I posted this question on the previous post, but it really relates to the topic of this post, so here it is again:

"Can anyone analyze how many times Novak was cheated by line judges in the final, i.e. what was the differential between wrong line calls against Novak versus wrong line calls against Rafael.

My impression during the match was that the differential was in double digits!

Some of the statistical enthusiasts on this site should point that out. It could have been very important."

Maybe one day the Hawkeye technology will be rapid enough to record and react to shots in real time, and all we will hear is a beep when a ball is out.

But personally I would miss the drama of the challenge. Just like I'd miss the drama of the obligatory towel off between points...at least on the big points. I didn't feel at all inconvenienced by that 6 hour final.

Bert: Hawkeye could handle all the linesppl work TODAY, as a matter of fact I saw ESPN or whatever application offering each shot in hawkeye view at some slam last year.

But officiating is good as it is. This Aussie was a particularly badly judged event, but rest assured, they will do a lot better next year. For the low number of official mistakes, players get enough challenge opportunities, actually infinite as long as you get them correct, so we cool.

From the number of Australian accents I heard, the line judging at the event was done mostly by nationals. I believe the USO, RG and Wimbledon use an international crew: I've often seen the Japanese line judge made famous (or infamous) by THAT foot fault call at several slams (and, I think, the London WTFs), but I don't recall seeing her in Oz. Perhaps AussieMarg or another local might know.

The line calling in the final was very poor, and by the end of the fourth set I was hoping Pascal Maria would issue unlimited challenges to the two players. I feared a blown call might decide the match.

"But the officiating was error-strewn throughout the tournament, on occasions large and small, and you have to wonder why. My own feeling is that we may be feeling an unintended consequence of the shift to electronic line-calling by way of Hawkeye."

It can;t be all due to Hawkeye..given the number of mistakes in the entire tournament. Last USO..it wasn't so bad. Some mistakes in line calling will happen...but i doubt if it will be more than 3 per set. For which the Hawkeye challenges should suffice.

This AO..it could be bad management..either they didn't train the linespeople well..or they were being overworked..or just plain incompetent. Either way, a GS should rectify these problems and see that they don't happen again.

Why not have the tv replay system also available to the umpire on contentious matters? Especially when Hawkeye isn't available for some reason.

I didn't see what happened in the Nalbandian match though..but no one should be losing a match because of some contentious call.

PB makes a good point that Hawkeye gives unwarranted - or at least unprecedented - power to the chair umpire. There is another, unmentioned, way that this power is amplified by hawkeye. In the case of a correct "in" call by hawkeye that is considered "out" by a linesperson, it is at the discretion of the chair to decide whether the player *could* have made the shot had s/he registered it as "in." Given that the "out" call itself will change the split-second behavior of the player, this complicates the point in an unprecedented way.
If hawkeye is here to stay, it seems to me that its most just use is in employing it for every call, on every point.

@ Andrew Burton: "I've often seen the Japanese line judge made famous (or infamous) by THAT foot fault call at several slams..."

She definitely was in Oz. I noticed her several times for obvious reasons
:)

I heard a lot about the ruckus in the Isner-Nalby match and the charges that Nouni was wrong to refuse Nalby's challenge, so I looked very closely to see what had happened when I eventually saw a replay of the match. And it seemed clear to me that, yes, Nalby did not realize at first that the call/overule had been made; however, IMHO he took a long time AFTER he was aware of the overrule before challenging, walking toward th mark frowning etc. I've seen challenges refused for shorter delays.

I have an idea. Let the people in charge do whatever they can to make dependence on linesmen for calls obsolete.(See Bert @ 5:50.) With the proper technology, we'd survive as well without them as we now do without net judges. Then, because I don't want to see so many good tennis people suddenly out of work, let's hire two officials per court to operate the stopwatches that will control the time spent between points (beep!) and the time that passes between the end of the point and the call for a challenge (beep!). :) The umpires have enough to do without having to deal with those duties.

How about that, TWibe?

It's all there on the video for a

Hawkeye has an accuracy of plus of minus 5 mm..which is not quite accurate the last i read (in NYT or someplace).

I don't know if they have improved the technology yet..but its based on some algorithm that calculates the trajectory of the ball assuming some spin etc. It does have potential for error because of those assumptions.There are multiple cameras that are supposed to capture the spin and direction..but it still has potential for error on very close calls.

It could be that the linespeople were correct (or 50% of them were correct) but Hawkeye assumed the wrong input for the trajectory.I didn't see the Nalbandian match...but just because Hawkeye showed something was "in" and the linesperson called it "out" dosen;t mean the lines person was faulty 100% of the time.

As far as I know..tennis dosen't use a 5 mm margin(if its 1 mm on the line..Hawkeye shows as "in"). This is not really done anywhere else. Its "indeterminate" if there is a margin of error of 5 mm and Hawkeye shows the ball 1mm touching the line.

I didn't see the Nalbandian match so I don't know if Hawkeye showed the ball 1mm on the line or not..because that can erroneous.

Ruth

Thanks for rewatching that incident regarding Nalbandian

At the time in my mind there seem to be soo much 'confusion'

Though apparently Nouni apologised later?

ATP Wednesday Order of Play

Zagreb at 4:30 AM: Evans vs Garcia-Lopez, Sela vs A Beck, Veic vs Zemlja and Melzer vs Seppi scheduled
Zagreb at 6 AM: Haase vs Bachinger scheduled
Montpellier at 8 AM: Lopez vs Rufin
Montpellier at 10 AM: Gasquet vs Davydenko
Montpellier at 11:30 AM: Roger-Vasselin vs Kohlschreiber
Zagreb at 11:45 AM: Ilhan vs Dodig followed by Ljubicic vs Berrer
Vina del Mar at Noon: Dutra Silva vs Montanes followed by Andujar vs Gil
Montpellier at 1 PM: Cipolla vs Simon
Vina del Mar at 1:30 PM: Chardy vs L Mayer
Vina del Mar at 7 PM: Monaco vs Andreev

Attending the AO this year I have to concur the lines people,some of the Umpires rulings were 'pathetic'

One of the most 'pathetic' line calls was made in the match Nadal v Berdych

I sat in Rod Laver "fuming'.

Andrew

She was there which by the time I finish this will have probably been pointed out by someone else.

It's a weird gig being a linesperson. Those screaming flat FH's on
the line are hard to call. The serve even harder. Yes the lines
calling was pretty sketchy but I blame the equator. Below it out
has been confused with in and visa versa. You don't even want to
know how complicated intercourse can be down there.

Loved when Nadal challenged his own serve. I'm sure it's happened
before but if so I missed it. Brilliant! Best moment in the whole
shebang for me. Certainly the funniest anyway.

they need to be put in the corner and ask to do several squats or sits up,whichever one they have harder time doing!lol!

yes they messed up big time!there was one for Nadou that was game point,if he did not challenge it was going to be deuce,don't they know aready Rafa needed all his game pointslol!,no deuce necessary!

I'm also concerned when hawkeye brings on the wrong shot and then the umpire says this is not the one I ordered,like how is it even possible?

I thought hawkeye should only show the very lastshot in question?!

"I'm also concerned when hawkeye brings on the wrong shot and then the umpire says this is not the one I ordered,like how is it even possible?"

oh..is that what happened at the Nalby match?

I don't know ladyjulia but I remember Anne Keathovong's brother officiating one match and calling on the phone about the wrong shot shown, then the replay the right shot!I did not even know that was possible?!

Aube,

Hmm..its possible. They probably don't run the algorithm until the call comes..but all the input data from the camera is probably stored. Somewhere, someone messed up the input.

makes sense ladyjulia,just scary idea although I need to remember with technology mess up do happen...

Why did I not go to the Ellen Show?,she offered the whole audience a trip to the BNP Paris Bas in Indian Wells for people to go watch Azababy,sweeet!

Aube

Silly you lol!

Just going o/t

I read that Caroline has sacked Sanchez as her coach

My goodness that didnt last long no?

This is what Aube is talking about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMJYrfnvf1U

Tennisdeb

Thanks

I do prefer Vika's hair Curled like she had in that photo the day after she won the AO holding the trophy

I thought she had Hair Extensions though Fuzzy put it right for me as usual

for people who miss Venus she's on tennis channel,a replay of her quarters at the US OPEN 2008 against Serebaby!

hahah Madame President,although I could go myself without Ellen
s help except that my baby refuse to play there...

I already rant about that on previous thread Madame President

Hi Tennisdeb!

Aube

I am up to read a 'good rant' I will check it out

I will post later my photos from Sydney...

Also I have great news regarding Apia International for me next year

I have to keep this news for the present time to myself.Though hopefully down the track a bit I can disclose.I hate secrets.D.

all rightie Madame President,waiting impatiently for the pictures,lol!

Also I really should be disciplined today and go to bed early,convalescence is over,need to go back to work tomorrow,enough "farniente" already!

Pretty sure I'm going to Indian Wells, and thanks Deb...now I know what to bring to have a little alone time with Vika...a chloroform soaked giant teddy bear.

MagicVilas

LOL!

Hi Marg...
I'm assuming your husband is fine? Did you end up going back? I haven't peeked in here since the semis.

MagicVilas

Peter's dr assured me he was fine and just had a small reaction to the drug he has been on.Peter told me to fly back to watch Rafa in the final.I was hestiant and left it up to the last moment.I checked with his dr fisrt.I flew back to Melbourne on the day of the final.I am back now in Sydney and I have caaught the Flu...I am seeing my dr later today.

Tom Perrota is the best and most objective writer on Tennis.com. Of course, that's just my opinion. Here is the example of his article today and the link for those who want to read more:

"Head of the Universe
Novak Djokovic. Novak Djokovic. Novak Djokovic. Novak Djokovic. Should we say it again? I’ll add just a few words to the pile of praise after Djokovic’s five-set, and nearly six-hour, Australian Open final performance. Last year Djokovic was otherworldly and dominated many of his matches. At the U.S. Open he saved match points against Roger Federer for the second straight year. In Melbourne this year, he won back-to-back five setters—and he beat Rafael Nadal after training 4-2 in the fifth set in the final. The man has gone from an iffy competitor who used to find ways to lose against Federer and Nadal to the best competitor in the sport, and maybe any sport. It’s a remarkable transformation and you get the sense there’s more to come."

http://www.tennis.com/articles/templates/features.aspx?articleid=16167&zoneid=9

Ugh...hate the flu.
Feel better, I'm off to play my nemesis in our bi-weekly death match, followed by sushi/sake bombs. The sushi chefs at the place we go to love tennis, and always have tennis channel on.

MagicVilas

Bye have a good time

Hidey ho tennis lovers

I know I should comment on pete's post but I found the Caro article about Sanchez being fired more disturbing. Caro will find it really difficult to win a major with her dad at the helm. FFS get rid of him and hire a proper coach. I am not surprised he didn't fit in with Piotr as the primary coach. To many cooks in that kitchen.

"Because of the utter lack of confidence in the officials, aided perhaps by the chair umpires' reluctance to become too involved, in the late stages of the tournament we came face to face a few times with the nightmare Hawkeye scenario—a player, having expended all his challenges in a fit of justifiable paranoia of poor calls, losing a huge match because he was unable to challenge an obviously erroneous call." by Pete.

This thought, well articulated by Pete, was increasingly on my mind in this tournament more than ever before. I felt badly for the players.

AA

Hi! I just caught up with the news regarding Caroline and Sanchez

Rolls Eyes

I mean its not going to be a over night success with a new coach

I feel they should have givemn Sanchez More Time.

Good Tennis Fan

Well said.I was live at the AO and to me the lines people etc were...to use a word.

Pathetic.I am from Sydney.

AM as with any new changes it takes at least six months. Hopefully he will be able to get another coaching job. I bet he has a few stories he could tell. I thought Caro had made a couple of good changes to her game during the summer.

I always thought the worse officiating was done on the outer courts as they don't have the luxury of hawkeye.

Maybe cricket has the right idea about having the right to choose to use hawkeye or not. Unfortunately that is part of sport about having bad umpires. I have watched loads of football matches where even the goal umpire has made a mistake and it cannot be reversed.

Anyway I am off to the doctors.I feel I have caught the flu being in Melbourne yesterday the weather changed and I was freezing.I lost my voice as well.Maybe most people will think that is a 'good thing'.I will load my photos from Apia Sydney International when I get back later.

I hate feeling this way.D.

Also I am a bad patient.D.

I think most nurses are...

Ciao

Well, I never could see, and really do not see now, after a couple of years, why, when a typical set will involve at least, say probably 60 to 70 total points, and each point has about an average of what 5 shots these days?

So that is about 350 total line calls per set. Why limit challenges to 3?

They do not take that long. I bet if you replay these matches there are as many instances where players take a couple of seconds to think about it, they might as well use the system.

@Tesla
Great point! I noticed that as well. There were at least 7 or 8 bad calls against Djokovic, some of them at crucial moments throughout the match. Nadal had maybe one or two. Coincidence? Hardly! In addition if you listen to the ESPN commentators a lot of these bad calls came when Djokovic hit a deep return and had Nadal on his heels with the advantage of controlling the rally...not even one of these experts mentioned even once the fact how crucial these bad calls could have been especially the way Rafa was serving in in the 4th and fifth set. In addition,I think it was in the beginning of the fifth set, after yet another horrible line call against Djokovic Rafa felt the need to raise his arm and apologize to Djokovic for that linesman's call. Do you think any of these expert commentators felt the need to explain to the public what that meant? Nope of course not. Of course if this would have happened to Federer or Nadal...it would have been written about as a travesty, rules need to be changed, bla bla bla. That's why Novak's win is even more impressive, his mental strength unparalleled in men's tennis, when you compete not only against the toughest competitor ever, that is Rafa, but you also compete against the whole biased stadium that has been brainwashed by the media into thinking that Djokovic is arrogant,cocky and evil, ou compete against the lines people who obviously displayed an inherent bias towards Djokovic and also you compete against an umpire whose names is Maria Pascal(yes French, I know but your opponent communicates with him in Spanish!). Bravo Nole!

yes, let's let those persecution complexes run wild and free

Ruth

Nalby was wronged there is not question about it. The Umpire OVER RULED a ball that was clearly out and then didnt let him challenge. I dont care if he took a little longer than normal to challenge. Watch any DelPo match and you will see him take longer routinely. Watch the final and you will see Nadal check the mark before challenging. It was a disgrace. I really dont see how anyone could see that incident and come to the conclusion that Nalby wasnt totally robbed. We are talking about a guy at the end of his career finally looking to be in shape and without injuries playing beautiful tennis and he got totally screwed. And so did we as tennis fans. Did you actually watch the match ?

LadyJulia,

the ball was WAY out had nothing to do with MM in the Nalby match. The linesperson made a routine out call and the idiot chair over ruled and then didnt let Nalby challenge, cuz he checked the mark first.

I feel like I have stumbled into the Twilight Zone, that last page on the last thread was bizarre.

I think it was the one person talking to themselves...

As for this one, the line calling was so bad, at the SF between Fedal, you could actually see the players looking at the umpire every time there was a shot called out, like they were thinking , should I challenge.

It's ridiculous to have to worry about that while playing your match.

Oh..NAlby was not allowed to challenge because he took a little longer?

Is there a rule about how long a player can take before they challenge a call? I looked at ATP rulebook but couldn't find it.

Regardless of how long Nalby took, it was obvious he was confused due to the noise, and so this is where the umpire should have used his discretion and allowed the challenge.

similarly, the Nadal Berdy match, where the umpire could have used his judgement aand Over ruled the call even if Rafa was too,late to challenge. In this case, I assume the umpire was not sure either.

Otherwise, why have umpires on the court? Just use Hawk eye and save some money.

theres no clear rule as far as i know. I think the language is something like "reasonable amount of time". But we have all seen players take forever to challenge and naming the repeat offenders would be easy.

I was fuming about the Nalby thing back when it happened and thought i was over it but now i am pissed again. It was a disgrace. I mean that idiot over rules and then wont let the guy challenge. He didnt take that long from the time that he understood what was going on. there was a lot of confusion with the crowd noise etc. Isner had no clue as to what was goign on either and was going to challenge himself.

This was a big deal though, it was an awesome match and it would have been nice to see Nalby play someone else. He was on.

Did I miss the article on the stellar performances of the US juniors in the AO (i.e., Taylor Townsend)? If not, I'm disappointed!

Nam1, Rafa match is differnt cuz it happened during the point, thats thw one you are talking about, right ?

and yes he should have let Nalby challenge no matter whaqt, in fact he should have begged him to challenge if he wasnt going to. Since he made a terrible over rule why would he want the available technology to make sure it was correct ? He messed up that entire match. Not sure i have ever seen anythign like it.

I cannot get my comment to post! Aaaarrrggghhh!!!!

Holy crap. This is insane..... Trying again.....

Trying again...

The trouble down in Oz really did begin in earnest with the Nalbandian incident, and what happened was, in my opinion, shocking. At 8-8, Ad-out in the fifth set, John Isner served up the T and missed wide by a couple of inches (according to the replay that TV viewers were given the privilege of seeing. The linesperson quickly called the serve out but the chair umpire (Nouni) overruled the call, giving Isner the ace. When the serve was first struck and the linespersons call made, the noise in the stadium was significant. In fact, watching on TV i could not hear the linesperson's call clearly. And when Nouni issued his overrule, that, too, was muffled by the crowd noise. The camera crew were great, so we TV viewers got some choice views of both players--Isner looked befuddled and Nalbandian was pointed up with his index finger, then gestured at the center line judge who had made th original call, as if assuring Isner that the ball was indeed out and that the linesperson had indeed made an audible call, if barely. But then it became clear Nouni was speaking to Nalbandian, apparently telling him that, no, the line judge's call was incorrect and that he (Nouni) was issuing an overrule. the cameras locked in on Nalbandian at that point, and we could see that he was clearly confused by what Nouni was saying, again gesturing toward the center line judge who had made the "out" call, while bending his ear toward Nouni to try to capture what he was saying. At this point, it was also clear that Nouni's English (he's French, I believe) and Nalbandian's were not meshing too well, so it was easy to see that Nalbandian was having a difficult time piecing together what Nouni was telling him. When he finally understood, we could see the light go off in his eyes and face, and he then put his arm up to challenge, while shaking his head and walking over to the mark to have a better look, just to be sure, at which point he made the challenge more assertively. Nouni then, apparently, told him he would not allow the challenge, as too much time had passed. It was a crock, as it was obvious to anyone watching that confusion had reigned and Nalbandian could not be faulted for beiung unclear what had transpired and for what Nouni was saying. he got robbed, plain and simple.

That said, I am not in the camp that Nalbandian was robbed of the match due to that call. He had three or four break chances in that very game on Isner's serve, and could not get the break. In fact, on the very first of those break opportunities, Nalbandian had sent isner hard to his left/backhand corner along the basleine, and Big John's cross-court get set up the perfect down-the-line backhand winner for nalbandian, who seemed to tighten a bit and decelerate, sending the ball into the middle of the net. It was an easy shot for almost any 5.0 and up player, and particularly for a guy with a backhand like Nalbandian's, and he simply choked on that shot. Had he gotten the ball up and over the net and into the court anywhere within three of four feet of the deuce-side singles sideline, Isner would have been nowhere in sight and he'd have beeen broken. And Nalbandian would have been serving for the matcn at 9-8 in the fifth set.

So I don't subscribe to the theory that Nouni's overrule cost Nalbandian the match. But I do subscribe to the idea that the chair umpire overrule should be abolished.

Giving up.... nite, all.

Why does everyone trust Hawk Eye so much? They don't have the stones to use it at RG for fear that they'll look like idiots when the mark is completely different from what they show on screen. One has to dig through piles of documents to find any experimental evaluation of HawkEye. And, when I last checked, there was nothing that made me believe it.

Anyway, I guess everyone is happy when they show a pretty picture of a ball close to a line ;-). Best challenge ever:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8yfHuYm_kM

Good morning,

Hey Pspace. :) You beat me to it. I love that video. Everytime I need to recover my smile, I watch that challenge again. Everyone is laughing. Best of all Lars Graff's adjusting his tie. :) I miss Marat.

Pspace

Hi! Hope you are well

Thanks for that link

Bulldog

I happen to agree with your thoughts regarding the Nalbandian situation

I mean Barry White aka Nouni aplogised for the incident

My realationship ended with Barry White aka Nouni after that sad to say.I was always of the opinion he was a good umpire.Okay he is human too and we all make mistakes.I also blame it on his New Beard.D.

Morning everyone. :)

Pete - thank you. The calls were horrible all tournament & several players in different matches lost all their confidence in the officiating. Not good.

Conspiracy theories, though...not convinced. :)

I liked Roger's smile in that video. :)

Poor Slice. He went away and his comments were posted anyway.

Some stats about Hawkeye. In Rotterdam last year the players challenged 169 times and they were right in 38 (22%.) Also from 2011 and during the AO there were 473 challenges and only in 131 times was the challenger right (28%.)

Hey jewell. Yes, that smile too. :)

AM,
I read that you are back at home. I hope everything is better with Peter.

Time to prepare for work.

The worst thing about "challenge in a timely manner" is that it's not consistently applied sometimes - I've seen players get to have whole conversations with their box and then be allowed to challenge and yet I've seen players who aren't allowed to challenge after a brief mark check. I guess it is a judgment call so complete consistency will never be possible.

zenggi

Peter is ok though I am not

Just came back from visiting the dr.I have a upper respitory infection and have to go on antiboitcs

I am just loading my photos from Sydney

Hopefully they will be up soon on the blog

Mandatory eye examinations, after which, one eye is plucked out for every three bad calls in a match. Then there would be at least half a dozen line people out there looking like pirates with their eye patch. And there would be several more with sunglasses looking like Ray and Stevie.

Thanks for writing this article, otherwise I do not know how to vent my frustration over officiating in AO this year. So far it is the WORST, just when I thought the officiating in UO last year was.

Tran

+1

What's become of Mohamed Layhani, Steve Ulrich, Lynn Welch and Lars Graf? They seemed like the star umpires, but I think they got into some dispute with the ITF, right? It seemed like it took a toll at the Aussie.

Nalbandian took longer to challenge the call because he hadn't heard the overrule in the first place. The volume on that call was lower than it should have been. The eurosport tv commentators also didn't hear the overrule and were confused when the "wrong score" was announced. Once Nalbandian figured out what was going on, he immediately tried to challenge but we all know how that turned out...

oops

I believe you are spot on with Nalbandian.I too could not hear as there was much confusion.

My heart went out to Nalbandian.D.

Why not give players not three but 6 challenge oppertunities and a longer time-limit?

Most of the problems should be out of the way then!

"The worst thing about "challenge in a timely manner" is that it's not consistently applied sometimes...."

This is very true, jewell. But the fact remains for me that I've seen more players refused challenges because they were slow in deciding to challenge than I've seen players get away with delayed challenges. I cannot imagine why Nalbandian did not immediately raise his hand and challenge once he realized that the "idiot" (as Nouni has been called) had overruled the linesman's call. Those kinds of challenges are usually among the quickest made.

Maybe, Nalbandian thought that there was a rule that allowed Argentinian's extra time to decide to challenge since I've definitely seen slow-walking, slow-talking Delpo get away with taking what seemd to me to be too much time to challenge.:) IIRC Federer complained about it (the Delpo delays) during one of their matches.

Nouni made a mistake with his overule, definitely,and if he apologized for anything, that may be it. But I didn't know that if an umpire made one mistake, he/she was required to compensate the player by making a deliberate "mistake" in the player's favor. That would have been great for Serena and a few other players I could name. LOL

Ruth

Indeed we could name more examples.

Yes shout out to Serena

We are all human and make mistakes that is certain

Sigh! sometimes the timing is just soo wrong.

Indeed its all about the timing I feel.

I have finished loading my photos of Apia Sydney International...sorry I could not post them earlier.Time wasnt my friend as the AO started soon after.

The first link will be 'My Favourite Photo".Gauloises I hope you are around to see this.It will be soo worthwhile.D.

http://s457.photobucket.com/albums/qq296/toshmarne/Juan%20Del%20Potro/

The rest of my photos's will be coming shortly

Hawkeye being a problem. What about the umpire not enforcing the time rule constantly broken my Nadal on serve. He has been getting away with this for years! Why not rule on that!

Okay the rest of my Apia International Sydney photos are here

I hope you all enjoy them.

http://s457.photobucket.com/albums/qq296/toshmarne/Sydney%20Apia%202012/

Indeed Rafa isnt the only player that sometimes goes over the time limit on serve

May I suggest they also time Nole with his boucning of the ball routine

A lot of journo's and commentators at this years AO were saying the same thing with Novak and his bouncing of the ball.In Novaks match against Murray for example,Murray was constantly telling the umpire that Novak was too slow in his service games and his boucning of the ball was over the time limit.Jim Courier timed Novak at 29 sec at least on 2 occasions in his match against Murray.Hewitt who was also commentating on that match said Murray should keep on at the umpire rregarding Novak and his time wasting.

I also could list other players.

I feel all the umpires should be 'consistant on this time rule' sad to say they are not.

"Maybe, Nalbandian thought that there was a rule that allowed Argentinian's extra time to decide to challenge since I've definitely seen slow-walking, slow-talking Delpo get away with taking what seemd to me to be too much time to challenge.:) IIRC Federer complained about it (the Delpo delays) during one of their matches."

I vividly remember when hawkeye made its debut that it was an unwritten understanding that as long as you are walking towards where the shot landed (to check it out), you are within time to challenge. Has nothing to do with Argentinians. Walking slow or fast however, is another matter that should be left to the umpire's discretion.
What happened with Nalbandian was different, and very unfair. He couldn't hear the overrule, walked over to Nouni (an umpire I highly regarded until this match) to confirm, understood the serve was overruled as in, took a look at the mark while walking, then raised his racket for a challenge. This is not a long time, especially given the commotion and the noise around him, and more importantly, given the SCORE.
Reminded me of a Wimbledon semi (dont remember the year exactly) between Henman and Philippoussis, where the point was made against Mark that cost him the match, and the call was wrong. I thought hawkeye was introduced especially for those types of situations, but lo and behold, these situations still take place. And players are often losing matches because of a bad call that either influences the score or cause psychological distress to the point of letting go (which is what happened to Nalbandian in this case).
With faster strokes due to racquet technology and the sheer build of some of our current players, it is inevitable that the human eye will fail to track down each and every ball. But that's why Tennis is the spoilt brat of 'refereeing'. A dozen people, a chair umpire, and a technology system. And they still get it wrong. lol

Caro fired her coach, good for her, he did little good for all the money she paid him. Smart move by the beautiful and talented Scandi who will be back on top. In watching the way Rafa plays Novak, I think he plays him too far back, he needs to move up in the court. If I had my way, I would like to reduce the control the umpires have on a match.

I just think the umpires need some proper training. Have a test where they need to know exactly what to do in all those different sticky scenarios.

The rules aren't applied consistently, the calls are dubious and some players get away with bending the rules with no penalty.

What't the point of having rules when people don't follow and the people who enforce them don't know what they're doing?

AM -

Thanks for the pics. Sorry you're ill, wishing a speedy recovery.

"Did I miss the article on the stellar performances of the US juniors in the AO (i.e., Taylor Townsend)? If not, I'm disappointed!"

Ditto, nikki. Several days ago, I wrote a comment here at TW about the American success in juniors, but it (the success) has not yet warranted a post on the subject anywhere on tennis.com,I think. BTW Two American girls --Townsend and Min -- and one boy -- Fratangelo (sp?) -- are among the 8 reigning singles junior Slam champions.

Ruth/nikki - Steve had one on Taylor Townsend:

http://blogs.tennis.com/thewrap/2012/01/snagging-one.html

I like where Bert is going with this....

I think of the three top young players, big old Kvitova is the most talented. She has it all, power, great weapons and a great serve. But she has two problems she needs to work out. First, she needs to reign in her shots and not go for winners so quickly, she needs to work the points more. She reminds me of a young Venus, very wild at time. Second, the big old girl needs to lose some weight. When she's moving, you can see rolls of blubber on her belly and sides just rolling along with her. The big old gal can stand to lose a few pound, also fat doesn't look good. I have never understood how a pro athlete can be fat when they work out all the time, and like don't get me started on fat people. Ciao dudes! Can't wait for Fed cup, miss V so much.

As an aside: does it surprise anyone that American teens are at the top of the heap in the juniors but fail to materialize as pros? Call me crazy (and an American one at that), but doesn't seem like a giant metaphor for America and the modern American spirit? A blaze of glory & promise, and then flaming out when it comes down to...work. When all is said and done, the person who spent the most time hitting the most balls on the practice courts will win.

In the modern world, talent is a dime a dozen. What separates the champions from the also-rans is...work.

And yes, we are speaking to you Donald Young. Does anyone here really think that in 2-3 years Young will be getting the best of Dolgopolov? I certainly don't, and I think there is an innate sense of entitlement coupled with an over-reliance on "talent" that will be his downfall, amongst many others.

But maybe it's just me....good luck to all of them, despite my cynical outlook. I think the Aussie Open showed a few glimpses of things to come.

Trying again... maybe it will work after a good night's sleep.

The trouble down in Oz really did begin in earnest with the Nalbandian incident, and what happened was, in my opinion, shocking. At 8-8, Ad-out in the fifth set, John Isner served up the T and missed wide by a couple of inches (according to the replay that TV viewers were given the privilege of seeing. The linesperson quickly called the serve out but the chair umpire (Nouni) overruled the call, giving Isner the ace. When the serve was first struck and the linespersons call made, the noise in the stadium was significant. In fact, watching on TV i could not hear the linesperson's call clearly. And when Nouni issued his overrule, that, too, was muffled by the crowd noise. The camera crew were great, so we TV viewers got some choice views of both players--Isner looked befuddled and Nalbandian was pointed up with his index finger, then gestured at the center line judge who had made th original call, as if assuring Isner that the ball was indeed out and that the linesperson had indeed made an audible call, if barely. But then it became clear Nouni was speaking to Nalbandian, apparently telling him that, no, the line judge's call was incorrect and that he (Nouni) was issuing an overrule. the cameras locked in on Nalbandian at that point, and we could see that he was clearly confused by what Nouni was saying, again gesturing toward the center line judge who had made the "out" call, while bending his ear toward Nouni to try to capture what he was saying. At this point, it was also clear that Nouni's English (he's French, I believe) and Nalbandian's were not meshing too well, so it was easy to see that Nalbandian was having a difficult time piecing together what Nouni was telling him. When he finally understood, we could see the light go off in his eyes and face, and he then put his arm up to challenge, while shaking his head and walking over to the mark to have a better look, just to be sure, at which point he made the challenge more assertively. Nouni then, apparently, told him he would not allow the challenge, as too much time had passed. It was a crock, as it was obvious to anyone watching that confusion had reigned and Nalbandian could not be faulted for beiung unclear what had transpired and for what Nouni was saying. he got robbed, plain and simple.

That said, I am not in the camp that Nalbandian was robbed of the match due to that call. He had three or four break chances in that very game on Isner's serve, and could not get the break. In fact, on the very first of those break opportunities, Nalbandian had sent isner hard to his left/backhand corner along the basleine, and Big John's cross-court get set up the perfect down-the-line backhand winner for nalbandian, who seemed to tighten a bit and decelerate, sending the ball into the middle of the net. It was an easy shot for almost any 5.0 and up player, and particularly for a guy with a backhand like Nalbandian's, and he simply choked on that shot. Had he gotten the ball up and over the net and into the court anywhere within three of four feet of the deuce-side singles sideline, Isner would have been nowhere in sight and he'd have beeen broken. And Nalbandian would have been serving for the matcn at 9-8 in the fifth set.

So I don't subscribe to the theory that Nouni's overrule cost Nalbandian the match. But I do subscribe to the idea that the chair umpire overrule should be abolished.

Samantha just LOL!

AM thanks for the pictures I noticed the Jarkko ones and you look great even in that color! lol

Thanks for the heads up on Steve's article about Taylor, jewell. I'd seen GVGirl's and another somewhere else, but I'd managed to miss Steve's. Sorry, Steve! :)

Nouni's overrule did not cost Nalbandian the match. However, David should've been given the chance to challenge the call.

Thanks for the lovely pictures from Sydney, AM. Too bad that Li Na isn't as impressive during her matches as she looks in practice.

And BTW, that colour ain't so bad!

I wouldn't mind reading about some follow up and/or aftermath to all of this, especially about Nouni. If the average punter knows the name of a chair umpire, I reckon there's more worth hearing.

Fed Cup (Saturday - Sunday USA EST)

World Group

Russia vs Spain(6 AM - 5 AM)
Sharapova, Kuznetsova, Petrova and Makarova vs Martinez Sanchez, Suarez Navarro, Parra-Santonja and Llagostera Vives

Belgium vs Serbia(8 AM - 7:30 AM)
Wickmayer, Flipkens, Hendler and Van Uytvanck vs Jankovic, Jovanovski, Krunic and Kostic

Italy vs Ukraine(9 AM - 9 AM)
Schiavone, Pennetta, Errani and Vinci vs K Bondarenko, Tsurenko, Savchuk and Beygelzimer

Germany vs Czech Republic(6 AM - 5 AM)
Lisicki, Goerges, Kerber and Groenefeld vs Kvitova, Benesova, Zahlavova Strycova and Hradecka

World Group II

United States vs Belarus (1 PM - Noon)
S Williams, McHale, V Williams and Huber vs Azarenka, Yakimova, Govortsova and Kustova

Japan vs Slovenia (10 PM Friday - 9 PM Saturday)
Morita, Date-Krumm, Nara and Fujiwara vs Hercog, Rampre, Kolar and Klepac

Slovak Republic vs France(7 AM - 6 AM)
Cibulkova, Hantuchova, Rybarikova and Cepelova vs Parmentier, Razzano, Cornet and Rezai

Switzerland vs Australia(5 AM - 4 AM)
Voegele, Sadikovic, Bacsinszky and Bencic vs Stosur, Gajdosova, Dokic and Dellacqua

"As an aside: does it surprise anyone that American teens are at the top of the heap in the juniors but fail to materialize as pros?"

Little Communist - it's not just Americans. There have been plenty of top-ranked juniors who've done nothing on the pro tour. Sometimes it takes longer, sometimes nothing happens...

As I like to ask: Whatever happened to Nicolas Pereira?

Hawkeye is inaccurate at times. That's obvious. People convince themselves that just because it's a video/electronic system that it must have a high and consistent accuracy. That's not so. I've seen replays that showed balls a foot out when everyone *knows* that wasn't the case.

Slice,

Thanks for that description of what really happened.

I think these things hold:

1. There is no written rule about how long a player can take before they issue a challenge.

2. Numerous players are allowed to challenge after consulting with their box (which is against the rules by the way if its the coach) and after checking the mark, meaning there is a delay between the line call and the challenge.

3. Nalby wasn't exactly twiddling his fingers or adjusting his hair in that duration...he was actually talking to the umpire about the same call.

Since the players have no idea how much time they have before they will NOT be allowed, and the umpire dosen;t know quantitatively how much time the player gets before its NOT allowed and given the confusion of an overrule...the umpire was CLEARLY unfair in this case.

Especially given that there is absolutely no consistency followed in the time duration for challenges with other players. You can't start implementing the rules with Nalby where there is no rule to implement.

Nothing really justifies the umpire in this case. He dosen't have the rulebook on his side, nor can he say no player is not allowed to challenge because 1000 other players have not been allowed to challenge after 5 seconds. There is clear evidence on tv that numerous players have been allowed late challenges when there is no written rule.

You can't treat one player in one way and another player in a completely different way.

The umpire dosen't have a leg to justify himself in this case.

Nalbandian should complain to the ITF about this umpire.

Its the way Hawkeye is used that is faulty. Every system will be inaccurate to some degree. But that dosen't mean it can't be used. It has to be used properly understanding what it can do and what it cannot do.

The way tennis uses hawkeye is illogical.

Tennis thinks a margin of error dosen't exist or can be ignored. So, a ball 1 mm on the line is really on the line.

Just sloppy on their part.

Since we are talking RULES can we also have the time rule between points implemented? No matter how hard they play, Novak and Rafa, should be penalized for time violations all the time and made to hurry up.

Even Martina said on Novak that she wants some ball bouncing number of times against Novak. How can you be up and ready to receive a 120 mph serve when you don't know if he is going to serve after 12th bounce or 28th? Especially if that ball bouncing is taking you constantly beyond the time limit! Thats pure gamesmanship!

They should get a timer on court and make it automatic instead of leaving it to the umpire. In NFL its done with the play clock starting as soon as the last play is done.

If you are winning so many GS and being considered in the best player of all time, Hall of Fame, etc. then you need to stop these gamesmanship and play within the rules.