Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[ponchi101]

Begu tossed her racquet, rather innocuously, but it bounced into the stands and hit a young kid.
She was not disqualified, but a supervisor was called.
Alexandrova, who ended up losing the match, was not happy.

I really am at odds here. She did not toss it in anger, just frustration. But that is a judgement call. I still think that, regardless of intentions, some regulations have to be in place.

[meganfernandez]

Begu tossed her racquet, rather innocuously, but it bounced into the stands and hit a young kid.
She was not disqualified, but a supervisor was called.
Alexandrova, who ended up losing the match, was not happy.

I really am at odds here. She did not toss it in anger, just frustration. But that is a judgement call. I still think that, regardless of intentions, some regulations have to be in place.

Hoo-boy. Another 1 in a million unlucky bounce. But this is why the rule exists - because you never know what can happen when the racket leaves your hand, and there has to be a rule/consequence to deter. It's not as reckless as some other incidents where a ball was hit with full force or a racket was flung right toward someone with little regard for their presence, but a kid did get hit in the face, enough to cry. I'm all for umpire discretion and usually stand behind their calls, as I do here. But had she been disqualified, I think it would have been justified, too.

[ponchi101]

That is why I think that the rule has to be unambiguous. Regardless of intention. If a ball, racquet or any other piece of equipment TOUCHES a third party, you are out. The sole exception should be a ball hit during a point in play that went stray after it was hit.
I agree that Begu's case here is right borderline. Had she been disqualified, it would have been justified too.

[JazzNU]

Sigh. Novak's obnoxious fans will be coming out of the woodwork today. Guaranteed.

[meganfernandez]

Sigh. Novak's obnoxious fans will be coming out of the woodwork today. Guaranteed.

Reason enough to default Begu. Unbearable. BTW, it's being reported that the racket didn't touch the kid. He was just scared. And possibly a big Alexandrova fan who faked an injury, holding his unscathed cheek and everything.

[Suliso]

Some fun facts from wta.com about Iga's win streak (now 30) qnd more.

- 4th longest win streak since 2000 (behind Venus, Serena and Henin)

- first player to win 13+ matches as #1 since Serena in 2015

- 46/47 sets won since R16 IW

- 15 bagels

- 16 consecutive sets won in finals

- only 3 other players have won 5+ consecutive tournaments in this century (Venus 2000, Serena 2013 and Henin 2007-2008)

- it has been 8 years since anyone has won more than 5 tournaments in a single season (Serena 7, 2014)

- bagel sets in a season since 2000:

25 Serena 2013
18 Clijsters 2003
17 Hingis 2000
16 Zvonareva 2008
16 Hingis 2001
15 Azarenka 2012
15 Clijsters 2005
15 Swiatek 2022


-

[ponchi101]

I thanked you for the post, but maybe you want to edit one little datum...

[ti-amie]

Begu should've been disqualified.

[ponchi101]

I know he is very much disliked here, but Simon reached today the 500 wins mark.
For somebody with that game, I find it impressive.

[Deuce]

That is why I think that the rule has to be unambiguous. Regardless of intention. If a ball, racquet or any other piece of equipment TOUCHES a third party, you are out. The sole exception should be a ball hit during a point in play that went stray after it was hit.
I agree that Begu's case here is right borderline. Had she been disqualified, it would have been justified too.

If the racquet hit the child (there is apparently some dispute about whether it did or not), then Begu should have been immediately disqualified, period.

That said, while I understand Alexandrova's frustration, I don't think it was wise of her to imply that she lost because 'the rules were against her today'. Indeed, players are responsible for their racquets. But players are also responsible for their play, Ekaterina.

I agree that the rule should be a solid one, leaving little room for judgement... but I do see a difference between this incident (Begu) and a situation where the racquet would travel 15 or 20 feet, bouncing repeatedly and slowing down in the process, and come to rest just barely brushing against a linesperson's shoe. I don't think disqualification would be in order in that latter example (unless the offender is Kyrgios ).

Here's a video of the Begu incident today. While it doesn't show if the child was actually hit or not, it does show that the manner in which the racquet was tossed, that close to the crowd, was quite irresponsible.

[JazzNU]

Since people seem to be invested in their pairing.

[ti-amie]

Here's a list of Badosa's withdrawals.

http://www.tennisabstract.com/cgi-bin/w ... aulaBadosa

[ptmcmahon]

Before today I’m only seeing one other one on that list?

[JazzNU]

I appreciate tweets like this, but prefer they follow it up with the who of the previous time they are referencing. The 5 Americans in 2003 that made the Round of 16 - Serena, Venus, Lindsay, Chanda, and Capriati

[ponchi101]

An interesting bit. But it is not as if American WOMEN's tennis has been in the same drought as the men's.
You tell me that 5 American men have reached the same stage, and then it surprises me.