Serena's meltdown

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 09-09-2018 03:12PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

An umpire who uses the same rulebook, but with different application of the rules, for men.

Sexism.

Firstly, unless you've seen the same umpire turn a blind eye towards men's coaches doing the same thing, this is pure speculation. From you and from her.

Secondly, it did not give her opponent an unfair advantage.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:12PM

Strazdas wrote: »

Given that she was playing against a woman, that rather defeats the 'sexism' argument.

Given that most people in this thread can’t wrap their head around the claim of sexism applying to the rules of the game on a broader scale rather defeats their argument on this subject.

dxhound2005 · 09-09-2018 03:13PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Unfair is a big step for most in this thread. Kudos to your open mind.

Women tend to be more polite to the umpires. Men are regularly seen losing the plot and throwing insults at them.

If it was vice versa, then yes, that too would be sexism.

Everyone should be polite to umpires. Serena wasn't last night. She lost the plot and she is not a man. Unless you saw thousands of matches you cannot make such generalisations.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:16PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Firstly, unless you've seen the same umpire turn a blind eye towards men's coaches doing the same thing, this is pure speculation. From you and from her.

Secondly, it did not give her opponent an unfair advantage.

Firstly, it’s the game as a whole, not him specifically. She called the rules sexist. I watch tennis regularly and can think of loads of incidents of men getting away with rants unpunished.

Called him a liar and thief for falsely accusing her of cheating and receiving coaching.

Secondly her opponent was given a game advantage as a direct result of this. If you can’t see that as an advantage then you might need a word with yourself.

Bob Harris · 09-09-2018 03:17PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Given that most people in this thread can’t wrap their head around the claim of sexism applying to the rules of the game on a broader scale rather defeats their argument on this subject.

I think you have problems wrapping your head around logic.

'because I'm a woman you're going to take this away from me?'
That argument had no place and was entirely irrelavant, just a major deflection away from the truth.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:17PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Everyone should be polite to umpires. Serena wasn't last night. She lost the plot and she is not a man. Unless you saw thousands of matches you cannot make such generalisations.

I’ve seen 100s and think you may not even have seen one.

Yes they should be polite but they aren’t, regularly.

Alf Veedersane · 09-09-2018 03:17PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Unfair is a big step for most in this thread. Kudos to your open mind.

Women tend to be more polite to the umpires. Men are regularly seen losing the plot and throwing insults at them.

If it was vice versa, then yes, that too would be sexism.

At best in respect of the violation for being coached. She absolutely deserved the others.

What happened to Cornet was an example of sexism in tennis.

What happened to Williams was not.

DrWu · 09-09-2018 03:17PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Firstly, it’s the game as a whole, not him specifically. She called the rules sexist. I watch tennis regularly and can think of loads of incidents of men getting away with rants unpunished.

Called him a liar and thief for falsely accusing her of cheating and receiving coaching.

Secondly her opponent was given a game advantage as a direct result of this. If you can’t see that as an advantage then you might need a word with yourself.

Any chance you can drop the condescending attitude to other posters?

Bob Harris · 09-09-2018 03:18PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Firstly, it’s the game as a whole, not him specifically. She called the rules sexist. I watch tennis regularly and can think of loads of incidents of men getting away with rants unpunished.

Called him a liar and thief for falsely accusing her of cheating and receiving coaching.

Secondly her opponent was given a game advantage as a direct result of this. If you can’t see that as an advantage then you might need a word with yourself.

It is a proven and admitted violation.

Serena gave her opponent the advantage by bursting into tears despite being a big strong independent black woman.

OldMrBrennan83 · 09-09-2018 03:18PM

There's always one. I'm sure people sometimes read a thread before forming their contrary opinion.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:19PM

Bob Harris wrote: »

I think you have problems wrapping your head around logic.

'because I'm a woman you're going to take this away from me?'
That argument had no place and was entirely irrelavant, just a major deflection away from the truth.

Yes, because seemingly if she were a man she’d have gotten away with it based on many recent examples.

My logic is fine.

I think she was grossly unlucky and unfairly treated and could see why she’d bring up sexism.

dxhound2005 · 09-09-2018 03:20PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

I’ve seen 100s and think you may not even have seen one.

Yes they should be polite but they aren’t, regularly.

I've seen a few. Maybe because men play for a longer duration, there is more scope for incidents in their matches.

The Talking Bread · 09-09-2018 03:21PM

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

At best it was unfair.

Just because something unfair happens to a woman doesn't mean it was sexist in the same way the same situation in the men's final wouldn't give rise to calls of sexism.

Depends what you mean by unfair?

Maybe he is an umpire who strictly follows the rules of the game whilst others are incompetent in doing so?

Serena was under pressure, looking to be inevitably being en route to a defeat and her coach tried to influence the game by telling her what she should be doing (ie playing closer to the byline). Even the coach admitted he was coaching her. She claimed she saw him giving her a "confidence boosting thumbs up", after initially implying she saw nothing!

It is pretty clear her reaction was heightened by the occasion and how under pressure she was. She seemed to be implying that she was entitled to win, that it was "my court" and that the fans didn't get the result :we all wanted"

It was a nice plot device for her to garner excuses, sympathy and give some more virtue signalling.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:21PM

Bob Harris wrote: »

bursting into tears despite being a big strong independent black woman.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:24PM

DrWu wrote: »

Any chance you can drop the condescending attitude to other posters?

I’ve been called ignorant among other things.

You jump in when I suggest someone not acknowledging giving an opponent a game in tennis an advantage as maybe needing to pay closer attention to what they post?

Haha!!!

c.p.w.g.w · 09-09-2018 03:24PM

Sure Tennis prize money is sexist against men. They need to win 3 sets on majors compared to women who need to win 2. Yet same prize money. But that's not the kind of inequality people like to talk about

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:24PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

I've seen a few. Maybe because men play for a longer duration, there is more scope for incidents in their matches.

That there sounds like sexism to me!!!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 09-09-2018 03:26PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Firstly, it’s the game as a whole, not him specifically. She called the rules sexist. I watch tennis regularly and can think of loads of incidents of men getting away with rants unpunished.

Called him a liar and thief for falsely accusing her of cheating and receiving coaching.

Secondly her opponent was given a game advantage as a direct result of this. If you can’t see that as an advantage then you might need a word with yourself.

I've watched a lot of tennis and seen lots of men get violations for rants. And equipment abuse, verbal abuse, coaching and even a time violation once or twice.

The coaching DID happen - the coach admitted it - so there's no lying. Subsequently, there was no thievery either. The other violations were also most certainly warranted. How can you say you watch tennis and NOT say they were code violations? She called the umpire a liar and a thief! - it was one of the most blatant abuse violations I've ever seen! How the hell do you expect a player to question the officials' integrity and NOT receive a sanction?

So we can put the sexist and victim cards away. She got what she deserved.

Alf Veedersane · 09-09-2018 03:27PM

The Talking Bread wrote: »

Depends what you mean by unfair?

Maybe he is an umpire who strictly follows the rules of the game whilst others are incompetent in doing so?

At best you could argue that most other umpires wouldn't have. I don't necessarily agree with that argument.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:28PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

I've watched a lot of tennis and seen lots of men get violations for rants. And equipment abuse, verbal abuse, coaching and even a time violation once or twice.

The coaching DID happen - the coach admitted it - so there's no lying. Subsequently, there was no thievery either. The other violations were also most certainly warranted. How can you say you watch tennis and NOT say they were code violations? The last one is one of the most blatant abuse violations I've ever seen.

The one thing no person can do in any sport and expect to get away with is questioning the officials' integrity. Compentence, maybe - but not integrity.

So we can put the sexist and victim cards away. She got what she deserved.

We’ll just have to disagree on all that so. Massively harsh treatment and unprecedented.

DrWu · 09-09-2018 03:31PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

I’ve been called ignorant among other things.

You jump in when I suggest someone not acknowledging giving an opponent a game in tennis an advantage as maybe needing to pay closer attention to what they post?

Haha!!!

Wrong. I'm referring to a string of preachy and condescending comments. Doesn't help your argument.

dxhound2005 · 09-09-2018 03:31PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

We’ll just have to disagree on all that so. Massively harsh treatment and unprecedented.

Are you sure you never saw something like that before?

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:32PM

DrWu wrote: »

Wrong. I'm referring to a string of preachy and condescending comments. Doesn't help your argument.

Wrong. Try quoting them or reporting them if you have a problem with them Doctor Wu

alan partridge aha · 09-09-2018 03:32PM

People would think a lot more of her if she even came out now and made a fulsome apology to the umpire.

People say things in the heat of battle that they might not mean, but when they reflect on it realise they were wrong.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:33PM

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Are you sure you never saw something like that before?

In the final of a grand slam? No.

I’ve seen loads of gestures from the coaches during matches though, mostly probably unseen by the players but caught by the cameras. All unpunished.

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:35PM

alan partridge aha wrote: »

People would think a lot more of her if she even came out now and made a fulsome apology to the umpire.

People say things in the heat of battle that they might not mean, but when they reflect on it realise they were wrong.

Why would she apologize if she didn’t receive any coaching in her mind? Why would she apologize for sticking up for her integrity and honour when that was directly questioned and punished by an umpire in front of the world?

dxhound2005 · 09-09-2018 03:36PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

In the final of a grand slam? No.

I’ve seen loads of gestures from the coaches during matches though, mostly probably unseen by the players but caught by the cameras. All unpunished.

Golf has a good system. People can report violations that they saw on TV and penalties have been imposed on players.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 09-09-2018 03:36PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

We’ll just have to disagree on all that so. Massively harsh treatment and unprecedented.

Which one? Coach admitting the offence, racket abuse or calling the umpire a liar and a thief despite the umpire clearly being in the right?

Also - this should put the sexism bull**** to bed. Same umpire, code violations to men and women. He's got a reputation for it.
http://larrybrownsports.com/tennis/umpire-carlos-ramos-history-code-violations-serena-williams/463180

alchemist33 · 09-09-2018 03:37PM

johnpatrick81 wrote: »

Why would she apologize if she didn’t receive any coaching in her mind? Why would she apologize for sticking up for her integrity and honour when that was directly questioned and punished by an umpire in front of the world?

She displayed a complete lack of honour and integrity last night

johnpatrick81 · 09-09-2018 03:40PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Which one? Coach admitting the offence, racket abuse or calling the umpire a liar and a thief despite the umpire clearly being in the right?

Her getting falsely punished and accused of receiving coaching when she didn’t receive any.

Her getting punished for a rant which many men have gotten away with worse, which was a direct result of the false allegation.

Serena's meltdown

Comments