Talk About Tennis 2.0

70% chance now of Swiatek completing the desert double. Who is the last to do so?

martini4me wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 1:24 pm Gauff has EIGHT double faults in her first three service games.

This doesn't seem ideal from the chair.

Swiatek is 9-1 vs Gauff. I'm surprised they have played that many times already. There have only been five matches between Swiatek and Rybakina.

Fastbackss wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:11 pm

martini4me wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 1:24 pm Gauff has EIGHT double faults in her first three service games.

This doesn't seem ideal from the chair.

It was an ugly situation. She begged for the supervisor and begged the umpire to listen to her. It went on and on. I don't understand why no one came out to assist. They had forever to respond. And they could have replayed it 10 times in the back while Coco and the chair argued. I admire Coco for trying to stand her ground. That umpire was an asshole. AND WRONG!

Gauff is not following up well her outstanding Australian season. Another surprising loss after easily winning the first set.

Suliso wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:08 pm 70% chance now of Swiatek completing the desert double. Who is the last to do so?

This is the first year both Doha and Dubai are WTA1000. Until this year they were alternating (500+1000). Last was Henin in 2007. In 09-10 there was only one of them on the calendar.

Friday Order of Play

CENTRE COURT
Starts at 6:00 AM

Semifinal
BLR A. SASNOVICH/GER L. SIEGEMUND vs USA N. MELICHAR-MARTINEZ/AUS E. PEREZ (3)
Followed by
Semifinal
ITA J. PAOLINI vs ROU S. CIRSTEA
Followed by
Semifinal
POL I. SWIATEK (1) vs RUS A. KALINSKAYA
Followed by
Semifinal
AUS S. HUNTER/CZE K. SINIAKOVA (4) vs CAN G. DABROWSKI/NZL E. ROUTLIFFE (2)

Following up on what has already been posted about this situation. Andy Roddick agrees it was bush league by the chair.

andyroddick
@andyroddick
This is an absurd exchange for this umpire. 1. He’s completely wrong 2. He’s lying about being wrong. 3. She must have simply said 10 plus times, I’d like the supervisor. That’s not a judgement call. He simply needed to honor that normal request and call the supervisor. Coco did well here. That’s before her opponent also not acknowledging truth (which she certainly didn’t have to do)

Someone posted this breakdown of Cirstea coming back against Vondrousova.

Mark Taylor :TheCDN4:
@emarktaylor@thecanadian.social
@tennis #Tennis

Via José Morgado @josemorgado

UNBELIEVABLE second set comeback from Sorana Cirstea! [vs Marketa Vondrousova]

ti-amie wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 9:36 pm Following up on what has already been posted about this situation. Andy Roddick agrees it was bush league by the chair.

andyroddick
@andyroddick
This is an absurd exchange for this umpire. 1. He’s completely wrong 2. He’s lying about being wrong. 3. She must have simply said 10 plus times, I’d like the supervisor. That’s not a judgement call. He simply needed to honor that normal request and call the supervisor. Coco did well here. That’s before her opponent also not acknowledging truth (which she certainly didn’t have to do)

If Pliskova knew for sure she returned the serve before the chair called it out, then i think she should have said so. The prevailing wisdom is that the players aren't responsible for making calls and it's not incumbent upon them to correct umpires. I disagree. If they are SURE that a wrong call has been made, they should say so. This benefits everyone overall. And it's simply the right thing to do in an endeavor where fairness is the most important thing.

I understand the supervisor cannot over-rule the umpire on a plain question of fact .. only on a rules/policy question. The umpire may have been wrong but it was a question of fact..did Pliskova hit the return before or after the call..the umpire is the last word on such things

But that was the "beauty" of Coco's request.

She was asking for a rules clarification with regard to hitting a ball called out.

She was properly asking.

You can see in the background the lines person signaled it was in as well. So, he was wrong all around.

Owendonovan wrote: ↑Fri Feb 23, 2024 5:03 am You can see in the background the lines person signaled it was in as well. So, he was wrong all around.

Yes, he should not overrule unless it is a clear error