So the point itself is its own middle? 
She shouted out early, and the rules say you can’t do that. There’s no question about that part. If you say it was in the middle of the point, it makes it sound like her shout affected the outcome of the point or that she was trying to interfere with Stosur. She wasn’t. And I think it should be noted that for once, Serena sounded gracious in defeat. (Not so much with the umpire.) Not to sound crazy, but maybe she’s learned something.
Oh, and “hindrance” isn’t the only rule where timing is essential. For instance, even if a ball is hit fifteen feet outside of the court, if a player catches it or touches it before it has bounced twice, the point goes to the other team. Doesn’t matter if it’s quite clearly out. The point has to be over before I can touch the ball.
I agree with you. I actually think that during the last game, she realized that she’d made an ass out of herself, again, and regretted it. Though probably not as much as she regretted playing so badly. So unlike her. But I do give her kudos for being a gracious loser. That is a bigger test of character than being a gracious winner.
Speaking of being gracious, I loved Nadal’s speech last night after winning the match. He made a point of saying that his heart was with NYC and the victims of 9/11. I don’t know if he’s been completely coached or not, but as a mother, he’s got my approval. He’s a fine young man and a pretty damn good tennis player to boot.
Djokovic, by contrast, looks bratty, and I wish he’d learn to control his sarcasm so that the crowd would get behind him. Or at least not openly root against him. I think he’s a fine young man, too, but he wears every emotion on his face, and that’s not necessarily a great quality when you have as much personality as he has.
The ball is out as soon as it lands outside the court, and the player does not need to wait for it to bounce a second time. I think everybody who has played tennis more than a couple of times is familiar with that rule, so it’s not the same as the hindrance rule.
Oh, yes. Duh. I should have said once. But my point is still the same. Even if it’s very obvious that the ball is out, the point isn’t over until it bounces once. I’ve seen lots of fights over this when people catch balls that are sailing.
Holy Cannoli was I wrong;)
You would never, ever see a professional player catch a ball before it lands, though. Why would they? They have ballkids (although a ballkid would never catch the ball in the air either). I can imagine a situation where amateurs would ignore that rule if the ball was going to land on someone else’s court - although I don’t think I’ve even seen that happen. I’ve probably caught serves on the fly (if they were 20 feet long) because it’s better to do that than have it interfere with someone else on the next court over. That’s technically a rules violation but in rare instances it can be the courteous thing to do.
Here is the actual hindrance rule from the ITF Rules of Tennis:
Note that whether the player intends to hinder the opponent is of no relevance. The only relevance is whether the act itself was intentional. Serena’s shout was clearly intentional. Hence all that was left was the umpire’s judgment as to whether Sosur was actually hindered in playing the point. As Sosur put a racquet on it, she was entitled to the benefit of the doubt. I think the umpire was correct.
Serena said that she “thought it was like the hat rule”. Here she was referring to a hat falling off, which is an unintentional act, and falls under the second part of the rule - the point is replayed.
Having said that, I agree with Marley23 and thought that Serena handled it well after the match and was (unusually) gracious. I thought it was poor form for Mary Carillo to bring up the incident during the trophy presentation interview, and Serena handled it well. Asking the question in a post-match press conference, or even one-on-one like Mary Jo Fernandez did is acceptable, but there is no need to sully the official presentation.
And congratulations to Grace Min, from Lawrenceville, Georgia (just a few minutes from where I live), for taking the girls’ title.
In answer to your question, yes, the debate has been around for a long LONG time and demonstration matches have also been around a long LONG time - most notably Bobby Riggs vs Margaret Court in 1971 - a year after Margaret Court won a Grand Slam. She lost to a 55 year old Bobby Riggs 6-2 6-1.
Your assertion that “aside from Martina, [the debate] has primarily been brought up concerning the Williams sisters” is factually incorrect and in my view, indicates that you have certain issues you’re wishing to project.
The debate’s been going on for decades and decades. Your claim that the debate is a silly bar room discussion is your opinion - but I disagree with you. People who are interested in the subject are entitled to know how much quantifiable difference there is between the men’s and women’s game.
I forgot until a few minutes ago that the men’s final started earlyish today. It was 3-2 Djokovoc when I tuned in, and he’s up 5-2 now. Right now Djokovic is just pushing Nadal around the back of the court and then drop shotting him. He’s broken Nadal’s serve three times already (Nadal got one of the breaks back). Looks like Djokovic will take this set easily, so Nadal will need to turn things around in a big, big hurry.
This is getting good quickly - Nadal is up 2-0 in the second set, and this Nadal serve game has gone to eight deuces so far. The court coverage for both these guys is just remarkable. Another break point for Djokovic here. I do wish someone would tap Luke Jensen on the shoulder and tell him the #1 guy’s last name pronounced is “Jock-a-vich,” not “Zho-ko-vich.”
Oh my goodness! Djokovic got the break, finally. He threw up a couple of desperation lobs when it looked like he was out of the point, and on the last one Nadal put the ball in the net. They’re back on serve at 2-1.
Djokovic held serve in about 35 seconds and then got a break of serve, so he now leads 4-2 in the second set with Nadal serving.
I’m not sure I did this right, but early in his career, most people pronounced Novak’s last “Joke-a-vich.” More recently, he said he preferred “Jock-a-vich.” What I don’t get is why Jensen is sort of Frenchifying the “dj” sound. I’ve never heard anyone say it that way. On the other hand the announcers are right that Nadal seems to have no confidence in his serve right now, which is making a bad situation worse for him. He’s hitting it around 100 miles an hour now on the first serve. He’s worked on his first serve for a few years and last year he was hitting it much harder than that.
McEnroe and Co. briefly mentioned the ad-court/deuce-court difference today, showing that Nadal won more points serving to his ad-court (he’s a lefty so I think that would be when he serves from his left box to Djokovic’s left box) than he did to the other one-how exactly is there an advantage/disadvantage? Is it because of how the serve spins and how much court the returner thus has to effectively cover?
It’s because Nadal is a lefty. So he can slice the ball out of court to a righties backhand. This is also something righties don’t deal with that often since most people (yes tennis players are people to) are righties.
All I can say is WOW!
(Time code violations really??)
What a final so far! Great match.
Oh MY Goodness!!!
Does this remind anyone of a Rocky movie? This might be the best tennis match ever! and 2nd place was Roger/Novak two days ago. Incredible.