PDA

View Full Version : So when is it absolutely accepatable for a player to quit a tennis match?


Jakeev
Feb 11th, 2006, 05:11 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?

Just wonderin...............

KimC&MariaSNo1's
Feb 11th, 2006, 05:33 AM
If they are injured and cant play anymore because of it. Kim at AO was injured but played through until the semifinal where she injured herself even more and couldnt go on. if your sick most of the time you can play on if its an early round youd thnk about pulling out but in a final it wouldnt cross my mind to pull out.

dinhd82
Feb 11th, 2006, 05:37 AM
When one's about to die, that should be it or have a broken limb. Also to think one's a professional one should even be more wary about fucking up like that, but oh well, it's one's prerogative.

the jamierbelyea
Feb 11th, 2006, 05:51 AM
I think for it to be publicly acceptable, she's going to have to roll over something, or do something that is visiable to the media, audience, opponet, etc...

For it to be really acceptable? You should be okay with it, and that's all you should answer to. :)

meyerpl
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:19 AM
You can't hold everybody to the same standard. Some people are tougher than others. Brett Favre of the Green Bay Packers (NFL) hasn't missed a start since he began in 1992. He's played with broken bones, the day after his father died, after his wife was diagnosed with cancer, his brother-in-law was killed, with the flu, and with serious injuries to his knees, ankles, back and throwing hand. I think a professional athlete has an obligation, in a big event, to make a 100% effort to play to the best of their ability. For each athlete, what they're capable of varies.

wipeout
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:52 AM
Heart arrhythmias would be a good reason to quit but the two players I know to have had them during matches -- Ivanisevic and Malisse -- both finished their matches.

meyerpl
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:22 AM
In 1969, in a quarter-final match during the Australian Open, Rod Laver beat a German player named Herman Kempfer in four sets. What was incredible was that after the third set, Kempfer had a fatal heart attack. Kempfer, never one to shrink in the face of adversity, played the entire fourth set........STONE COLD DEAD!

densuprun
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:35 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?

Just wonderin...............

1. yes
2. yes
3. no
4. yes
5. yes
Cramps/stomach pain? -- NO.

But you may be surprised to hear that just one rolled ankle is usually enough.

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:40 AM
Players should not retire until the crowd, TV viewers and commentators fully enjoy the perverse sight of someone suffering out there.

Give 'em some blood for God's sake!

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:06 AM
When someone's injured and they say they're injured. I wouldn't go around saying I'm injured and keep playing like I'm not injured. If I say it, I'll mean it and I'll pull out the moment I say I'm injured.

It's about truth and integrity.

Chrissie-fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:29 AM
Simple, you retire when you feel that you can't go on. :shrug:

-Sonic-
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:48 AM
If she gets a zit.

-Sonic-
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:49 AM
Itchy foot.

-Sonic-
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:50 AM
Forgot to set the video for Lost.

But no-one would actually forget that, rite? That'd be crazy!

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:22 PM
It's about truth and integrity.

Something most of these haters no nothing about!! :sad:

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:23 PM
Forgot to set the video for Lost.

But no-one would actually forget that, rite? That'd be crazy!

I've got it on my computer!

new-york
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:24 PM
when you can't move or when you are bagelling the opponent but can't finish.

i guess. :confused:

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:42 PM
well, the thread starter obviously thinks a player can quit whenever the fuck they feel like it.

hablo
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:43 PM
I have a feeling the thread starter is not gonna like most of the answers he gets in this thread ;)

harloo
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:44 PM
I loved Amelie's statement:

"I was ready to die on court"

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:50 PM
I loved Amelie's statement:

"I was ready to die on court"


was a classic. I'm glad she didn't though. :)

TonyP
Feb 11th, 2006, 01:59 PM
When it is acceptible to retire:

1. When the player cannot actually perform the acts required to finish the match.
Example, the player is right handed and has sustained an injury to the right arm and the player cannot swing the racket at the ball.

2. When the player sustained an injury and continued play threatens to do further harm to her body.

Example: a player turns an ankle on court and feels severe pain if she tries to walk or run, indicating possible ligament damage.


3. When the player is taken ill and is in need of immediate medical treatment.
Example, severe heat exhaustion. Symptoms, dizziness or fainting on court, blurred vision, light headedness, disorientation, cold chills, shakes, etc.

When should a player NOT retire.

1. Stomach upsets. ie. See Andy Roddick or Pete Sampras for examples of carrying on, despite stomach problems.

2. Feelings that in your present condition, you cannot win the match.
See Hingis, 1996 and 2002 for examples of carrying on matches, despite physical problems or illness problems.


When should a player retire, rather than make a travisty out of the match? See Mary Pierce, US Open, 2005.


Actually, tennis has brought a lot of this on itself, by allowing the abuse of the injury time out. It used to be that if you cramped or became exhausted on court, it was referred to as loss of conditioning and you had the option of quitting if you couldn't continue. Today, you get to take a two week vacation at a health spa and listen to Doctor Phil tapes before you have to retire.

smiler
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:02 PM
Apparently a bruised ego is sufficient :rolleyes:

Dana Marcy
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:06 PM
Jakeev :hug: (It's never going to end which is too bad)

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:21 PM
Only when GM'ers think it's OK to do so :tape: :tape: ( well, that's what I understood reading this board the last week or so anyway :tape: :tape: )

gsm
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:46 PM
if the player has tummy ache, they should;

1) take ALL the medicine that the trainer gives them.
2) allow time for the medicine to work (more than 2 points).

h-h should take note of the above.

Infiniti2001
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:54 PM
When someone's injured and they say they're injured. I wouldn't go around saying I'm injured and keep playing like I'm not injured. If I say it, I'll mean it and I'll pull out the moment I say I'm injured.

It's about truth and integrity.

That's you, but you have to consider the circumstances. Case in point, Venus Williams at the 2003 Wimbledon finals. Do you think she was faking?? Just imagine, if she decided not to show up or call it quits during that match. Oh well to answer Jakeev's question------
A player should only quit a tennis match when hhis or her guts are splattered all over the tennis court :lol:

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 02:56 PM
That's you, but you have to consider the circumstances. Case in point, Venus Williams at the 2003 Wimbledon finals. Do you think she was faking?? Just imagine, if she decided not to show up or call it quits during that match. Oh well to answer Jakeev's question------
A player should only quit a tennis match when hhis or her guts are splattered all over the tennis court :lol:
Did Venus say she was injured?

She said she was injured for Indian Wells and pulled out of her match against Serena remember?

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 03:03 PM
When it is acceptible to retire:

1. When the player cannot actually perform the acts required to finish the match.
Example, the player is right handed and has sustained an injury to the right arm and the player cannot swing the racket at the ball.

2. When the player sustained an injury and continued play threatens to do further harm to her body.

Example: a player turns an ankle on court and feels severe pain if she tries to walk or run, indicating possible ligament damage.


3. When the player is taken ill and is in need of immediate medical treatment.
Example, severe heat exhaustion. Symptoms, dizziness or fainting on court, blurred vision, light headedness, disorientation, cold chills, shakes, etc.

When should a player NOT retire.

1. Stomach upsets. ie. See Andy Roddick or Pete Sampras for examples of carrying on, despite stomach problems.

2. Feelings that in your present condition, you cannot win the match.
See Hingis, 1996 and 2002 for examples of carrying on matches, despite physical problems or illness problems.


When should a player retire, rather than make a travisty out of the match? See Mary Pierce, US Open, 2005.


Actually, tennis has brought a lot of this on itself, by allowing the abuse of the injury time out. It used to be that if you cramped or became exhausted on court, it was referred to as loss of conditioning and you had the option of quitting if you couldn't continue. Today, you get to take a two week vacation at a health spa and listen to Doctor Phil tapes before you have to retire.

So which rule book did you get this out of?

Was it the WTA's or was it your own?

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 03:07 PM
if the player has tummy ache, they should;

1) take ALL the medicine that the trainer gives them.
2) allow time for the medicine to work (more than 2 points).

h-h should take note of the above.

If a poster has a brain, they should:

1. not judge due to it not being them on the court

2. allow the player the benefit of the doubt because all players want to win a grand slam and would not retire just for the sake of it, even if they are losing!

gsm should take note of the above ..... along with all the Justine haters (whom by the way are the fans of all the players Justine has beaten)! :haha:

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 03:21 PM
When it is acceptible to retire:

1. When the player cannot actually perform the acts required to finish the match.
Example, the player is right handed and has sustained an injury to the right arm and the player cannot swing the racket at the ball.

2. When the player sustained an injury and continued play threatens to do further harm to her body.

Example: a player turns an ankle on court and feels severe pain if she tries to walk or run, indicating possible ligament damage.


3. When the player is taken ill and is in need of immediate medical treatment.
Example, severe heat exhaustion. Symptoms, dizziness or fainting on court, blurred vision, light headedness, disorientation, cold chills, shakes, etc.

When should a player NOT retire.

1. Stomach upsets. ie. See Andy Roddick or Pete Sampras for examples of carrying on, despite stomach problems.

2. Feelings that in your present condition, you cannot win the match.
See Hingis, 1996 and 2002 for examples of carrying on matches, despite physical problems or illness problems.


When should a player retire, rather than make a travisty out of the match? See Mary Pierce, US Open, 2005.


Actually, tennis has brought a lot of this on itself, by allowing the abuse of the injury time out. It used to be that if you cramped or became exhausted on court, it was referred to as loss of conditioning and you had the option of quitting if you couldn't continue. Today, you get to take a two week vacation at a health spa and listen to Doctor Phil tapes before you have to retire.This is becoming eerie. I actually agree with everything you wrote. Which, to be honest, has been occurring with lamentable frequency lately.

First Fingon, now TonyP. If this keeps up, soon, I'll have nobody left to disagree with.

gsm
Feb 11th, 2006, 03:41 PM
gsm should take note of the above ..... along with all the Justine haters (whom by the way are the fans of all the players Justine has beaten)! :haha:
says the unbiased "Justine Fan" :o

Infiniti2001
Feb 11th, 2006, 03:43 PM
Did Venus say she was injured?

She said she was injured for Indian Wells and pulled out of her match against Serena remember?

http://img493.imageshack.us/img493/9697/0910op.jpg

:angel: :angel:

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:00 PM
http://img493.imageshack.us/img493/9697/0910op.jpg

:angel: :angel:

Different rules/ethics for different tournaments?
Just asking!

starr
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:14 PM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?

Just wonderin...............

Whatever it is, it's more than a tummy ache.

Take a look at the match Andy played yesterday.... or many, many other examples.

Obviously, a player can quit a match whenever he/she wishes, but wouldn't it be sad if players quit every time because they had a stomach ache -- or how about menstrual cramps? because they can be a lot more painful and debilitating than a stomach ache. Or a headache? or maybe because you just think there is not point in continuing with the match because you know you can't win?

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:19 PM
says the unbiased "Justine Fan" :o

Err what has that got to do with it? :(

Oh I see ... that was the only answer you could come up with ... you had no answer for it! Oh ok then I now understand! :haha:

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:19 PM
Different rules/ethics for different tournaments?
Just asking!Definitely. The slams are the pinnacle of the sport.
The situation with Venus at IW vs JH2 at OZ this year differs in four particulars

Slam vs non-slam
Final vs semi-final
Retirement vs walkover
illness vs injury
The side issue at IW, of course, was the accusation that Venus gave Serena a wlakover because she didn't want to play her. Given the number of times they've played each other since, that particular lie has since died a quiet death.

The comparable situation to htis year's OZ final is really the Wimbledon 2003 final. Venus really shouldn't have played that match. She went into it with an abdominal injury, and she made it worse by continuing to play when she aggravated it. She consequently missed the rest of the year. In fact, except for last year's Wimbledon, she really hasn't ever recovered her level of play. If that wasn't a case for a retirement in a slam final, then nothing short of that is either.

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:20 PM
Different rules/ethics for different tournaments?
Just asking!

Only when it comes to the fans of the players that Justine has beaten! ;)

Justine Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:23 PM
The comparable situation to htis year's OZ final is really the Wimbledon 2003 final. Venus really shouldn't have played that match. She went into it with an abdominal injury, and she made it worse by continuing to play when she aggravated it. She consequently missed the rest of the year. In fact, except for last year's Wimbledon, she really hasn't ever recovered her level of play. If that wasn't a case for a retirement in a slam final, then nothing short of that is either.

Thank you for seeing Justine's side of it!

Hallelujah!

creep
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:24 PM
It's all the players own doing. If they didn't fuck around as much as they do and cry wolf when there's nothing wrong with them, then, just maybe people would give them a bye ball when there is something amiss with them.

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 04:39 PM
Definitely. The slams are the pinnacle of the sport.
The situation with Venus at IW vs JH2 at OZ this year differs in four particulars

Slam vs non-slam
Final vs semi-final
Retirement vs walkover
illness vs injury
The side issue at IW, of course, was the accusation that Venus gave Serena a wlakover because she didn't want to play her. Given the number of times they've played each other since, that particular lie has since died a quiet death.

The comparable situation to htis year's OZ final is really the Wimbledon 2003 final. Venus really shouldn't have played that match. She went into it with an abdominal injury, and she made it worse by continuing to play when she aggravated it. She consequently missed the rest of the year. In fact, except for last year's Wimbledon, she really hasn't ever recovered her level of play. If that wasn't a case for a retirement in a slam final, then nothing short of that is either.

Last time I checked, the scoring was 15-30-40-game in Indian Wells just like it was at the AO.
Last time I checked, the spectators have paid their ticket to attend a match at both I.W. and AO.

I can't understand why there should be different logic between a very important Tier 1 and a GS when it comes to rules and ethics. You like to think so because it supposedly suits your favourite player. Yet WS fans are ususally the most vocal when it comes to double standards regarding the treatment V and S get ( and rightfuly so for the most part I have to say ).

About the retirement vs walkover thing, it is totally irrelevant since Justine actually should have call it a walkover from the beginning, giving how hopeless her situation was. What would you have said had she done so? I'd be curious.

As for Venus, sorry I have to say it, she was freakin stupid to play on at Wimbledon. As a fan who have witnessed her level of play declined since then, you should be the first one to recognize it would have been a wise decision to retire/not to step on the court.

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 05:28 PM
Thank you for seeing Justine's side of it!

Hallelujah!I've always seen Henin-Hardenne's side of it. She was feeling ill, she could have kept going, she knew she wouldn't win, so she quit. That was never the issue.

The issue was whether or not that was disgraceful and dishonorable behaviour in a GS final. Neither the facts, nor the legality of what she did have ever been at issue.

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:09 PM
I can't understand why there should be different logic between a very important Tier 1 and a GS when it comes to rules and ethics.Possibly you really can't understand, and of course, it isn't the rules that are different, or even the logic. It's the expectations.

The slams are tennis history. They are the oldest tournaments, the tournaments that tennis legends played. The tournaments upon which all that is tennis today was built. Some of the players appreciate all that, and their behaviour changes accordingly.As for Venus, sorry I have to say it, she was freakin stupid to play on at Wimbledon. As a fan who have witnessed her level of play declined since then, you should be the first one to recognize it would have been a wise decision to retire/not to step on the court.It might have been wiser not to have played. It might have been wiser to have retired mid-match. But I totally understand her decision to play, and her decision not to retire.

It's about honor, it's about standards, it's about respect for the game, and for the tournament, and for the champions who've gone before you. You know, I'm sure, how many slams every important active player has won. Do you know how many times each of them won Rome, or Indian Wells? The slams ARE different. They ARE more important.

Roger Federer cried when Rod Laver handed him the OZ championship trophy. Because the magnitude of the event, and because of his immense respect for Laver (to my mind the greatest player in the history of the sport).

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:18 PM
I've always seen Henin-Hardenne's side of it. She was feeling ill, she could have kept going, she knew she wouldn't win, so she quit. That was never the issue.

That's an incorrect assumption on your part, but not Justine's words. So stop trying to speak for her.

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:20 PM
The comparable situation to htis year's OZ final is really the Wimbledon 2003 final. Venus really shouldn't have played that match. She went into it with an abdominal injury, and she made it worse by continuing to play when she aggravated it. She consequently missed the rest of the year. In fact, except for last year's Wimbledon, she really hasn't ever recovered her level of play. If that wasn't a case for a retirement in a slam final, then nothing short of that is either.


You're grabbing at straws here. Venus's crap play since Wimby 2003 has nothing to do with that hoax of an abdominal injury. Even if she was really injured in that match (let's say for the sake of argument she was), those sort of things heal in 3-4 weeks. She had her own reasons for taking all that time off, only Venus and the Williams family know what they really are. Her game has declined due to a number of factors.

VS Fan
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:34 PM
Volcana:

Venus decision to play was probably more about stopping HUGE dissaprovals from the media and tennis in general. She was in a no win situation. Had she defaulted, it would have made Indian Wells look like a very minor incident.

Giving Serena a Wimbledon crown by default would have made the detractors go crazy, even though she SHOULD have retired from the semifinal with Kim. She WON it by accident!!

That she actually WON a set must reflect Serena's inability to deal with her courage.

She said in the ceremony that she played because the Winbledon crowd "deserved a match" for the final.

She delivered at great expense to herself.

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 06:47 PM
She delivered at great expense to herself.


Nobody buys that except the Williams fans. Venus did what she was supposed to do - she played the final. But "at great expense"? Gimme a break.

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:04 PM
Possibly you really can't understand, and of course, it isn't the rules that are different, or even the logic. It's the expectations.

I expect players to follow the same rules, logic and ethics wherever and whenever they're playing. Slams got more exposure, that's the sole reason everything blows into larger proportions. But as far as , let's say respect for the game is concerned, in my eyes a challenger 1st round or a GS Final do have the same value. People just won't talk about it as much because they have no idea/do not care what happens there.

The slams are tennis history. They are the oldest tournaments, the tournaments that tennis legends played. The tournaments upon which all that is tennis today was built. Some of the players appreciate all that, and their behaviour changes accordingly.It might have been wiser not to have played. It might have been wiser to have retired mid-match. But I totally understand her decision to play, and her decision not to retire.

And it was a stupid decision, no matter what. Sure, courage, perseverance are great values, only when not led by blind stupidity/so called respect for the event.

Tell me honestly, if we could go back in time, would you rather choose :
a) what actually happened ( Venus playing on, now not being close to the player she once was ),
or b) Venus acting wisely,retiring/not stepping on the court, and now still being the "old" winning Venus?

And please, be honest.

It's about honor, it's about standards, it's about respect for the game, and for the tournament, and for the champions who've gone before you. You know, I'm sure, how many slams every important active player has won. Do you know how many times each of them won Rome, or Indian Wells? The slams ARE different. They ARE more important.

Roger Federer cried when Rod Laver handed him the OZ championship trophy. Because the magnitude of the event, and because of his immense respect for Laver (to my mind the greatest player in the history of the sport).

Lower tournaments deserve just as much respect as GS's in my book.
It doesn't matter how old they are, how big the TV ratings are, at the end of the day it's in both cases about the game of tennis.

Suppose you consider breaking a racket a mark of disrepect for the game, is breaking a racket during a GS a worse attitude than breaking a racket in a challenger ? To me it would be the exact same ( I don't mind players breaking racket but you get the message )

About Roger, well seriously he's getting quite ridiculous crying at every damn slam he wins. Once was emotional, twice was moving, trice was ok, but now it's really too much ( and I'm a Fan )

starr
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:04 PM
About the retirement vs walkover thing, it is totally irrelevant since Justine actually should have call it a walkover from the beginning, giving how hopeless her situation was. What would you have said had she done so? I'd be curious.



If that's the criteria, I guess none of the men should ever show up against Federer in a final.

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:13 PM
If that's the criteria, I guess none of the men should ever show up against Federer in a final.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

No one is unbeatable you **** *** ( Didn't Fed lost a final somewhere in ShangaÔ last november anyway ? :tape: )

Suffering from stomach ulcere puts you in a position where you can't possibly win any kind of match against a top 30 player

See the nuance? Or is it too acute for the 2 neurones of yours?

Carmen Mairena
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:14 PM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?

Just wonderin...............

When it's about Justine, she SHOULDN'T quit any match in any of the situations you say. I'm sure that even if the central court broke because of earthquakes it would have to be Justine the one to give further explanations of her quitting... :rolleyes:

Justine :yeah: :hug: :worship:

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:18 PM
Lower tournaments deserve just as much respect as GS's in my book.
It doesn't matter how old they are, how big the TV ratings are, at the end of the day it's in both cases about the game of tennis.




buddy, if that was all it's about, there wouldn't BE Grand Slams in the first place. Only an imbecile could seriously argue that all tournaments are equal in importance. The four Grand Slams matter in a way that other tournaments do not, and the finals of the Slams even more so.

minboy
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:25 PM
buddy, if that was all it's about, there wouldn't BE Grand Slams in the first place. Only an imbecile could seriously argue that all tournaments are equal in importance. The four Grand Slams matter in a way that other tournaments do not, and the finals of the Slams even more so.

Gosh, do u share your neurons with Starr or what?

Respect does not equal importance. I repeat : respect does not equal importance.

Are GS more important than lower tournaments? Off course.
Are lower tournaments less subject to respect than Gs? No

Get it??

vogus
Feb 11th, 2006, 07:32 PM
Gosh, do u share your neurons with Starr or what?

Respect does not equal importance. I repeat : respect does not equal importance.

Are GS more important than lower tournaments? Off course.
Are lower tournaments less subject to respect than Gs? No

Get it??


in the real world (as opposed to your fictitious utopia), respect is very much related to importance. Players are not going to make the same sacrifices for a Tier 2 that they make for a Slam. And that's a function of respect.

moon
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:00 PM
I've always seen Henin-Hardenne's side of it. She was feeling ill, she could have kept going, she knew she wouldn't win, so she quit. That was never the issue.

The issue was whether or not that was disgraceful and dishonorable behaviour in a GS final. Neither the facts, nor the legality of what she did have ever been at issue.

This is not an acceptable reason for quitting a tennis match, at any level.

starr
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:26 PM
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

No one is unbeatable you **** *** ( Didn't Fed lost a final somewhere in ShangaÔ last november anyway ? :tape: )

Suffering from stomach ulcere puts you in a position where you can't possibly win any kind of match against a top 30 player

See the nuance? Or is it too acute for the 2 neurones of yours?

What this tells me is that you've never had a stomach ulcer. A stomach ulcer doesn't produce debilitating pain. Plus the stomach "ulcer" was caused by the anti-inflamatories -- which makes it a mild ulcer if one might call it an ulcer at all. It seems the main problem is that she had pain during the night and couldn't sleep and that left her without energy the next day. That's what Justine said in her press conference and I have no reason to doubt it.

edit: just a hint for you: When someone stoops to personal insults during an argument, it demonstrates an insecurity about one's own position. It's sort of a dead giveaway, so you might want to reconsider that tactic.

harloo
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:51 PM
That she actually WON a set must reflect Serena's inability to deal with her courage.



:confused: :lol:

Infiniti2001
Feb 11th, 2006, 08:56 PM
You're grabbing at straws here. Venus's crap play since Wimby 2003 has nothing to do with that hoax of an abdominal injury. Even if she was really injured in that match (let's say for the sake of argument she was), those sort of things heal in 3-4 weeks. She had her own reasons for taking all that time off, only Venus and the Williams family know what they really are. Her game has declined due to a number of factors.

leave it up to the board bully/knowitall to call Venus's ab injury a hoax. You are so transparent it's even funny anymore :rolleyes:

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:06 PM
Venus's crap play since Wimby 2003 has nothing to do with that hoax of an abdominal injury. Even if she was really injured in that match (let's say for the sake of argument she was), those sort of things heal in 3-4 weeks.Well, I suppose calling it a hoax in the first place does inform all of us about the accuracy of anything else you write, so you are performing a service. As for healing in '3-4 weeks', that depends on the severity of the injury. It might heal in 3-4 weeks, it might take 6-8 months. It might require surgery, even multiple surgeries. Abdominal tears are nasty things that don't heal easily. Of course, since you're pretending the injury a hoax in the first place, the facts about such injuries probably don't interest you either.in my eyes a challenger 1st round or a GS Final do have the same value.We can agree to disagree. I think a GS final is more important.Tell me honestly, if we could go back in time, would you rather choose :

a) what actually happened ( Venus playing on, now not being close to the player she once was ),
or b) Venus acting wisely,retiring/not stepping on the court, and now still being the "old" winning Venus?

And please, be honest.c) I would rather she had played, and waqs now playing as she did from 2000-2003.

It's not an either or proposition. The way Venus is playing now is not the result of that injury.

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:10 PM
The side issue at IW, of course, was the accusation that Venus gave Serena a wlakover because she didn't want to play her. Given the number of times they've played each other since, that particular lie has since died a quiet death.

Wow, then how about...

- The number of times that Justine has come back from behind to win matches in grand slams.

- The time that Justine lost a grand slam final.

It's not like she was in uncharted waters.

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:13 PM
So when Venus led 6-1 3-6 5-0 in Wimbledon 2001 Justine thought that she could still win? Remembering that Venus is the defending and US Open champion.

But against Amelie who was leading 6-2 2-0 and slamless, she thought she couldn't win and gave up?

Um... looking at those two scorelines and situations, if she was a quitter, I'd say she would've quit in the former.

Hayato
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Not at 6-1 *1-0 when your winning.

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:32 PM
Pardon me for taking a couple sentence each from your last two posts to respond to.So when Venus led 6-1 3-6 5-0 in Wimbledon 2001 Justine thought that she could still win? Remembering that Venus is the defending and US Open champion.

But against Amelie who was leading 6-2 2-0 and slamless, she thought she couldn't win and gave up?

Um... looking at those two scorelines and situations, if she was a quitter, I'd say she would've quit in the former.Sam, the difference is, she was feeling sick against Amelie, AND she was losing badly. Against Venus, she taken the second set, and she'd beaten Venus the only time they'd ever played before.

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:32 PM
I've always seen Henin-Hardenne's side of it. She was feeling ill, she could have kept going, she knew she wouldn't win, so she quit. That was never the issue.

The issue was whether or not that was disgraceful and dishonorable behaviour in a GS final. Neither the facts, nor the legality of what she did have ever been at issue.
How do you know she could've kept going? How?

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:35 PM
Pardon me for taking a couple sentence each from your last two posts to respond to.Sam, the difference is, she was feeling sick against Amelie, AND she was losing badly. Against Venus, she taken the second set, and she'd beaten Venus the only time they'd ever played before.
The only time they've played before on clay. Big difference. Venus was defending champion and US Open champion and every knew she was THE BEST fast court player during that time.

As for Mauresmo..

Justine won the last time they played. Had a 4-3 lead in H2H and won on the only similar surface to this in Sydney. She's in a much much better position.

And given Amelie's nickname "Choko Momo", Justine would have to be the silliest bitch on Earth to just "give up" a slam like that. Really.

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:48 PM
How do you know she could've kept going? How?By watching the match, and the end of it. She didn't seek medical attention, she picked up her rackets and walked out, she stayed for the awards ceremony. She was NOT physically incapacitated. Feeling absolutely wretched? No doubt.

Note on your previous post. I didn't call her a 'quitter'. I said she quit in that particular match. That may seem a semantic difference, but to me, it's not.

You may recall all the posts about Roberto Duran immediately after the OZ final. (He too, incidentally, said he was suffering from an upset stomach when he quit against Leonard.) Well, Duran went on to many more years of success. Nobody says he's quitter. He's still regarded as one of the best fighters in the history of the sport. A champion before, and after that fight. But it's still the thing people most remember about him, now that it's 25 years later.

hello1087
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:54 PM
Well I think its accpetable if a family member dies that, you are close to take a day off or even to retire, but I think its totally possible to carry on with the match, look at Pete Sampras's match with Jim Corier he still caried on with it, but in different situations it is different and feels different, life is not all about tennis, sometimes you need to take time out

Volcana
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:55 PM
The only time they've played before on clay.The only they played before period.

Sam L
Feb 11th, 2006, 09:57 PM
By watching the match, and the end of it. She didn't seek medical attention, she picked up her rackets and walked out, she stayed for the awards ceremony. She was NOT physically incapacitated. Feeling absolutely wretched? No doubt.

Note on your previous post. I didn't call her a 'quitter'. I said she quit in that particular match. That may seem a semantic difference, but to me, it's not.

You may recall all the posts about Roberto Duran immediately after the OZ final. (He too, incidentally, said he was suffering from an upset stomach when he quit against Leonard.) Well, Duran went on to many more years of success. Nobody says he's quitter. He's still regarded as one of the best fighters in the history of the sport. A champion before, and after that fight. But it's still the thing people most remember about him, now that it's 25 years later.
Stop talking about Duran. I don't care who he is, he's not a tennis player, he's not relevant.

Let's talk about tennis players then.

If that's the case, what about Helen Wills Moody who quit against Jacobs. She was even going to play doubles that day.

No one remembers that. People only remember her 19 slams and her match against Lenglen in Cannes.

Just because a player is able to lift her bags and is walking. Does not mean she can play tennis. It requires you to do different things, remember?

squash
Feb 11th, 2006, 10:22 PM
when you are as ill as Justine was at the AO.

JennyS
Feb 11th, 2006, 10:23 PM
I say if a player has a symptom can be relieved by an over-the-counter drug or massage, then they should continue on. If a player is really in visible distress and their health is at stake, by all means quit the match.

In terms of what Justine did, I think the reason so many people still doubt her is for two big reasons:

1. She's kind of the "little girl who cried wolf" so even if she is injured or not feeling well, many people won't believe her whether she is hurting/sick or not.

2. There were no signs that she was actually in physical stress. We didn't see her grab her stomach through the match, grimace, have difficulty running, or bend over in pain.

If a player needs to take a medication, maybe they should give them 15-20 minutes to let the medicine kick in. That way maybe we'd have fewer retirements during matches.

Greenout
Feb 11th, 2006, 11:10 PM
Well I think its accpetable if a family member dies that, you are close to take a day off or even to retire, but I think its totally possible to carry on with the match, look at Pete Sampras's match with Jim Corier he still caried on with it, but in different situations it is different and feels different, life is not all about tennis, sometimes you need to take time out


Well..then perhaps ESPN, and everyone should realize that Justine has played a final before under bad circumstances. She simply doesn't talk about it to the media.

For example.. WIMBLEDON 2001 against VENUS the final. Justine's grandfather died right before the match! She's not a quitter.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/2001/wimbledon/news/2001/07/08/henin_family/


Henin's estranged father cheers from afar

Posted: Sunday July 08, 2001 2:35 PM

Justine Henin receives the Wimbledon singles runner-up trophy from the Duchess of Kent. AP

ROCHEFORT, Belgium (Reuters) -- Justine Henin's 82-year-old grandfather died on Sunday morning just hours before she played in the Wimbledon final, her father said, but she was protected from the news until after the match.

Jose Henin, who is estranged from his 19-year-old daughter, told Reuters that Georges Rosiere died of a heart attack.

"He was her greatest fan," said Jose. Justine was overpowered by defending champion Venus Williams of the United States 6-1, 3-6, 6-0 in the final.

Jose said he and his daughter had grown apart after the death of his wife Francoise from cancer six years go. "I'm distant from her now, following my wife's death even more so," he said.

Justine is reluctant to talk about the family split which came last year.

Before the falling-out, Jose had traveled with his daughter, but now she travels with her coach Carlos Rodrigues, and occasionally fiance Pierre-Yves, who was courtside on Sunday.

All Justine says is that she does not talk to her father.

The estrangement had been hard, Jose said, "but Justine's results show that was what we needed, that it was the right thing to do. "She's a lot more independent now and I'm a lot more calm."

Wise beyond her years, Henin has suffered more than her fair share of heartbreak.

Her mother's death was a trauma which almost ended her tennis ambitions before they had got off the ground as she had to look after her two brothers and younger sister.

"It was really, really difficult for me to play after this," she says. "I think when my mother died I became more mature than I would be if she was still here."

Francoise had been a major influence in Justine's tennis and one particular moment stands out for the 19-year-old.

"My mother had taken me to Roland Garros when I was 10," she recalls. "I saw the match between Steffi Graf and Monica Seles in a big final in 1992. "I was in the stadium and I said to my mother 'I will play on this court one day.'"

She fulfilled her promise in 1999, five years after her mother's death, when she played Lindsay Davenport in the second round at Roland Garros.

She came mighty close to winning, bowing out 7-5 in the third set. "When I played there it was fantastic and I thought about that moment [with my mother]," she says.

Jose watched his daughter's Wimbledon final with 500 friends and neighbors at the local sports hall in Rochefort, a town where the entire Henin family lives.

The partisan audience was in a festive mood at first but turned somber as their girl was beaten. "We're right behind her because we know how young she is and that she has the future in front of her, when she'll certainly win one, if not more, Grand Slams," said Mayor Francois Bellot.

The 19-year-old Henin is the first Belgian to reach the Wimbledon singles final, but she is not the only Belgian to have done well this year.

Last month Kim Clijsters became the first player from Belgium to reach a Grand Slam final when she was runner-up at the French Open, having beaten Henin in the semifinals.

"They're a real force to be reckoned with for the future," Henin's father said.

Scotso
Feb 11th, 2006, 11:21 PM
There is a large difference between a grand slam final and other matches.

StarDuvallGrant
Feb 11th, 2006, 11:54 PM
For example.. WIMBLEDON 2001 against VENUS the final. Justine's grandfather died right before the match! She's not a quitter.

ROCHEFORT, Belgium (Reuters) -- Justine Henin's 82-year-old grandfather died on Sunday morning just hours before she played in the Wimbledon final, her father said, but she was protected from the news until after the match.


:)

Justine Fan
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:02 AM
It's all the players own doing. If they didn't fuck around as much as they do and cry wolf when there's nothing wrong with them, then, just maybe people would give them a bye ball when there is something amiss with them.

You know creep ..... you are so right there!

Volcana
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:09 AM
If that's the case, what about Helen Wills Moody who quit against Jacobs. She was even going to play doubles that day.

No one remembers that.Actually, most articles you read about Helen Wills Moody bring up that match. Most people with any interest in tennis history know about it.

Now as to whether or not she could have continued playing, here are a coup[le quotes, courtesy of the boston globe (http://www.boston.com/sports/other_sports/tennis/articles/2006/01/29/henin_hardenne_took_the_queasy_way_out/).

''My energy was very low and my stomach painful." - Justine Henin-Hardenne

''I knew at the beginning I couldn't win. But I wanted to try. When you see it's not working, it's the only way to go out. There was no reason to keep playing." - Justine Henin-Hardenne

Note: That wasn't, 'I couldn't play'. It was 'There was no reason to keep playing.'

There was one other quote in that article that sums up the position of most people.

''You stay on the court until you're obviously sick." - Mats Wilander

And I can't help bringing up Duran, it just about the perfect analogy. If you were a boxer, you'd know how difficult a sport it really is. The conditioning of boxers, especially at the lower weight classes, easily challenges that of tennis players.

In some ways though, JH2's quote sums it up perfectly.
"There was no reason to keep playing."
I'm absolutely sure that for her, there wasn't. That's exactly the point of conflict.

Justine Fan
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:32 AM
I've always seen Henin-Hardenne's side of it. She was feeling ill, she could have kept going, she knew she wouldn't win, so she quit. That was never the issue.

The issue was whether or not that was disgraceful and dishonorable behaviour in a GS final. Neither the facts, nor the legality of what she did have ever been at issue.

This is a nice and intelligent post - none of that arguing stuff!

OK .. yes I understand, but what was she supposed to do? There was a post by miniboy on the first page I think that gave the example of Venus with her abdominal strain when she played Wimbledon 2003. Of course Venus should not have played that final, not with what she had. But look at what happened when she did play it, the poor thing hasn't been right since. Ok the abdominal injury has gone, but it's left her not the Venus we all knew in 2002/3. She's still a force to be reckoned with on a very good day, but she used to be like that every day!! Players were shit scared to be drawn against her!

Now with JHH she could see the future and the ramifications of playing on with an injury - Venus didn't, but now Venus does and that is why she looks after herself a bit more by not playing matches until she is fully fit.

Justine has had a history of this virus etc and we know that this retirement had nothing to do with the virus, BUT maybe if she would have carried on playing, even if it was only 4 more games, she could have brought something on. Justine had no energy - when you've been out of the tour for nearly a year with an energy-sapping virus, I'm sure she was concerned and worried when she had no energy again. That's bound to bring up some fear. Well, like Venus is looking after herself now and not playing until she is 100% fit - Justine is doing the same - she had no energy at all at that point of the match and maybe just said to herself "I can't make myself ill again, just to win a grand slam and just to let Amelie celebrate her match point" Remember 14 months prior to that she was in bed with an energy-sapping virus! Don't you think it goes round in a players mind that if I do that .... that might happen. It's human nature, we all do. Do you think if Venus now has a strain in her abdomen she'd go out and play a grand slam final - I bet she wouldn't - she looks after herself now and that's why she has withdrawn from Antwerp because she has an injury and she doesn't want to threaten her career by playing with an injury. The same is for Justine, she was looking after herself ... except her injury is not physical it's internal and as some cannot see it, some judge it as a lie.

So what I'm trying to say here is whether it is disgraceful or dishonourable, Justine was just looking after herself and thinking of the future. Yes you may think it was selfish, but this is what most players do when it comes to their health. Just go by Venus as an example - it's one of the best examples you can give - she played when injured and look what happened. But as I said, because no one can see Justine's injuries, that assume that she is quitting and telling lies - I'm sorry, but Justine never gives up. So I don't really think it was disgraceful or dishonourable, I don't think you can give it a name - I think it's called "looking after yourself".

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:43 AM
Would it have been more palatable for some of you if she had defauted the final without even stepping on court?? No.

Because some of you continue to moan, now for days, and I'm sure for the upcoming weeks over a decision made by one of the greatest on-court fighters of this generation.

Justine's decision had to be for herself. And I'm glad she had the courage to do what was best for herself during an on-court health crisis.

Many of you, especially some of Justine's biggest detractors whine about how often today's pro players are injured, yet are now bitching that they should play through the pain and misery.

Un-fu**ing believable.

gsm
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:49 AM
i have been watching/playing tennis for over 10 yrs.

never have i seen such a weak/strange retirement as i did in the AO final.

it seemes that most of the people giving h-h the benefit of the doubt either didnt see the match or have h-h in the username, sig or avatar and are blinded by faith.

there is no coincidence that this retirement has attracted so much collective negative attention, its because the vast majority of those that saw the match/post match, body language etc... are strongly of the opinion that h-h should have at the very least tried to carry on.

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:51 AM
i have been watching/playing tennis for over 10 yrs.

never have i seen such a weak/strange retirement as i did in the AO final.

it seemes that most of the people giving h-h the benefit of the doubt either didnt see the match or have h-h in the username, sig or avatar and are blinded by faith.

there is no coincidence that this retirement has attracted so much collective negative attention, its because the vast majority of those that saw the match/post match, body language etc... are strongly of the opinion that h-h should have at the very least tried to carry on.

I watched the entire match and it was obvious that something wrong was happening with Justine early on in the match.

I didn't add Justine to my signature until after the match.

In spite of the fact Justine knew she probably wouldn't win, she showed up and tried. Of course, the haters will never give her credit for that.

sunset
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:58 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?


No offense, but weíre not stupid.
I donít know what your implications are but if youíre referring to Justine I think she should have played on.

Letís look at the facts, nothing more.

1. Justinís camp announced that she hadnít felt better in 2 years.
2. Just prior to quitting Justine played and won a 30 ball rally.
3. When the doctor came on the court he had something in left hand that would have relived the symptoms. Justine elected not to take any.

Iím not a lawyer but the evidence points more toward quitting out of frustration, not an illness.

Justine Fan
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:59 AM
I watched the entire match and it was obvious that something wrong was happening with Justine early on in the match.

I didn't add Justine to my signature until after the match.

In spite of the fact Justine knew she probably wouldn't win, she showed up and tried. Of course, the haters will never give her credit for that.

:hug:

Kart
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:17 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?

Just wonderin...............

If she's beating someone I like then I'd find it quite acceptable.

gsm
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:44 AM
I watched the entire match and it was obvious that something wrong was happening with Justine early on in the match.
if your referring to h-h spraying balls into the net/out of court etc... then your not alone.

if your referring to h-h looking sick/ill, then your almost alone, the vast majority of people who saw the match were shocked when she called for the trainer and amazed when she pulled the pin.

heck, she didnt take all the medicine given to her by the trainer and then only played for two points, giving no time for the medicine to work.

I didn't add Justine to my signature until after the match. :tape:

In spite of the fact Justine knew she probably wouldn't win, she showed up and tried. Of course, the haters will never give her credit for that.
yeah, i'm a hater, the vast majority of people who saw the match are haters.

faste5683
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:47 AM
If she's beating someone I like then I'd find it quite acceptable.

:lol:

:wavey:

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:52 AM
yeah, i'm a hater, the vast majority of people who saw the match are haters.

Of the millions of people that saw the final, only a fractional vocal minority are complaining. Complaining that a tennis player, who didn't violate any WTA/ITF rule, withdrew from a tennis match because she felt ill. How dare her!

However for those who were indifferent, or didn't care for Justine before the final, have taken the opportunity to use her illness as a batting ram against her. Yes, hater indeed. Especially when those same people constantly complain about the injuries in the WTA, and so many others in the WTA have retired during matches and had to default.

Come on. At least be consistent.

gsm
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:20 AM
Of the millions of people that saw the final, only a fractional vocal minority are complaining.
if thats the case why did wertheim had this to say;

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/jon_wertheim/01/29/aussie.open/index.html
"I don't recall a single issue that has generated more response from you guys than Justine Henin-Hardenne's dubious retirement in the women's final."

is that why this topic has been perhaps the most talked about ever on this forum, since perhaps ever.

yep, its just fractional minority who saw the match who are outraged by h-h's AO final behaviour.

Hazy
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:20 AM
Only the American/Anglo Saxon press, that never liked Justine in the first place, are complaining.

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:23 AM
if thats the case why did wertheim had this to say;

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/jon_wertheim/01/29/aussie.open/index.html
"I don't recall a single issue that has generated more response from you guys than Justine Henin-Hardenne's dubious retirement in the women's final."

is that why this topic has been perhaps the most talked about ever on this forum, since perhaps ever.

yep, its just fractional minority who saw the match who are outraged by h-h's AO final behaviour.

200+ emails does constitute a fractional minority in comparison to the millions that watched the match. Next, hater?

griffin
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:32 AM
Of the millions of people that saw the final, only a fractional vocal minority are complaining.

I'm sure it's comforting to chalk up all the objections to Justine's decision to quit to a "vocal minority" of "haters" but given that even some of her FANS have voiced disapproval this is flat-out delusional.

Anyone who's bothered to read why most people on this board objected to Justine's retirement would have a hard time not understanding exactly what their reasons are, and the fact that some of you can't just disagree on those points but feel the need ignore them and put it all down to people "just looking for a reason to hate" says to me that you know you don't have a decent argument to counter with.

gsm
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:40 AM
200+ emails does constitute a fractional minority in comparison to the millions that watched the match.
where does it say "200+ emails"?

regardless, i doubt he would say "I don't recall a single issue that has generated more response from you guys than Justine Henin-Hardenne's dubious retirement in the women's final." for the heck of it.

and i doubt this forum was buzzing for a week with people hammering h-h for her AO final effort, for the heck of it.

Greenout
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:45 AM
Being objective, and finding fault in error by commenting is one thing, calling Justine "disgusting bitch" , and saying " I always hated her" , "hope she never wins another match" , "Loser" is something else all together. And this is what bothers,and hurts alot of Justine fans.


If it happened to say.. Lindsay, or Kim or say it was Amelie that withdrew in the exact same circumstances the majority of the Anglo press would be very sympathetic, and so would this board. Justine simply isn't a very sympathetic player to alot of people. Perhaps not gloating, and looking too pleased about that blow out at last year's RG 2005 against Mary may helped her cause. But, has there been any Justine final in a grand slam when she won where this board or critics have called it a "good match"? All I remember is bashing and calling any Justine grand slam win or Olympics medal match "the worst ever".


On the other hand- if it happened to say Maria, or Venus. I think the reaction would probably be as bad for them as Justine since these two players haven't been getting much support from tennis critics.

spencercarlos
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:50 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?


No offense, but weíre not stupid.
I donít know what your implications are but if youíre referring to Justine I think she should have played on.

Letís look at the facts, nothing more.

1. Justinís camp announced that she hadnít felt better in 2 years.
2. Just prior to quitting Justine played and won a 30 ball rally.
3. When the doctor came on the court he had something in left hand that would have relived the symptoms. Justine elected not to take any.

Iím not a layer but the evidence points more toward quitting out of frustration, not an illness.
I agree

griffin
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:51 AM
All I remember is bashing and calling any Justine grand slam win or Olympics medal match "the worst ever".


If that's all you remember (and you've managed to forget that every slam winner in recent memory has had her detractors) then I suggest you have a very selective memory.

Hell, even everybody's favorite girls next door, Kim and Lindsay, caugh flak when they reached number one.

spencercarlos
Feb 12th, 2006, 03:12 AM
Of the millions of people that saw the final, only a fractional vocal minority are complaining. Complaining that a tennis player, who didn't violate any WTA/ITF rule, withdrew from a tennis match because she felt ill. How dare her!

However for those who were indifferent, or didn't care for Justine before the final, have taken the opportunity to use her illness as a batting ram against her. Yes, hater indeed. Especially when those same people constantly complain about the injuries in the WTA, and so many others in the WTA have retired during matches and had to default.

Come on. At least be consistent.
You are wrong.. Most people think she quit because she was losing badly.
Although i think she looked sick, i think she could have finished the match. Having the stomach pain she had, she could have given herself more time, go to the bathroom, take some pills, ot have more time to recover, i donīt think she was going through a critical situation that would not have allowed her to continue playing.
Having said this i can tell you i have seen many players with cramps, sick, throwing, or playing in big pain, Agassi, Sampras, Graf, Seles, Hingis, Novotna, Sabatini, Arantxa, Navratilova, among many other players that donīt come to my mind playing injured and finishing their respective matches, most of them ended up losing of course, but they gave their best out there despite the conditions. Whereareas Justine did not.

Greenout
Feb 12th, 2006, 03:14 AM
If that's all you remember (and you've managed to forget that every slam winner in recent memory has had her detractors) then I suggest you have a very selective memory.

Hell, even everybody's favorite girls next door, Kim and Lindsay, caugh flak when they reached number one.


I don't have selective memory.


There's proof in the past threads. Some players catch more flak than others. I would say Justine and Maria especially- perhaps because they've defeated a few players that have bigger fan bases on this board.

I don't think you can compare the rude threads posted about Justine or Maria that crossed the line- and are vulgar or in poor taste to the topics compared to Lindsay being #1 w/out a slam or anything about Amelie or Kim in Wtaworld.



*Back to the original question. So when is it absolutely accepatable for a player to quit a tennis match?

As a JHH supporter I'll be honest, and say actually..in theory never.

But, we've crossed that line of things that should never happen in tennis matches a long time ago. A player was stabbed, an umpire was slapped, doping was used to go deep in a grand slam draw, the crowed jeered a player off her game, player's swearing, coaching from the side lines etc....

And people who use the examples from the pre-internet CNN age don't seem to understand that alot of shit has gone on before. We simply didn't hear about it or see it.

I'm not saying Justine was right- it's still pretty surreal to me, but it happened. Can't go back, and change that match now. People act like it was the Rolling Stones at Altamont where someone got stabbed, and they were pretty oblivious to it flying away after the concert. The AO 2006 final ended very tamely, tepid... I'm sure when you look back at the tape 6 months from now it will look so anti-climatic.

I think the reactions were just the tail end of the bitterness of TENNIS , and all those poor tennis tournaments(Shanghai etc..) from last year, injury talks, no-shows. I'm not even sure it was really about only Justine- mainly a pissed off attitude about TENNIS in general for everyone. The media was very cynical when the men's draw turned to to be so poor this year. It to me was just the snowball effect of everything tennis represented to alot of people in the past 7 months, and unfortunately it came 500X more in expression to Justine's retirement.

Diesel
Feb 12th, 2006, 03:24 AM
I don't have selective memory.


There's proof in the past threads. Some players catch more flak than others. I would say Justine and Maria especially- perhaps because they've defeated a few players that have bigger fan bases on this board.

I don't think you can compare the rude threads posted about Justine or Maria that crossed the line- and are vulgar or in poor taste to the topics compared to Lindsay being #1 w/out a slam or anything about Amelie or Kim in Wtaworld.

You must have selective memory if you only mention Justine and Maria without Venus or Serena anywhere near the top of the list. Both Williams sister trump anything Justine or Maria has received and half the time there is no rhyme or reason behind their bashing that constantly and consistently cross the line. Queue the violins on the the Justine treatment.

Greenout
Feb 12th, 2006, 03:58 AM
You must have selective memory if you only mention Justine and Maria without Venus or Serena anywhere near the top of the list. Both Williams sister trump anything Justine or Maria has received and half the time there is no rhyme or reason behind their bashing that constantly and consistently cross the line. Queue the violins on the the Justine treatment.


I don't have selective memory, but I'll admit that I'm very indifferent to Venus or Serena. I don't read those threads, so yes I may not know about the depth of the Venus/Serena bashing. I have no interest nor get any entertainment from those 6 pages threads that have negative titles about them. I'm simply not interested enough to care: love or hate, it's boring to me actually. It's the same old people with the same old arguments slightly changed to include recent items.

It's like those issues of magazines where you can change the titles from 1983 to 2006, and it's still the same article [10 ways to lose weight quickly from your Christmas Holiday binge]

Diesel
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:14 AM
I don't have selective memory, but I'll admit that I'm very indifferent to Venus or Serena. I don't read those threads, so yes I may not know about the depth of the Venus/Serena bashing.

Your interest or lack thereof isn't a requirement for proof of bashing. Just because you claim not to pay attention to it doesn't mean it does not exist and therefore you move Justine up the coveted bashing list as if it was tailor made for her. That in itself is selective, hence your own indictment of your selective memory.

vogus
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:49 AM
If it happened to say.. Lindsay, or Kim or say it was Amelie that withdrew in the exact same circumstances the majority of the Anglo press would be very sympathetic, and so would this board. Justine simply isn't a very sympathetic player to alot of people.




Not true. If any of those players had withdrawn from a GS final under the same circumstances, there would have been a strong negative reaction. You can't just blame this on the Anglo press disliking Justine. There was already a bad reaction to Davenport's tanking in the final last year, but it would have been even stronger if Davey had walked off the court at 3-0 in the final set.

starr
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:53 AM
:haha:

This is too funny. Fans fighting to claim "the most bashed" title for their favorite.

Jakeev
Feb 12th, 2006, 05:12 AM
1. She is going into labor?
2. She is near death or drops dead?
3. Get's word that someone in her family has died?
4. Earthquakes or meteor showers?
5. Billions of ants crawling across the court?


No offense, but weíre not stupid.
I donít know what your implications are but if youíre referring to Justine I think she should have played on.

Letís look at the facts, nothing more.

1. Justinís camp announced that she hadnít felt better in 2 years.
2. Just prior to quitting Justine played and won a 30 ball rally.
3. When the doctor came on the court he had something in left hand that would have relived the symptoms. Justine elected not to take any.

Iím not a layer but the evidence points more toward quitting out of frustration, not an illness.

Either answer the freakin question or shut the hell up.......oh.......please.

Greenout
Feb 12th, 2006, 05:41 AM
Not true. If any of those players had withdrawn from a GS final under the same circumstances, there would have been a strong negative reaction. You can't just blame this on the Anglo press disliking Justine. There was already a bad reaction to Davenport's tanking in the final last year, but it would have been even stronger if Davey had walked off the court at 3-0 in the final set.


I don't think so.... such harsh abusive language as "disgusting bitch"
"tarnished reputation" , "I always hated her!" would not have been used for Lindsay.

In fact, why don't u start a thread in GM to prove my theory? A poll
[Do you think Justine is a disgusting bitch for AO 2006 or any other crap you think she's pulled before?] I'm sure that 50% would vote yes. If you stuck in an alternative question to the poll [Do you dislike her in anyway for some reason or another?] that would be 30%, and leaving people who actually like Justine at 20% here at WTAworld. com that would vote [No, I like her tennis, and she's fine with me]

junlee_vee
Feb 12th, 2006, 06:27 AM
I'm sure it's comforting to chalk up all the objections to Justine's decision to quit to a "vocal minority" of "haters" but given that even some of her FANS have voiced disapproval this is flat-out delusional.

Anyone who's bothered to read why most people on this board objected to Justine's retirement would have a hard time not understanding exactly what their reasons are, and the fact that some of you can't just disagree on those points but feel the need ignore them and put it all down to people "just looking for a reason to hate" says to me that you know you don't have a decent argument to counter with.

:worship: Great post!

le bon vivant
Feb 12th, 2006, 06:47 AM
When it is acceptible to retire:

1. When the player cannot actually perform the acts required to finish the match.
Example, the player is right handed and has sustained an injury to the right arm and the player cannot swing the racket at the ball.

2. When the player sustained an injury and continued play threatens to do further harm to her body.

Example: a player turns an ankle on court and feels severe pain if she tries to walk or run, indicating possible ligament damage.


3. When the player is taken ill and is in need of immediate medical treatment.
Example, severe heat exhaustion. Symptoms, dizziness or fainting on court, blurred vision, light headedness, disorientation, cold chills, shakes, etc.

When should a player NOT retire.

1. Stomach upsets. ie. See Andy Roddick or Pete Sampras for examples of carrying on, despite stomach problems.

2. Feelings that in your present condition, you cannot win the match.
See Hingis, 1996 and 2002 for examples of carrying on matches, despite physical problems or illness problems.


When should a player retire, rather than make a travisty out of the match? See Mary Pierce, US Open, 2005.


Actually, tennis has brought a lot of this on itself, by allowing the abuse of the injury time out. It used to be that if you cramped or became exhausted on court, it was referred to as loss of conditioning and you had the option of quitting if you couldn't continue. Today, you get to take a two week vacation at a health spa and listen to Doctor Phil tapes before you have to retire.

lmaoooooooooooooooooooooo :haha: :tape::tape:

Kunal
Feb 12th, 2006, 06:56 AM
when her water breaks

faste5683
Feb 12th, 2006, 11:37 AM
I don't think so.... such harsh abusive language as "disgusting bitch"
"tarnished reputation" , "I always hated her!" would not have been used for Lindsay.

In fact, why don't u start a thread in GM to prove my theory? A poll
[Do you think Justine is a disgusting bitch for AO 2006 or any other crap you think she's pulled before?] I'm sure that 50% would vote yes. If you stuck in an alternative question to the poll [Do you dislike her in anyway for some reason or another?] that would be 30%, and leaving people who actually like Justine at 20% here at WTAworld. com that would vote [No, I like her tennis, and she's fine with me]

Actually, you're right on. I've done some casual research, and it's not pretty. There's an awful lot of "fogging" going on in this thread - and by persons that should more detached in their views, imo.

This site is all about people expressing their opinions. Yet when adjectives such as "ass waxed", "disgusting bitch", and "gutless whore" are reapeatedly used in a 200 post thread, you've got to wonder why it was allowed to go on and on and on...

:wavey:

creep
Feb 12th, 2006, 11:44 AM
You know creep ..... you are so right there!

If you enter a thread and just head straight for my post/s, itíll save a lot of time reading through bullshit. :)

faste5683
Feb 12th, 2006, 11:51 AM
If you enter a thread and just head straight for my post/s, itíll save a lot of time reading through bullshit. :)

I know I do! Why wade through the mountain of hyperbole when "creep" has graced us with a comment? :lol:

P.S. How's "Mel" doing? :kiss:

:wavey:

creep
Feb 12th, 2006, 11:59 AM
I know I do! Why wade through the mountain of hyperbole when "creep" has graced us with a comment? :lol:

P.S. How's "Mel" doing? :kiss:

:wavey:

You know something? I havenít heard from Mel since she became a stripper. Last time I heard from her she told me this story.

That she walks out and starts shaking her butt in this guys face. And he takes a twenty from his wallet, licks it, and slaps it on her right butt cheek.

Then Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He takes out a twenty, licks it, and slaps it on her left butt cheek.

Finally, Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He sits there and thinks for a minute, then he grabs his wallet, takes out his atm card, slits it down the crack of her butt and takes both twenties.

She told me later she found out he was a Banker! :eek:

Chrissie-fan
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:05 PM
If you enter a thread and just head straight for my post/s, itíll save a lot of time reading through bullshit. :)
Brilliant. :worship:

Kart
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:13 PM
Being objective, and finding fault in error by commenting is one thing, calling Justine "disgusting bitch" , and saying " I always hated her" , "hope she never wins another match" , "Loser" is something else all together. And this is what bothers,and hurts alot of Justine fans.

That is quite understandable.

If it happened to say.. Lindsay, or Kim or say it was Amelie that withdrew in the exact same circumstances the majority of the Anglo press would be very sympathetic, and so would this board.

The 'my player gets a tougher time than yours does' argument is weak and wholly subjective - Amelie fans are hardly likely to be more content with all the 'half a man' comments and Lindsay fans are not exactly open to the 'she's a slamless loser' descriptions that we frequently see on here.

I wouldn't blame any of them for feeling that way any more than I do you.

turt
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:26 PM
if your referring to h-h spraying balls into the net/out of court etc... then your not alone.
Obviously
if your referring to h-h looking sick/ill, then your almost alone, the vast majority of people who saw the match were shocked when she called for the trainer and amazed when she pulled the pin.
But you forget to mention the vast majority of people who watched the match did not watch every televised match Justine played in the past, thus don't have a clue about how Justine usually looks like! Most true Justine fans just knew from the beginning there was something wrong, because she looked sooooo pale, really much more than usual. Of course, whatever the true Justine fans obviously saw, it doesn't matter because they are biased, and would say anything to defend Justine :tape:
heck, she didnt take all the medicine given to her by the trainer and then only played for two points, giving no time for the medicine to work.What do you know that she didn't take the medicines before the match, thus not feeling the necessity to take more of these?

:tape:

yeah, i'm a hater, the vast majority of people who saw the match are haters.Maybe not the vast majority, but quite a few people on this board are... Anyway I won't change the haters' mind, so why did I even bother? :rolleyes:

faste5683
Feb 12th, 2006, 12:28 PM
You know something? I havenít heard from Mel since she became a stripper. Last time I heard from her she told me this story.

That she walks out and starts shaking her butt in this guys face. And he takes a twenty from his wallet, licks it, and slaps it on her right butt cheek.

Then Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He takes out a twenty, licks it, and slaps it on her left butt cheek.

Finally, Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He sits there and thinks for a minute, then he grabs his wallet, takes out his atm card, slits it down the crack of her butt and takes both twenties.

She told me later she found out he was a Banker! :eek:

:haha:

I had a feeling Mel had a few good stories in her... :kiss:

:wavey:

Justine Fan
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:02 PM
You know something? I havenít heard from Mel since she became a stripper. Last time I heard from her she told me this story.

That she walks out and starts shaking her butt in this guys face. And he takes a twenty from his wallet, licks it, and slaps it on her right butt cheek.

Then Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He takes out a twenty, licks it, and slaps it on her left butt cheek.

Finally, Mel goes to the next guy and shakes her butt in his face. He sits there and thinks for a minute, then he grabs his wallet, takes out his atm card, slits it down the crack of her butt and takes both twenties.

She told me later she found out he was a Banker! :eek:

:lol: :lol: You are absolutely hysterical!!

Man you're crazy and I love it!!!

Volcana
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:15 PM
But as I said, because no one can see Justine's injuries, that assume that she is quitting and telling lies - I'm sorry, but Justine never gives up. So I don't really think it was disgraceful or dishonourable, I don't think you can give it a name - I think it's called "looking after yourself".I don't think we have much disagreement about the facts. And what their is, is ultimately semantics.

I didn't ever say she was lying, so we aren't disagreeing there. You just don't like the word 'quit'. You prefer 'looking after yourself'. I think her own words imply she could have continued playing. ("There was no reason to keep playing.") You make the point that just because it's physically possible to be on the court playing, doesn't mean you should. And I have to concede, Venus Williams IS a good example of possible negative effects.

So all that really comes down to semantics, between the two of us anyway. What remains is a question of attitutude. How much do you sacrifice your body at the alter of the event. American football has two recent examples

Terrell Owens have come back early from a broken ankle to play in last year's Super Bowl. There was a WHOLE lot of lawyering between him and the team before they let him. Both sides knew he was risking his career, and their investment in him. He played very well in that game.
Chad Pennington, quarterback of the NEw York Jets, suffered a season ending shoulder injury in 2004. Her came back early, to start the 2005 season. And suffered the exact same injury, missing the entire 2005 season, and now his career is in jeopardy.
As athletes in the USA, we're trained to 'sacrifice our bodies', 'lay it all on the line', or, as Amelie Mauresmo said 'I was ready to die out there'. It ISN'T wise. But wisdom isn't the issue, it it? Part of athletic training is using your mind to push yourself past the point where your body says, 'Stop, I don't want to do this anymore'. The image of the marathoner collapsing meters from the finish line, and then crawling to the finish sticks in my mind. Cyclists crashing, then getting up bloody, grabbing a new bike and continuing.

When Mats Wilander said ''You stay on the court until you're obviously sick.", you'll note the 'obviously'. As in when it's apparent to other people. Let me ask you this. Do you understand why ex-pros like Wilanders and Shriver were so shocked when she retired, and why so few pros are expressing sympathy? Even if you think they are wrong, do you understand wy they take the position they do?

TonyP
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:28 PM
Some more points. Posters asked about the "rules" I listed in my earlier post. Of course, I made them up. They are not official rules, just what I personally believe to be sensible.

Another poster, I think Greenout, wrote that Justine paid the price for general anger at the injury situation which has been plaguing tennis for quite some time. That's probably true to some extent. Its not just tennis, either. Athletes are considered pampered, spoiled millionaires these days and the public now loves to attack them.

Michelle Kwan is taking flack for pulling out of the Olympics, when she had gotten special medical dispensaton to get on the US team in the first place.

But some Justine fans are mistakenly saying only a few "haters" are disappointed in her. That is not true. She has taken a real black eye in the media in general. No, tennis fans are not rioting in the streets over this, but tennis fans generally don't burn down the stadium when they are unhappy.

From what I can figure out and what I guess, Justine simply "didn't get it." That is a cliche, pure and simple, but it sort of sums up the problem. Nobody, at least not me, thinks she just blew off a grand slam final because she wanted to leave work early that day. I do not doubt she was feeling terrible.

To me, there is just one issued involved here. Could she have played out the match, despite her physical discomfort? From what she said in her press conference, it appeared that she could have stood out there and finished the match and not have wound up in a hospital emergency room afterwards. Since she sat out there for the entire ceremony, then went to the news conference, we can only assume she could have played on. It appeared to be more of a case of, I am not 100%, I am going to lose, why prolong the agony.

What Justine failed to take into consideration were the 15K fans in the stadium and the millions around the world watching on TV. True she has fought like a tiger for matches before, true she has not always been in good health, but it simply appears that on this occasion, she did not take anyone into consideration except herself.

Tennis is riddled with stories of on court heroism, especially one the men's side, where guys play out five set matches in slams despite all kinds of adversity.

AS mentioned in my earlier post, Hingis at the Chase Championships in '96, played out a fifth set when she was cramping in the legs so badly she was almost unable to move. She got bageled in the set, but she didn't quit. Asked why afterwards, Hingis, who had just barely turned 16 at the time, said "I didn't think you were supposed to quit in a final."

Michael Chang didn't quit at Roland Garros when he couldn't walk, either, during his match against Lendl in '97.

YOu aren't supposed to quit unless you have no alternative. Justine should know that and now she has a great big image problem to cope with.

And tennis has more of a problem with members of the public who think its a sport for whimps.

cartmancop
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:50 PM
I think when a player has an injury that absolutely prevents them from having a chance. (a severely injured shoulder, wrist, etc.) or when they injure themselves in a way that absolutely prevents them from going on. (a very bad ankle injury, knee, etc)

I think the only way anyone is going to be OK with someone pulling out with a stomach illness is if the player is extremely sick on court for everyone to see. People would have been a little more sympathetic towards JHH if she had been vomiting all over the court and looked disoriented/dehydrated. Roddick the other day, didn't catch much crap for losing his match b/c although he was very sick, he kept fighting.

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 01:56 PM
I'm sure it's comforting to chalk up all the objections to Justine's decision to quit to a "vocal minority" of "haters" but given that even some of her FANS have voiced disapproval this is flat-out delusional.

Anyone who's bothered to read why most people on this board objected to Justine's retirement would have a hard time not understanding exactly what their reasons are, and the fact that some of you can't just disagree on those points but feel the need ignore them and put it all down to people "just looking for a reason to hate" says to me that you know you don't have a decent argument to counter with.

:cool:

The "vocal minority of haters" I speak of are the same individuals in this forum which have persistently attacked Justine Henin-Hardenne in this forum about the AO finals issue.

They've called her a "bitch", a "cheat", a "liar", questioned her motives and persistently bring her character into issue regarding her decision to retire during the AO Women's Singles Final.

Yet not one of these individuals have been able to prove their assertions regarding her retirement because they can't possibly know what was going on in Justine's head at the time she made the decision to retire. In my opinion, its delusional to think you can read someones mind.

Justine is often credited as being a great fighter on-court. Justine has never been known to tank matches. Her illnesses and injuries have been many. Which is why I give her the benefit of the doubt.

There's absolutely nothing delusional about the way her detractors have persistently attacked in this forum. Its been very blunt and straight-forward. And even spawned a few :cuckoo: :cuckoo: :cuckoo:

How can one possibly hate one tennis player that much and say they love the sport of tennis? :angel:

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:22 PM
But some Justine fans are mistakenly saying only a few "haters" are disappointed in her. That is not true. She has taken a real black eye in the media in general. No, tennis fans are not rioting in the streets over this, but tennis fans generally don't burn down the stadium when they are unhappy.

There was simply no crowd reaction after Justine retired during the AO finals. There were no "boos" from the people in the stadium.

The media story of Justine's retirement lost steam within 48 hours of the final. Most of the residual overflowed at SI's tennis section, but even SI sports wrote a very neutral article post AO final that didn't attempt to get into "motives" or question Justine's character. Other than the normal, consistent tennis columnists, it never had the legs to spill over onto front page Sports papers across the country or around the world.

In re: Men's five set matches, the trauma Martina Hingis endured at 16, and all those on-court heroes.

"On-court" heroism??? Let's get something straight. Tennis players who put their health at risk with illness/injury by playing long past their physical breaking point on-court are called "martyrs," not heros in my opinion. By the time you are puking on-court from heat exhaustion, you are likely dehydrated and could be at risk for sun stroke, collapsing, etc. What's heroic about that?

And to think the tennis community at-large complains about ATP/WTA injuries, yet expect their "heros" to perform well passed their physical limitations, creating a climate for injury. Am I the only person that sees that as being very, very hypocritical??? Especially the ESPN tennis commentator team and a few tennis columnists who pounded Justine. And a few in here who have gotten their granny panties in an uproar. Sounds pretty sadistic to me.

I'm just sayin' :wavey:

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:33 PM
Hell, even everybody's favorite girls next door, Kim and Lindsay, caugh flak when they reached number one.

Not like this, Griffin. And you know it. :angel:

vogus
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:51 PM
:cool:

The "vocal minority of haters" I speak of are the same individuals in this forum which have persistently attacked Justine Henin-Hardenne in this forum about the AO finals issue.

They've called her a "bitch", a "cheat", a "liar", questioned her motives and persistently bring her character into issue regarding her decision to retire during the AO Women's Singles Final.



you're so in denial that it's not even funny. The credible posters on the board criticizing Justine have not used any of those words. In fact, the posters who have abused Justine are your best friends in this argument, because they're the ones who make it possible for this ridiculous, self-pitying, "Justine is so persecuted" mentality to exist. The argument is not about "the haters" at all, and i think you know it, but you are using "the haters" to hide behind the fact that Justine's retirement from the AO final was, at the end of the day, just plain indefensible.

Mother_Marjorie
Feb 12th, 2006, 02:56 PM
you're so in denial that it's not even funny. The credible posters on the board criticizing Justine have not used any of those words. In fact, the posters who have abused Justine are your best friends in this argument, because they're the ones who make it possible for this ridiculous, self-pitying, "Justine is so persecuted" mentality to exist. The argument is not about "the haters" at all, and i think you know it, but you are using "the haters" to hide behind the fact that Justine's retirement from the AO final was, at the end of the day, just plain indefensible.

The "vocal minority of haters" I speak of are the same individuals in this forum which have persistently attacked Justine Henin-Hardenne in this forum about the AO finals issue.

They've called her a "bitch", a "cheat", a "liar", questioned her motives and persistently bring her character into issue regarding her decision to retire during the AO Women's Singles Final.

Yet not one of these individuals have been able to prove their assertions regarding her retirement because they can't possibly know what was going on in Justine's head at the time she made the decision to retire. In my opinion, its delusional to think you can read someones mind.

Justine is often credited as being a great fighter on-court. Justine has never been known to tank matches. Her illnesses and injuries have been many. Which is why I give her the benefit of the doubt.

There's absolutely nothing delusional about the way her detractors have persistently attacked in this forum. Its been very blunt and straight-forward. And even spawned a few

How can one possibly hate one tennis player that much and say they love the sport of tennis? :wavey:

gsm
Feb 12th, 2006, 03:01 PM
There was simply no crowd reaction after Justine retired during the AO finals. There were no "boos" from the people in the stadium.
i cant think of any moment an AO crowd has ever booed a player, perhaps its not in their nature.

+ had the impression the crowd was stunned into silence more than anything.

it never had the legs to spill over onto front page Sports papers across the country or around the world.
it may not have been the biggest global sports story from that weekend, but h-h's antics were still very widely reported.

Tennis players who put their health at risk with illness/injury by playing long past their physical breaking point on-court are called "martyrs," not heros in my opinion.
are you suggesting that h-h was on the verge of "playing long past her breaking point"?

By the time you are puking on-court from heat exhaustion, you are likely dehydrated and could be at risk for sun stroke, collapsing, etc. What's heroic about that?
of course none of these ailments would have applied for h-h with the AO final being played in air con.

And to think the tennis community at-large complains about ATP/WTA injuries
injuries that fans are concerned about are things like tendon/muscle tears, ankles/wrists/back etc... you know, injuries that if pushed can prolong the complaint.

Volcana
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:30 PM
The media story of Justine's retirement lost steam within 48 hours of the final.It's a women's tennis story. A VERY minor sport. Most of the media isn't going to spend much time on it unless it involves one of the Williams sisters, or maybe Maria Sharpaova. In this case, column inches simply isn't an indication of the seriousness of the matter. BYW, if you've seen any articles supporting Henin-Hardenne decision to quit, please post a link. And I apologize for asking if you've already done that.The "vocal minority of haters" I speak of are the same individuals in this forum which have persistently attacked Justine Henin-Hardenne in this forum about the AO finals issue.

They've called her a "bitch", a "cheat", a "liar", questioned her motives and persistently bring her character into issue regarding her decision to retire during the AO Women's Singles Final.There are also many people who have called her none of those things, and STILL criticize her decision to quit that final. Including me. Including TonyP, for that matter. We may be vocal, but haters we aren't. I'm not going re-print all of TonyP's (excellent) last post, but he covered the issues so well, there's no point in my trying to find my own words.
From what I can figure out and what I guess, Justine simply "didn't get it." That is a cliche, pure and simple, but it sort of sums up the problem. Nobody, at least not me, thinks she just blew off a grand slam final because she wanted to leave work early that day. I do not doubt she was feeling terrible.

To me, there is just one issued involved here. Could she have played out the match, despite her physical discomfort? From what she said in her press conference, it appeared that she could have stood out there and finished the match and not have wound up in a hospital emergency room afterwards. Since she sat out there for the entire ceremony, then went to the news conference, we can only assume she could have played on. It appeared to be more of a case of, I am not 100%, I am going to lose, why prolong the agony.

What Justine failed to take into consideration were the 15K fans in the stadium and the millions around the world watching on TV. True she has fought like a tiger for matches before, true she has not always been in good health, but it simply appears that on this occasion, she did not take anyone into consideration except herself.Is she obligated to take anyone into consideration except herself? Of course not. But nonetheless, the expectation IS there, and her failure to meet that expectation has predictably resulted in criticism.Tennis is riddled with stories of on court heroism, especially one the men's side, where guys play out five set matches in slams despite all kinds of adversity.

AS mentioned in my earlier post, Hingis at the Chase Championships in '96, played out a fifth set when she was cramping in the legs so badly she was almost unable to move. She got bageled in the set, but she didn't quit. Asked why afterwards, Hingis, who had just barely turned 16 at the time, said "I didn't think you were supposed to quit in a final."

Michael Chang didn't quit at Roland Garros when he couldn't walk, either, during his match against Lendl in '97.

YOu aren't supposed to quit unless you have no alternative. Justine should know that and now she has a great big image problem to cope with.
"On-court" heroism??? Let's get something straight. Tennis players who put their health at risk with illness/injury by playing long past their physical breaking point on-court are called "martyrs," not heros in my opinion. By the time you are puking on-court from heat exhaustion, you are likely dehydrated and could be at risk for sun stroke, collapsing, etc. What's heroic about that?MarJenAll20 - I agree with you that playing til you're physically incapable of going on is not 'heroic'. It is however, admirable, and it's how virtually every athlete I know has been trained. The Hingis quote TonyP used is telling.
"I didn't think you were supposed to quit in a final."
I have no idea whether you play, or have played, any sport seriously. Have you? What sport? What would your coaches and/or trainers say? My coaches and trainers always point to the player who plays on injured. Isaih Thomas sprained his ankle so badly against the Knicks once, he was literally hopping on one leg on the court. And scored 25 points in the fourth quarter. The tennis examples Hingis, Chang, Sampras, et al, TonyP covered.

What coach or trainer ever pointed to a player who quit mid-match and said to the pupil 'That's the way to behave!'?

BTW, your definition of 'playing long past their physical breaking point' differs from that of virtually every coach, trainer or serious competitior I ever met. Playing with cramps is 'past' your physical breaking point. Neither is an upset stomach, or vomiting, for that matter. Those are just the challenges that come with athletics. Your physical breaking point is exactly that. When thing break. Broken bones, muscle tears, dizziness to the point you can't walkAnd to think the tennis community at-large complains about ATP/WTA injuriesI'm not one of those people. Injuries are a part of athletics. Women's tennis sees more injuries now because the players are playing way harder. I have no interest in returning to the days of 'hit-and-giggle' tennis.

griffin
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:47 PM
Not like this, Griffin. And you know it. :angel:

I wasn't comparing the complaints about slamless #1's to complaints about Justine quitting in a Grand Slam final, and you know THAT ;)

cellophane
Feb 12th, 2006, 04:49 PM
When will the word 'HATERS' be retired? :retard: Yeah, I know, never. I think I'm going to be sick.

manu32
Feb 12th, 2006, 06:54 PM
i wish stomach ulcer for haters ......obsession is the best way to get it.....

hablo
Feb 12th, 2006, 07:00 PM
When will the wod 'HATERS' be retired? :retard: Yeah, I know, never. I think I'm going to be sick.I believe it's as misused as the word "choker"...

TonyP
Feb 13th, 2006, 03:58 AM
Marjenall20 said:

"On-court" heroism??? Let's get something straight. Tennis players who put their health at risk with illness/injury by playing long past their physical breaking point on-court are called "martyrs," not heros in my opinion. By the time you are puking on-court from heat exhaustion, you are likely dehydrated and could be at risk for sun stroke, collapsing, etc. What's heroic about that?"



What's heroic about that is that it is pretty much what athletic competition is all about. It is supposed to be a test of things, fortitude, mental toughess and about testing one's physical limits. As Boris Becker once said, a fifth set in tennis is about character, who has the will to push themselves beyond what they think are their limits.

Whether it is worth it to put yourself to such a test is an individual question everyone, including Justine, has to answer for themselves and only that person can answer it for themselves.

I thought a very interesting comment came from Sharapova, after she lost to Hingis in Tokyo. She said she was disappointed she didn't show her normal "fighting spirit" in the second set, the one she lost 1-6.

That was Sharapova, not Justine. I know. But it was an interesting comment nonetheless.

One doesn't want to judge others, but we do judge people. We cheer the person who fights against impossible odds. We cheer the soldier who pushes himself beyond the normal limits of mortal men and women. We give those people medals.


We evaluate athletes by their performances all the time, not just their athletic skill, but also how far they push themselves. We cheer the long distance runner who pushes forward when he or she looks like they will collapse. And in tennis, we judge male players who have the fortitude to fight back in a five set match when they are down two sets to love, but somehow find the fortitude to come back and win the final three sets.

Justine has fought hard before and hopefully, will do so again. This time, it appears that she chose not to fight and all I am saying is, the fans deserved more from her.

She isn't an evil person and maybe even, she is being misunderstood here. Maybe this is a failure to communicate, but right now, it appears she decided at some point in that final that the prize was not worth the struggle.

jojoseph
Feb 13th, 2006, 05:47 AM
When that players is really hurt and can't go on, which includes not being able to finish the awards ceremony without showing serious discomfort.

SelesFan70
Feb 13th, 2006, 06:08 AM
Depends on the player... :tape: :o

Kunal
Feb 13th, 2006, 06:21 AM
when masha starts screaming so loudly that the other person's about to go deaf....and the referee has already quit and the crowd has earbuds on for protection

minboy
Feb 14th, 2006, 01:59 PM
in the real world (as opposed to your fictitious utopia), respect is very much related to importance. Players are not going to make the same sacrifices for a Tier 2 that they make for a Slam. And that's a function of respect.

( a lil' late but ...)

Respect is not related to importance in the eyes of respectful people.

US president is a more important person than the average unemployed bloke. I'm sure you wouldn't even look at the unemployed guy, but respectful people would threat the US president and the unemployed the very same way.

Difference in termes of sacrifices for tier 2 and GS ? That's a matter of prestige ( waiting for the "in real world prestige is related to respect and importance " crap :tape: )

minboy
Feb 14th, 2006, 02:04 PM
What this tells me is that you've never had a stomach ulcer. A stomach ulcer doesn't produce debilitating pain. Plus the stomach "ulcer" was caused by the anti-inflamatories -- which makes it a mild ulcer if one might call it an ulcer at all. It seems the main problem is that she had pain during the night and couldn't sleep and that left her without energy the next day. That's what Justine said in her press conference and I have no reason to doubt it.

edit: just a hint for you: When someone stoops to personal insults during an argument, it demonstrates an insecurity about one's own position. It's sort of a dead giveaway, so you might want to reconsider that tactic.

I' ve been sick enough to know that a sickness that is bad when doing nothing turns into real real bad when trying to produce physical exercice.

Personnal insult : well that's just cause i can't stand dumb people. Dumbness causes dumbness. Might be the reason everyone around constantly behave as dumbasses, me included.