[Frankster]

LOL @ the commentator - he was like, "Oh the game is over now" as soon as Nalbandian kicked the advert board!

[f1mad]

(Original post by Frankster)
LOL @ the commentator - he was like, "Oh the game is over now" as soon as Nalbandian kicked the advert board!

He certainly knows the rulebook .

[Frankster]

(Original post by f1mad)
He certainly knows the rulebook .

haha.. and knows how to be like Geoff Shreeves!!

[TheMagicRat]

(Original post by TenOfThem)
Ridiculous behaviour by Nalbandian ... made even worse by his comments afterwards

Surely he has an agent ... why was that person not there saying "just say sorry to the linesman, the crowd, and Cilic"

As I said in the Tennis Society, in some cases, sports people shouldn't be expected to give an interview straight after the event. Nalbandian was clearly still angry and pumped up and he probably wouldn't say the same things if he'd been given an hour or two to calm down.

[Hopple]

(Original post by f1mad)
The extent of the injury, is not the sticking point:

He didn't physically abuse anyone. He kicked a piece of wood which accidentally hit the guy on the shin.

The sticking point is that everyone was physically and mentally capable of finishing the final, yet the match was cancelled.

[tomclarky]

(Original post by f1mad)
Obviously, he would've broke the code of conduct. You don't make special exemptions no matter who you are, that behaviour shouldn't (and isn't) tolerated.

It was an accident though. He didn't intend to hurt the line judge. What about if he had angrily hit the ball in frustration and it hit an official in the face? Disqualify him for that?

[TenOfThem]

(Original post by TheMagicRat)
As I said in the Tennis Society, in some cases, sports people shouldn't be expected to give an interview straight after the event. Nalbandian was clearly still angry and pumped up and he probably wouldn't say the same things if he'd been given an hour or two to calm down.

I agree

[TenOfThem]

(Original post by tomclarky)
It was an accident though. He didn't intend to hurt the line judge. What about if he had angrily hit the ball in frustration and it hit an official in the face? Disqualify him for that?

Ask Tim Henman

Wimbledon 1995

[James82]

If I'd done that in the street I would have been arrested. The way it's been written up makes it sound like he kicked and advertising hoarding and it accidentally caught the line judge, when you look at the video it looks more like he was trying the kick the line judge and he accidentally caught the advertising hoarding.

The hoarding was about 6 inches high and the line judge was sat on a chair about 6 inches behind it, there is no way any normal thinking person would think they could kick it and not make contact with the line judge.

He should be fined and face a lengthy ban, I'm surprised the police didn't want a word with him though.

[tomclarky]

(Original post by TenOfThem)
Ask Tim Henman

Wimbledon 1995

That was also harsh i think. At what point does something become abuse instead of just an accident?

[f1mad]

(Original post by Hopple)
He didn't physically abuse anyone. He kicked a piece of wood which accidentally hit the guy on the shin.

The sticking point is that everyone was physically and mentally capable of finishing the final, yet the match was cancelled.

Yes he did; once that happens, it is disqualification.

He kicked a piece of wood which accidentally hit the guy on the shin

That is physical abuse.

Physical:Involving bodily contact or activity

Abuse: Use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.

Go figure?

[f1mad]

(Original post by tomclarky)
That was also harsh i think. At what point does something become abuse instead of just an accident?

Accident or not, should that sort of behaviour be condoned? Of course not, the rules are written for a reason.

[Hopple]

(Original post by f1mad)


Yes he did.

Hey, if you don't like Nalbandian that's your business, just don't ruin it for the people who paid to see him.

[f1mad]

(Original post by Hopple)
Hey, if you don't like Nalbandian that's your business, just don't ruin it for the people who paid to see him.

He kicked a piece of wood which accidentally hit the guy on the shin

That is physical abuse.

Physical: Involving bodily contact or activity

Abuse: Use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.

Go figure?

Hey, if you don't like Nalbandian that's your business

What does that have to do with anything, do you condone what he did?

[Hopple]

(Original post by f1mad)
That is physical abuse.

Physical: Involving bodily contact or activity

Abuse: Use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose; misuse.

Go figure?

He didn't use anything to hurt the guy. He attacked the wood. All of the spectators wanted the match to continue, and they're the ones who've paid to see it.

[Emissionspectra]

Nalbandian is a ****er Nalbandian is a ****er

[TenOfThem]

(Original post by tomclarky)
That was also harsh i think. At what point does something become abuse instead of just an accident?

I think that the "accident" in both cases was brought about "un-sportsman-like behaviour"

There was intentional aggression that resulted in injury


As a consequence, neither incident was merely an "accident"

[f1mad]

(Original post by Hopple)
He didn't use anything to hurt the guy. He attacked the wood. All of the spectators wanted the match to continue, and they're the ones who've paid to see it.

He used his leg did he not? And what did he kick? A piece of wood.

Result?

Straight DQ.

Regardless of who's watching, regulations and rules are written for a reason. Do you not understand what that means?

You can't go around bending rules to please fans.

[f1mad]

(Original post by TenOfThem)
I think that the "accident" in both cases was brought about "un-sportsman-like behaviour"

There was intentional aggression that resulted in injury


As a consequence, neither incident was merely an "accident"

Intentional aggression it was indeed.

[tomclarky]

(Original post by f1mad)
Accident or not, should that sort of behaviour be condoned? Of course not, the rules are written for a reason.

If he hadn't have struck anyone then nothing would've happened. What about if a player hits a ball into the crowd by accident and it hits a spectator. Disqualify him? Who's deciding what equals abuse? The rules should be clear i think, e.g whether or not it was intentional.

I don't condone players reacting angrily. Fine him maybe but don't call off the match.