Week 35 - US Open Main Draw Hard

Julia Carrot · All-time great

RE: Week 35 - US Open Main Draw Hard

KK · Club Coach

Jaggy1876 wrote:
Really enjoyed that match. Although Laura moaning and growling made me dislike her, a bit spoiled little rich girl strikes of, so I'm glad the working class guts of Naomi pulled through. Northern Grit indeed

Am I also right in saying thats her GB number 2 now? If she's not it must be really close with Heather.

Whatever class you like to classify her as, Naomi has had a vast amount of money spent on her by her father. Both Laura and Naomi had hugely more time and money spent on them as children than the average child. I'm not saying that makes them spoilt. I would not classify any child having a large amount of money spent on them as being spoilt if they appreciate it and work hard to justify the money spent (whether at sport or academically).

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Naomi's press conference after the match clears things up.
She was struggling in the conditions, and was worried about cramping, she was therefore taking on as much fluid as possible, including between points. She put four sachets of rehydration powder into one of her drinks to try and be sure! and used double the number of gels she would usually expect. Giving the post match on court interview with Eurosport's Catherine Whitaker, she actually said, "You'll have to be quick, I'm about to start cramping". And she did. When she got to the main press session, two hours later, she said she was glad it wasn't any sooner as she had been cramping almost the entire time between the end of the match and the press conference.
WTA Insider contacted an umpires representative for clarification about whether taking drinks between points was acceptable, and they agreed that, as long as you don't go over the time per point, then there is nothing in the rules to stop it - it's no different from using the towel every point. They also said that the repeated ball toss of Laura is currently uncovered by the rules, though they have never had, or imagined, a player who routinely throws the ball and catches it two or three times on single points, and catches the ball, even in still conditions, almost every service game, so there was never a need for a rule to guard against it.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I do not agree with the WTA saying the repeated ball toss is uncovered by the rules.

The ITF rules state:

Q CONTINUOUS PLAY/DELAY OF GAME
A maximum of twenty (20) seconds shall elapse from the moment the ball goes out
of play until the time the ball is struck for the next point, except at a ninety (90)
second changeover or a one hundred and twenty (120) second set break. The
procedures for enforcing this rule are as follows:
1 Twenty (20) Second Rule
a Start stopwatch when the player is ordered to play or when the ball goes out
of play.
b Assess Time Violation or Code Violation if the ball is not struck for the next
point within the twenty (20) seconds allowed. There is no time warning prior
to the expiration of the twenty (20) seconds.

This is what we were taught in French 'umpiring school'

i.e. a player can take as many ball tosses as they like as long as they HIT the ball within the 20 seconds, or 25 second, depending on the tournament.

And, yes, the rule is not strictly enforced. But if you take a lot of ball tosses, the umpire is told to issue a time violation.

It's pretty common sense and exactly what the rule says, I can't see what the WTA don't understand about it.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

They did not address the intersection of ball toss with time delay, it was a brief mention. There is obvious seeming overlap, as you show. The focus of the point was more on whether repeated ball tosses in and of themselves are something of note. They are apparently not. They could cause a player to fall foul of other rules, like time violation, but it is not the ball toss that is at fault there, it is the time. The tow thing aren't interchangeable because a player might, for example, only fluff the toss the once in a point, but because they had extensively towelled and taken a long time to get to the srvice line, nonetheless be called for a violation on time; where as another player might swiftly fluff three tosses yet incur no penalty.
This as come up before in a different context, when both Vika and the Confectioner, have both been accused of repeatedly fluffing ball tosses after physically draining points, or more oftentimes, on big points, particularly break points against them, expressly for the effect of attempting to discombobulate their opponent. On those latter occasions, there was no time factor, it was the frequency with which ball tosses were fluffed on critical points (and not otherwise) that was the question - the ball toss in and of itself being the concern.
I don't think for a second that Laura is doing it in any cynical way like has been accused of the others, which makes it more of a time thing, as you point out.
Apologies, for not being clearer about the nature of the WTA question and response.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Yes. There is a rule that you must not intentionally create a hindrance to your opponent i.e. do something deliberately to put them off. Which it's just feasible that repeated ball tosses could be. And so you could call a violation for that.

But it's obvious that there's no rule saying only 'x' number of ball tosses allowed, just as there's no rule saying only 'x' number of ball bounces before serving allowed. It's part of someone's serve. And as long as done within the time limits your serve process is your serve process. I've no idea about Laura last night - did anyone time any of the serves that had lots of failed tosses?

Equally, if Naomi is serving, she's perfectly allowed to take a drink between points (as long as within the time limit)

However, if Naomi is receiving, she has to play to Laura's speed and so if Laura is standing ready to serve and Naomi is at the back getting a drink, Naomi would be at fault.

Of course, it would be quite funny if Naomi said, 'fine, go ahead, Laura, I'm ready', while all the time at the back having her drink, knowing full well that there were 4 flunked ball tosses to come before the ball even threatened to come over the net and she'd be back in place fine by then

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

One can rather imagine, say, a Kyrgios, doing just that.

theemptyvessel · Club Coach

Final comment. I do find it kind of odd that when we have been so starved of success in the womens game that when we have two of our players in the Main Draw of a slam we seem to be spending so much time debating who is the most spoilt and who is the least sporting. They are both great players who have worked damn hard to get there and seem to be very nice people with it, it's not like either one is an Ostapenko.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

There've been a few comments along those lines. But, reading back, most are along the lines of the game itself and the good week for both.

AliB and I have been talking about the rules in themselves, nothing to do with the two players as such.

philwrig · Hall of fame

Coup Droit wrote:
I do not agree with the WTA saying the repeated ball toss is uncovered by the rules.

The ITF rules state:

Q CONTINUOUS PLAY/DELAY OF GAME
A maximum of twenty (20) seconds shall elapse from the moment the ball goes out
of play until the time the ball is struck for the next point, except at a ninety (90)
second changeover or a one hundred and twenty (120) second set break. The
procedures for enforcing this rule are as follows:
1 Twenty (20) Second Rule
a Start stopwatch when the player is ordered to play or when the ball goes out
of play.
b Assess Time Violation or Code Violation if the ball is not struck for the next
point within the twenty (20) seconds allowed. There is no time warning prior
to the expiration of the twenty (20) seconds.

This is what we were taught in French 'umpiring school'

i.e. a player can take as many ball tosses as they like as long as they HIT the ball within the 20 seconds, or 25 second, depending on the tournament.

And, yes, the rule is not strictly enforced. But if you take a lot of ball tosses, the umpire is told to issue a time violation.

It's pretty common sense and exactly what the rule says, I can't see what the WTA don't understand about it.

Well for some reason either the umpires don't understand the rule or don't choose to enforce. In Landisville Laura was reloading up to 5 times before hitting her serve, which surely if you're to give a time violation you have to give it then !!

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I think the trouble is that, in practice, there is so much discretion involved with the time thingy in general.

I'm sure they know the rule, it just seems perhaps unfair to enforce it if the player seems genuinely to be having a problem with their ball toss AND the other player hasn't complained.

After all, the time violation rule is meant for (a) TV/spectator purposes (makes tennis boring) and (b) can be used to give one player an advantage over another.

If the other player does not complain, you're only left with (a) which is less compelling than (b).

For me, (never that level (!!!!) but based on what we were taught), if it's windy, you'll allow more leeway (although the actual rule does not change so in theory you shouldn't), if both players are having problems with their ball toss, you'd be less inclined to intervene (will even out), if the opposing player doesn't mind, then why make a scene.... etc. etc.

And Laura's service process is reasonably fast (i.e. she doesn't spend ages with the towel, fiddling with her hair etc. etc.) so a couple of ball tosses will probably be within the 'allowable' limit (i.e. the rather longer one that's generally given).

But, yes, if someone takes 45 secs., say, based on 4-5 ball tosses, more than twice or three times, I'd give them a warning. It's an unfair advantage that's not allowed in the rules.

PaulM · Tennis legend

I think given, as Naomi said clearly herself, there was no intent behind Laura's aborted tosses, it was just an issue she has genuine trouble with, there is a bit of additional leeway given. It was bad, but not ridiculous enough (for me) to merit a warning.

Similarly, Naomi asked the umpire about taking a drink between points at one of the changeovers. As already confirmed its no issue beyond time. She took a drink instead of towling down.

-- Edited by PaulM on Wednesday 31st of August 2016 02:51:22 PM

kundalini · Specialist Reporter + Intermediate Club Player

As philwrig says, in Landisville Laura had far more failed ball tosses. However, given there were no ball boys in most (possibly all) of those matches, the time violations would make no sense as there were huge delays between points as the players went to recover the balls.

Agree with Coup Droit, that so long as Laura keeps to within the time limits, or reasonably close to, then I think she should be ok. If she is going way over, then she should be penalised.

markymc1983 · Club Coach

Laura needs to sort her ball toss out put simply. Also, as a mere spectator of the sport, I think there should be a one failed ball toss per service action rule (unless exceptionally windy). It is very irritating as a spectator so I can understand the opponents annoyance.

AliBlahBlah · All-time great

Bencic beats Petko 3 & 2, and awaits the winner of Johanna's match.
I watched this one, and her loss last week in New Haven, to Flipper. Not quite back to her best after the injuries, but getting close, fast. She creates space without power with such ease. She'll definitely be a very tough R3 if Jo makes it. A month ago, you suspect it would have been much easier.