PDA

View Full Version : The footfault again: can we clarify one thing which seems to be misunderstood?


Steffica Greles
Sep 13th, 2009, 01:59 PM
As far as I'm aware, she foot faulted to double fault at 15-30, which gave Kim match point. The score was then 15-40. Her behaviour then got her a point pentalty in addition, which gave the match to Clijsters.

Or, was it that Serena's second warning (having smashed a racket earlier) meant she was disqualified regardless of the score?

I've heard both versions in the media.

Or, as a third scenario, did the point penalty take her to 15-40 and there was no double-fault? The fact the match finished was therefore a point penalty AND disqualification.

gentenaire
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:01 PM
It's scenario 1. Except that the point penalty was only because it was already her second warning.

ED fan forever
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:02 PM
I think it was a point penalty and since she was already facing match point she thus lost the match. It was just the WORST possible time for her to receive a point penalty violation.
I didn't see the match live but saw it on Sky Sports earlier-I can't remember the last time there was so much drama in a match before. This is a US Open to forget for a lot of the top players, and now especially Serena.

Tanja8
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:03 PM
As far as I know:
1st warning = warning
2nd warning = point (in this case it was match point)
3rd warning = match

Double foult (foot fault on 2nd serve) took her to 15:40
2nd warning - she lost the point.

VishaalMaria
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:03 PM
Scenario 1.

Serena hit a fault on her serve. Second serve, hit the serve and the line judge called it as a "foot fault". Thus she loses the point to go down 15-40. She then threatens the the lines person, point penalty , GSM Clijsters.

Sean.
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:07 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/8252971.stm

Tournament referee Brian Earley said: "It was not a default, it was a point penalty that happened to be given on match point.

"There was an earlier warning for racquet abuse and she was called for a foot fault and she said something to a line umpire and it was reported to the chair and that resulted in a point penalty.

"It was a code violation for unsportsmanlike conduct."

I normally trust the BBC to be accurate. :)

spiceboy
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:09 PM
Scenario 1.

Serena hit a fault on her serve. Second serve, hit the serve and the line judge called it as a "foot fault". Thus she loses the point to go down 15-40. She then threatens the the lines person, point penalty , GSM Clijsters.

That's the most shocking thing. Threating a lines person gives you just a warning (it was a point penalty because she had that other warning already).

She should have been thrown away from the stadium at the minute :rolleyes:

goldenlox
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:48 PM
Marat got upset at a foot fault call at a USO.
But at match point, Serena knows she's tanking the match when she walks over to the linesperson and curses at her and threatens her. If she's upset at the call, go to the chair ump. Just verbally attacking that linesperson at match point is an obvious tank of the match.

DeliriousPotato
Sep 13th, 2009, 02:52 PM
Oh come on, give her a break... Of course I agree that it was an unacceptable behaviour and I agree with the penalty... But I guess I can understand her behaviour... It's frustration and anger in an unhealthy mix... She was also nervous, and she just exploded. Of course she didn't mean a word she said, perhaps if she apologized that instant the outcome wouldn't have been so negative... I hope you come back after this Ree...

Monica_Rules
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:02 PM
I thought it was

1-Warning
2-Point Penalty
3-Game Penalty
4- Match default

But stages can be jumped depending on the severity of the offenc elike Henamn being defaulted in wimbledon in 1995 for hitting a ball girl with a ball. :o

TheAllan
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:12 PM
They actually made the wrong call. It should have been an immediate default.

manu
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:14 PM
I thought it was

1-Warning
2-Point Penalty
3-Game Penalty
4- Match default

But stages can be jumped depending on the severity of the offenc elike Henamn being defaulted in wimbledon in 1995 for hitting a ball girl with a ball. :o
Nope, Serena did not get defaulted (neither a game, nor a match default). The only thing that happened was her receiving a POINT penalty, which happened to be given on matchpoint. She lost the matchpoint and thus, the match. She was NOT excluded for her behaviour.

scoobsuk
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:16 PM
I believe it's

1 Warning
2 Point Penalty
3 Default.

This is how McEnroe was caught out at the Aussie Open when he was defaulted. The rules had changed - it used to be 3. Game Penalty then 4. Default and he thought he had another outburst in hand, but instead of getting the game penalty he got defaulted instead.

manu
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:25 PM
I believe it's

1 Warning
2 Point Penalty
3 Default.

This is how McEnroe was caught out at the Aussie Open when he was defaulted. The rules had changed - it used to be 3. Game Penalty then 4. Default and he thought he had another outburst in hand, but instead of getting the game penalty he got defaulted instead.
Again, there was NEVER a default. There was ONLY a point penalty, which happened to be given on matchpoint. If it had been given a point before, they WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO PLAY. So once again, Serena did not get excluded.
The USTA official who was talking to Serena at the end of the match, Brian Ealing if I'm correct, clarified this to the media. I can't seem to find his quote right now though, but you might want to look it up if you're interested.

scoobsuk
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:27 PM
Again, there was NEVER a default. There was ONLY a point penalty, which happened to be given on matchpoint. If it had been given a point before, they WOULD HAVE CONTINUED TO PLAY. So once again, Serena did not get excluded.
The USTA official who was talking to Serena at the end of the match, Brian Ealing if I'm correct, clarified this to the media. I can't seem to find his quote right now though, but you might want to look it up if you're interested.
Agreed - I'm just showing how it's supposed to work.

In McEnroe's case he already had a warning and a point penalty so his next infraction got him the default.

Here, Serena had had a warning, and her next was a point penalty. It's just that it came on match point down.

All of which goes to show it's a stupid time to go and chew out a linejudge.

manu
Sep 13th, 2009, 03:30 PM
Agreed - I'm just showing how it's supposed to work.

In McEnroe's case he already had a warning and a point penalty so his next infraction got him the default.

Here, Serena had had a warning, and her next was a point penalty. It's just that it came on match point down.

All of which goes to show it's a stupid time to go and chew out a linejudge.

Oops, didn't mean to wrongfully accuse you. Sorry for that! I thought you were referring to what happened to Serena, didn't have a clue that you were talking about the general procedure.

I'm getting too caught up into this incident, need to get off my computer :o:p