it on Nadal and Novak because people really want to see them play. I'd use the same logic for a final. It's a seriously crap spectacle if a superstar goes out on some overly harsh non-sporting technicality, similarly it's seriously crap if the final is decided by an overly harsh non-sporting technicality. You might not mind so much if you just booked tickets to watch some random people on a random court early on in the tournament, but wow you'd be pissed if it was the final.

Reply 4314

Sirocco11

3

Original post by JaggySnake95

It's in the rule book so it shouldn't have gone on. But the ATP don't stop Nadal and Djokovic cheating on the time limits between points so who knows what drugs the ATP take to decide how they enforce their 'rules'.

Don't confuse the ATP with umpires in individual matches. It's up to their discretion regarding time violations - which is a grey area anyway - and doesn't compare to how black and white the incident today was. Nalbandian caused a linesperson to be injured, the decision was pretty simple as a result.

Reply 4315

member592149

11

Original post by Hopple

They don't enforce it on Nadal and Novak because people really want to see them play. I'd use the same logic for a final. It's a seriously crap spectacle if a superstar goes out on some overly harsh non-sporting technicality, similarly it's seriously crap if the final is decided by an overly harsh non-sporting technicality. You might not mind so much if you just booked tickets to watch some random people on a random court early on in the tournament, but wow you'd be pissed if it was the final.

They don't even give out a single point warning though. If you have a rule you can't decide when you want to enforce it.

Original post by Sirocco11

Don't confuse the ATP with umpires in individual matches. It's up to their discretion regarding time violations - which is a grey area anyway - and doesn't compare to how black and white the incident today was. Nalbandian caused a linesperson to be injured, the decision was pretty simple as a result.

But the ATP should be putting pressure on umpires to give out warnings etc.

Reply 4316

Hopple

18

Original post by JaggySnake95

They don't even give out a single point warning though. If you have a rule you can't decide when you want to enforce it.

They should go by common sense. The crowd wanted it to continue, so keep going. I'm sure if Nalbandian had deliberately attacked the guy the crowd would have been in favour of DQing him at the very least.

Reply 4317

TheMagicRat

15

I honestly can't see what the discussion is. It was clear cut. As soon as it happened Andrew Castle immediately said something like, "This match is probably over". It was a mistake but it's one Nalbandian will have to live with. Sadly, this moment of madness will probably be what he's remembered for.