The New York Post reports that the Women's Tennis Association agrees that Williams was the victim of a double standard:
“[Saturday] also brought to the forefront the question of whether different standards are applied to men and women in the officiating of matches,” [WTA chief executive Steve Simon wrote on Twitter]. “The WTA believes that there should be no difference in the standards of tolerance provided to the emotions expressed by men vs women and is committed to working with the sport to ensure that all players are treated the same. We do not believe that this was done [Saturday] night.”
And the winner of the men's title, Novak Djokovic, said:
“I have my personal opinion that maybe the chair umpire should not have pushed Serena to the limit, especially in a Grand Slam final. Just maybe changed — not maybe, but he did change the course of the match.... [It] was, in my opinion, maybe unnecessary. We all go through our emotions, especially when you’re fighting for a Grand Slam trophy.”
পোস্টগুলি
২২৮টি মন্তব্য:
«সবচেয়ে পুরাতন ‹পুরাতন 228 এর 201 – থেকে 228For some reason McEnroe got in "hot water" for simply telling the truth. Serena would be ranked 500 or 700th on the men's tour.
Everyone attacked him for saying it. Even though its true.
Serena wins a lot of points for "incredibly fast serve" and her "powerful ground strokes". But on the mens' tour her power and serve are just average - if that.
Its not just that. Instead of returning serves that were slower than hers, she'd be returning serves that were *Faster* than her's. A completely new experience for her.
It annoys me when people try to make it a political issue. It's not.
Many things the media makes out to be political and racial are neither. The media has an excuse: they're stupid. I can't imagine why any of the commenters here would want to follow their lead.
Serena screwed up and I am in sure in cooler moments she will admit that.
No. She won't. She never has in the past, so why would she now?
You'd have a better chance of getting Hillary to admit she lost - which, not coincidentally - is the same, damn script Serena is playing to now.
I was just messing with you, Mock.
narciso takes the set with Stein. But I'm amused shortly thereafter. Tennis is a "racist sport"?. Someone hitched a ride in Crack's clown car.
"McEnroe's tantrums were considered to be full of sound and fury signifying nothing"
Not at all. His was protest against lax, shoddy, unprofessional officiating in a professional sport, and he effected real change for the better, including the use of video technology to make better calls.
McEnroe complaints were often annoying, but he changed the game for the better. I can't say the same of the not at all serene Williams. Venus is okay.
another NYTimes commenter noted that Osaka essentially gave the game back to Serena:
suellen
Washington, DC17m ago
I very much agree with this analysis, having watched Osaka's strong play and Williams' unraveling on Saturday (as well as Ramos's mismanagement). But I'm struck by the absence of mention of one significant part of the last set in any of the post-match discussion about this episode. After Williams was docked a game for her "thief" comment, the score became 5-3 Osaka, with Williams serving. Osaka made virtually no effort to win that game (which would have ended the match), quite clearly giving that game to Williams by deliberately hitting the ball alternately quite long on one point and quite low into the net on others. That made the score 5-4 Osaka, essentially giving back to Williams the game that was taken by Ramos. The TV announcers made no mention of this, the post-match commentators made no mention of this, and I have seen no mention of it in any analysis since. But it was plain as day at the time, as Osaka had otherwise shown no such repeated weakness in her strokes. She gave Williams the game, thereby giving her the chance to get back into the match. And after doing that, she returned to her previous form, and convincingly beat Williams in the match-winning game, just as she had been convincingly playing better tennis throughout the match. I think she deserves recognition for having leveled the playing field to the extent she could, something she had no obligation to do and I wonder if Williams or any other player would have done had the shoe been on the other foot.
>>But I'm struck by the absence of mention of one significant part of the last set in any of the post-match discussion about this episode. After Williams was docked a game for her "thief" comment, the score became 5-3 Osaka, with Williams serving. Osaka made virtually no effort to win that game (which would have ended the match), quite clearly giving that game to Williams
If you are struck by that omission, then you aren't paying attention.
>>I think she deserves recognition for having leveled the playing field
I think tennis courts are already level. :)
Yes, it is possible Osaka deliberately threw the 9th game of set 2- I thought so at the time watching it, but couldn't be certain and still can't be. It is definitely true that Osaka played that one game worse than any other she played in the match.
Of course, the media aren't going to mention that Osaka might have done that because it undermines the narrative that the match was stolen from Williams by the umpire. It is also why so much of the media discussions omit discussing the first set in which Osaka dominated Williams in every aspect of play.
Many things the media makes out to be political and racial are neither. The media has an excuse: they're stupid. I can't imagine why any of the commenters here would want to follow their lead.
I agree with Earnie. I’d go so far as to say that the best route to unearned wealth is to buy journalists for what they’re really worth and sell them for what they think they’re worth.
Do tennis guys get to wear whatever they want? Spandex body suits?
"Women should have a right to bad behavior just like men." -- Serena Williams
"A lot of these people that are weighing in and saying double standard. I'm saying, you know what? This is not the hill you want to die on." -- Mary Carillo
Ha, Mary Carillo wins!
She was outplayed by Osaka and felt it and threw a several tantrums at the ref to cover up the reality. Made a spectacle of herself trying to blame the ref because she couldn't win the tournament. Will probably never acknowledge peak bad sportsmanship.
“Just maybe changed — not maybe, but he did change the course of the match.”
Martha said...
Noted in NYTimes comment section—
Rewatch the game following the one game penalty. Osaka served that game and purposely hit the ball into the net repeatedly. Osaka lost that game 40-0. So Serena was made whole again AND STILL MANAGED TO LOSE THE SET, MATCH, and her cooL.
9/10/18, 8:26 AM
We were having lunch in a restaurant and ESPN was still going on about this story.
It looks like there's a big component of Entitlement. Serena, like Hillary, was entitled to win. The loss is strongly felt because it calls other peoples entitlement into doubt.
Slightly OT, but though I admire Martina Navratilova's op-ed in today's NYT very much, that is, hands down, the ugliest tennis dress I have seen in my life. I didn't watch the match, only the confrontations with the umpire (aside: All sorts of people are using "umpire" and "referee" interchangeably here -- I thought it was one or the other, and at this point I don't know which is right), so what I saw was mostly Williams' face, not that appalling fluffy, layered black tutu thing. Ewwww.
Jeremy Abrams' spot-on earlier comment bears repeating:
"She crushed those rackets on purpose to draw the penalty, and berated the official to draw a penalty as well. That way, Osaka's win looks tainted, and it's all still about Serena. She is a vile woman."
Which is consistent with her I am a goddess and thou shalt bow down and worship me persona.
Is Serena on steroids? https://www.quora.com/Is-Serena-Williams-on-steroids
Osaka is the new Trump - wasn't supposed to win.
Narayanan Subramanian said...
Any proof she was looking to coach for advice?
Yes, actually. Her first defense was that her coach was only giving her a thumbs up, and that it should not have been counted as coaching even though it was received communication. Arguing that the gesture was misinterpreted implies she was looking.
It doesn't matter, though, because the rule is on the coach, not the player. The players are expected to "forbid" the coaches from communicating with them, from swearing at the umpire, etc. What matters is whether the umpire sees it.
This show tennis isn't American like Baseball is...
Well, of course not. Otherwise, it would be called "American Baseball." Tennis is Franco-Anglican. Why would one expect an imported sport to be American? Americanizing it might stir up charges of cultural appropriation or something.
The self-reliance of the competitor is one of the signature features of tennis. Having a handler tell the player what to do all the time changes the nature of the game. It's supposed to be both a mental and physical competition.
The umpire was correct to warn her on the violation about coaching.
Breaking the racquet was emotion - the ump could have accepted it, but the point penalty was fully justified.
Verbal abuse by Williams was totally unacceptable, shameful, disgraceful to a great player, to the USA, to the game of tennis, to the umpire.
Williams' abuse would have been a red card -- kicked out in soccer. Sent off the field in baseball or football. All who care about "good sports" should be glad she was booted, and sorry she was so out of control.
Ignorance is Bliss said...
"Okay, let's assume that I'm too stupid to use logic, and too ignorant to know what the possible options are."
That's easy to imagine: I'm watching it now.
"I would like to ask you, as humbly and politely as possible, what option do you suggest for enforcing reality's parameters?"
Good Lord. You don't even listen to yourself. How am I supposed to explain it after you just asked me to assume you're too stupid to understand?
DanTheMan said...
"Arguing with crazy is crazy."
That's what I said. Now - who wants to go to one of those totally legit psychic shops with me, since no one can figure out how we could enforce reality's parameters?
We could pay a visit to your Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, after that - if it makes you more comfortable.
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...
"I dunno, The Crack Emcee. I'd wager than an awful lot of Haitians would rather be in Compton."
And I know a whole lot of dead people from Compton who'd probably wish they were now in Haiti.
BUMBLE BEE said...
"Someone hitched a ride in Crack's clown car."
Please. I've already said, several times - here and on my own blog - that I don't care about tennis:
I'm just being unfair because y'all are - how's it feel?
buwaya @ 2:17pm,
"How my husband could know this, and know how I feel about it, and still root against Williams was beyond me. It felt like a personal betrayal."
Female solipsism is a dreadfully destructive force. Here, again, we see the tragedy of the Nineteenth Amendment.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন