PDA

View Full Version : Stupid Rule


xan
May 12th, 2006, 04:40 PM
Is this one of the worst rules in tennis?

In the Safina - Petrova match

Dinara was ahead at 6-3, 3-2 Advantage Safina on Nadia's serve.

Nadia was given a double fault to give Dinara the break for 4-2. Then the umpire overruled the call on Nadia's second serve and gave Nadia TWO serves again. Nadia went for a big first serve, served an Ace and then held for 3-3.

That made a huge difference to the match.

Why give someone TWO more serves when they clearly faulted their first serve, and were only (perhaps) miscalled on the 2nd. It is very unfair to the receiving player. :mad:

GrandSlam05
May 12th, 2006, 04:43 PM
Did that really happen? It's terrible!

Ferosh
May 12th, 2006, 04:44 PM
I'm more than sure that if this had happened on Maria's serve in whatever match, you would not be here bitching about it. Get over it and accept the fact that Nadia might just pass Maria in the rankings. That's the only reason you decided to create this thread. :rolleyes::baby:

xan
May 12th, 2006, 04:46 PM
I'm more than sure that if this had happened on Maria's serve in whatever match, you would not be here bitching about it. Get over it and accept the fact that Nadia might just pass Maria in the rankings. That's the only reason you decided to create this thread. :rolleyes::baby:

You're the obsessive one making this about Maria. :rolleyes: :smash:

My popint is quite simple. the rule is illogical and unfair - whoever it happens to.

SloKid
May 12th, 2006, 04:59 PM
This rule actually doesn't make sense at all, but it's not Nadia's fault. :p

Dave B
May 12th, 2006, 04:59 PM
bad call = replay the point, regardless of where that call is. Makes sense to me.

miffedmax
May 12th, 2006, 05:04 PM
Well, it may be the correct call, but it doesn't entirely make sense.

Martian KC
May 12th, 2006, 05:07 PM
Duh. You always replay the point on bad calls.:retard: Not like this is the first time it's ever happened.:baby:

AsGoodAsNew
May 12th, 2006, 05:08 PM
Well, it may be the correct call, but it doesn't entirely make sense.
i'm with you on that! Wasn't it Charles Dickens who said that the law could be an ass?

AsGoodAsNew
May 12th, 2006, 05:10 PM
Duh. You always replay the point on bad calls.:retard: Not like this is the first time it's ever happened.:baby:
I think that there is a difference here. Just because it is a rule doesn't mean it is just. and just because it has happened before doesn't make it fair.

Dementinator
May 12th, 2006, 05:14 PM
seems a tad strange to me ,plankova was very lucky there indeed ,but its all part of the game I guess....

Dave B
May 12th, 2006, 05:21 PM
Well think about it this way. Say Dinara was on the run and hit a high defensive lob. Nadia hit an overhead that was called out but was then overuled, but Dinara guessed correcty and only did not hit the ball because of the call. Ruling = replay the point.

Saying that Nadia should only get a second serve is like saying that in the example above the point should not start over, but rather Dinara should lob the ball in a similar spot to Petrova and Petrova should hit an overhead in the direction of Dinara. Hmmmm, that would be very silly indeed.

bellascarlett
May 12th, 2006, 05:26 PM
I'm more than sure that if this had happened on Maria's serve in whatever match, you would not be here bitching about it. Get over it and accept the fact that Nadia might just pass Maria in the rankings. That's the only reason you decided to create this thread. :rolleyes::baby:

okaaaaaaayyyyyy....

excitement1995
May 12th, 2006, 05:52 PM
I second this. There's no problem with the rule.

Well think about it this way. Say Dinara was on the run and hit a high defensive lob. Nadia hit an overhead that was called out but was then overuled, but Dinara guessed correcty and only did not hit the ball because of the call. Ruling = replay the point.

Saying that Nadia should only get a second serve is like saying that in the example above the point should not start over, but rather Dinara should lob the ball in a similar spot to Petrova and Petrova should hit an overhead in the direction of Dinara. Hmmmm, that would be very silly indeed.

Knizzle
May 12th, 2006, 06:02 PM
Why should Nadia be penalized because of a bad call, what if she had served another second serve THEN really DF then she would have gotten broken although she had served a really good second serve then had it called out and overruled.

Justeenium
May 12th, 2006, 06:12 PM
let's just do away with line judges and let the players call their own lines :silly:

AsGoodAsNew
May 12th, 2006, 07:45 PM
Well think about it this way. Say Dinara was on the run and hit a high defensive lob. Nadia hit an overhead that was called out but was then overuled, but Dinara guessed correcty and only did not hit the ball because of the call. Ruling = replay the point.

Saying that Nadia should only get a second serve is like saying that in the example above the point should not start over, but rather Dinara should lob the ball in a similar spot to Petrova and Petrova should hit an overhead in the direction of Dinara. Hmmmm, that would be very silly indeed.
There is a difference in my own, albeit non-expert, opinion. The first serve is out or doesn't get over the net. That part of the match is over. The second serve is the deemed out. So the replay is for that serve. I am driving myself mad becase I can't explain in words what seems intrinsically unfair!

And this is not because of these 2 players, because I am not fan of either.

pav
May 12th, 2006, 07:55 PM
I hadn't thought about that one,common sense would say give the server only another second serve in a case like that.
I would lose all my common sense if my fav. player recieved two more serves though,and would think it all fair and correct. I just found and watched a tape of Bepa Z. v mother time Mary at RG when Bepa serving and already in reactor meltdown mode served an ace, called out then corrected by the ump. who then said replay the point as Mary might have got to it(which she wouldn't have,it was an unplayable ace) so Bepa proceeded to meltdown some more cheered on by the french crowd,but went on I think to serve another ace and got out of it. I suppose these unfair call even out over the years.

alfonsojose
May 12th, 2006, 07:59 PM
I'm more than sure that if this had happened on Maria's serve in whatever match, you would not be here bitching about it. Get over it and accept the fact that Nadia might just pass Maria in the rankings. That's the only reason you decided to create this thread. :rolleyes::baby:
:lol: :D

LH2HBH
May 13th, 2006, 01:11 AM
A let call ALWAYS allow the server to start from 1st again, unless it's a net cord. It's a fair rule IMO. A distraction (one reason for a let, eg. garbage on the court) or a bad call can be unnerving which is why the point starts from the beginning.

ace4lleykim
May 13th, 2006, 01:15 AM
Well that was unfair. I mean if the umpire overruled then could just let Petrova reserve second serve not both.

terjw
May 13th, 2006, 01:39 AM
There is a difference in my own, albeit non-expert, opinion. The first serve is out or doesn't get over the net. That part of the match is over. The second serve is the deemed out. So the replay is for that serve. I am driving myself mad becase I can't explain in words what seems intrinsically unfair!

And this is not because of these 2 players, because I am not fan of either.

I feel exactly like you - it's just so obviously unfair to get both serves back. And I really can't understand how anyone could possibly think that's fair. I mean if on the second serve a player hits a let - and the serve catches the top of the net but it stays in - they replay that point but it remains a second serve. They don't give that player her first serve back.

felipe2004
May 13th, 2006, 03:05 AM
yeah, it is a very common rule and rather old, but everytime i see it happening I think that it is unfair.

excitement1995
May 13th, 2006, 03:48 AM
So, you served a risky second serve ace but was called out by the lineman. After the umpire overuled, you only think it's fare for you to manage to risk your second serve once again?

yeah, it is a very common rule and rather old, but everytime i see it happening I think that it is unfair.

tennisboi
May 13th, 2006, 04:33 AM
This rule is crazy it's so unfair to the returner

excitement1995
May 13th, 2006, 04:51 AM
You only call the rule unfare if it consistantly favors one player more than the other. In this case, you have to show that the let call favors the one who serve more. But this is not so apparent. Although a second serve is disadvantages, but when the player got to the point where the let call was called, more often than not it's fare game already. The one who served worked her way to shake off the disadvantage. At this point, the whole point had too be replayed. If you only allow it to start from the second serve, that's unfare to the server for her effort.

This rule is crazy it's so unfair to the returner

spencercarlos
May 13th, 2006, 05:58 AM
Is this one of the worst rules in tennis?

In the Safina - Petrova match

Dinara was ahead at 6-3, 3-2 Advantage Safina on Nadia's serve.

Nadia was given a double fault to give Dinara the break for 4-2. Then the umpire overruled the call on Nadia's second serve and gave Nadia TWO serves again. Nadia went for a big first serve, served an Ace and then held for 3-3.

That made a huge difference to the match.

Why give someone TWO more serves when they clearly faulted their first serve, and were only (perhaps) miscalled on the 2nd. It is very unfair to the receiving player. :mad:
But it is also unfair for the server who actually had serve its serve IN the court and was called out.
It is also unfair to make the server, that had gotten the ball in play, but called wrong by the umpire/lineswoman, have the chance of only one serve.

perseus2006
May 13th, 2006, 05:58 AM
It doesn't happen often enough to be a big deal.

spencercarlos
May 13th, 2006, 06:27 AM
I feel exactly like you - it's just so obviously unfair to get both serves back. And I really can't understand how anyone could possibly think that's fair. I mean if on the second serve a player hits a let - and the serve catches the top of the net but it stays in - they replay that point but it remains a second serve. They don't give that player her first serve back.
Because the server had his/her serve in already, what if the player gets one serve and serves a fault (double fault), now that is unfair too.

Volcana
May 13th, 2006, 06:31 AM
1st and 2nd serves are part of the same point. Bad call = replay the point. I understand your gripe, but don't you think they considered that over the 100+ years of tennis we've had so far?