Posts Tagged ‘US Open’
Legendary Serena, the Bryans Reach 100, and Marin Breaks Through: Final Thoughts on a Turbulent US Open
There’s a lot of ground to cover, so let’s dive right into my (25) final thoughts on the year’s final Slam:
- By defeating Caroline Wozniacki in Sunday’s final, Serena Williams won her 6th US Open title, and her 18th Slam title overall. Additionally, by winning her third US Open title in as many years, Serena achieved a rare three-peat; a feat not seen since Chris Evert won four successive titles from 1975-78. With number 18 in hand, Serena joins an elite group alongside Evert and Martina Navratilova, one behind Helen Wills Moody’s 19, four behind Steffi Graf’s 22, and six behind Margaret Court’s 24. However, NONE of these numbers really matter much in the grand scheme of things. Reaching 18 gives Serena more than enough legitimacy for any G.O.A.T discussions. (For more Serena discussion, check out ‘Serena Williams – The Humanization of a Flawed Champion‘)
- For her part, Caroline capped her resurgent summer season with an extremely strong showing to reach her second US Open final. Her victory over Maria Sharapova was one of the best in memory, and she can leave New York knowing that she left everything on the court in pursuit of her first Slam. Will she be able to keep up the aggressive play in 2015? It’s unlikely. Though aggression was at the heart of her summer success, it’s just not in her comfort zone. Also, it was fueled by her off-court personal struggles, but that won’t always be the case. But even if she can keep the aggression in her game, that only gives her slightly better odds to go deep again at the big tourneys where, unfortunately, she’ll continue to be outhit.
- Marin Cilic, the newly-crowned US Open men’s champion, has long been considered a contender, but was never viewed as a threat…and with good reason. Prior to winning his maiden Slam title, the Croat had won several ATP 250-level events, but never a 500-level tournament or Masters Series 1000. This win could serve as a catalyst for Marin to “backfill” his tournament resume, as it did for Stan Wawrinka after he won the Australian; hopefully without the follow-up loss of focus.
- Kei Nishikori had an excellent tournament with huge wins over Milos Raonic, Stan Wawrinka, and Novak Djokovic. Unfortunately, he fell short in the final when he needed to step up the most. The wear and tear of too much court time slowed him down, and prevented him from imposing his ground game as he had done so beautifully against Novak. Kei has a history of physical breakdowns in big events when his body is pushed to the limit, but not this time. He made it all the way through without a single thought of retirement in his earlier battles. I hope he can keep that up in 2015.
- 2014 Slam Results, Part 1: The 2014 Slam winners were Li Na/Stan Wawrinka (Australian Open), Maria Sharapova/Rafael Nadal (French Open), Petra Kvitova/Novak Djokovic (Wimbledon), and Serena Williams/Marin Cilic (US Open). Let’s break down what this possibly tells us about the future prospects for both tours, starting with the ladies…
- 2014 Slam Results, Part 2: For the women, the onslaught of WTA teen phenoms, formidable as they are, failed to make an impact at the highest level. Each of this year’s Slam winners is a tried-and-true veteran, and that’s no coincidence given the demands of the game. At this year’s US Open, Spaniard phenom Garbine Muguruza flamed out in the first round. Canadian Genie Bouchard, the most hyped of the younger generation, fell in the fourth round. Swiss teen Belinda Bencic fared the best of the bunch with a R16 upset of Jelena Jankovic. And that’s as good as it got. Just a thought: maybe the WTA should stop trying to push the younger players to stardom before they’re ready, marketing dollars be damned.
- 2014 Slam Results, Part 3: For the men, the significance of two champions outside of the “Big Four” cannot be overstated. Prior to 2014, the last guys outside of that group to win a Slam were Juan Martin Del Potro back in 2009 (US Open) and Marat Safin in 2005 (Australian Open). This year saw two outsiders win (Stan Wawrinka in Melbourne and Marin Cilic in New York). Will we see a further erosion of the old guard in 2015? I think so!
- The era of the “Big Four” is officially over. Let the debate begin.
- Wimbledon champion Novak Djokovic ended his poor summer with a run to the semifinals where he was completely outplayed by Kei Nishikori. After his post-Wimbledon wedding and with the eminent birth of his first child, Novak is clearly distracted. He needs to have a serious sit-down with Roger on how to do the pro tennis thing with family in tow…
- Roger Federer had a great summer, and played well through most of his time in New York. He fell short against Cilic’s phenomenal onslaught, but shouldn’t be concerned about any lingering questions of age. Even though he still needs a little help from the draw and scheduling gods for his best chances at another Slam, he remains an unwavering fixture atop the men’s game. One need only look to Rafa Nadal’s absence to appreciate that fact.
- Though we all missed Rafa’s presence in New York, he seemed to be having a great time at home with his friends in Mallorca. I could be wrong, but it really didn’t look as if he missed this tennis thing all that much. We’ll find out soon enough when he plays his next event.
- If a quarterfinal showing qualifies as struggling, Andy Murray’s Slam “struggles” continued in New York. I guess that also means that Amelie Mauresmo’s struggles as his coach continued in New York. Why do I have a gut feeling that this partnership isn’t going to make it to the end of the year?
- Gael Monfils finally stepped up to the “big boy” table, put away his highlight reel mentality, and played the type of tennis that we all knew he was capable of in reaching his first US Open quarterfinals. I hope that trend will continue into the New Year.
- Disappointment, Part 1: Disappointing is the only word I can think of to describe performances by Milos Raonic and Grigor Dimitrov at the Open. Both failed to back up their previous Slam showings in very uncharacteristic losses. I hope their teams were able to glean some positives from New York, because from where I sit, there were very few.
- Disappointment, Part 2: After semifinal showings in Melbourne and Paris, and the final in London, Genie Bouchard came into this summer as the hottest player on tour. It all quickly fell apart for her, however, with first-round losses in Montreal and Cincinnati, and a second-round loss in New Haven the week before the Open. Much has been made about Genie’s maturity, and her ability to handle the pressures that accompany elite-level tennis. Judging by her summer, as well as her subsequent withdrawal controversy from the Hong Kong tournament, she still has a ways to go.
- A few years ago, the “Super Coach” phenomena was merely an interesting novelty. After a strong showing in this year’s US Open men’s semifinals, it’s a novelty that’s likely here to stay. The semifinals saw Chang vs Becker and Edberg vs Ivanisevic. The victors, Chang and Ivanisevic, squared off in Monday’s final with Ivanisevic coming out on top. Anyone want to place bets on when we’ll see Sampras and Agassi sitting in player boxes?
- Broadcast Woes, Part 1: Cilic and Nishikori both played outstanding tennis to reach their first Grand Slam final. Unfortunately for CBS, the lack of a known quantity spelled doom for the oddly-placed Monday final ratings. As tweeted by Ben Rothenburg:
Women got a 4.0, more than double. RT @Ourand_SBJ: CBS’s US Open Men’s Championship drew a 1.9 overnight, down 32% from last year’s 2.8.
— Ben Rothenberg (@BenRothenberg) September 9, 2014
This is not an indictment of Marin/Kei, but merely the reality of televised men’s tennis without Roger, Rafa, Novak, or even Andy.
- Broadcast Woes, Part 2: After a remarkable run that started in 1986, CBS aired its’ final US Open match on Monday with the men’s final. With no real allegiance to the CBS coverage, I hope the consolidated coverage on ESPN makes it easier to follow coverage in 2015 and beyond.
- Broadcast Woes, Part 3: The tennis powers-that-be surely can’t keep bemoaning the lack of support for tennis on TV when the coverage is so inconsistent and disjointed. I know that I’ve said this before, but how can anyone expect increased support from the casual tennis fan when even the diehard fans can’t easily find televised matches for the biggest US tournament of the year? Some matches were on DirecTV, some were on ESPN, some were on ESPN2, some were on Tennis Channel, and some were on CBS. Heck, some were even on ESPNNews. Even when ESPN and CBS partnered to air coverage of different events during simultaneous coverage, they would inevitably switch to the over courts and end up showing the same match for brief intervals. Honestly, it was a shit show! I realize that this is strong language, but it’s the only language I can think of to adequately describe the ridiculous situation at the heart of languishing fan support for tennis in the US.
- Broadcast Woes, Part 4: The last thing I’ll say about the broadcast issues at the Open is on the bias shown by commentators who assigned to matches with American players. Honestly, it was disgusting. It’s not that hard to show support for the home team without disregarding the other player on the court.
- Here’s a “Broadcast Thumbs-Up”! After listing in detail the broadcast issues of this year’s tournament, I should also note the “good stuff”. This includes Martina Navratilova’s on-air wedding proposal (and acceptance) to her longtime partner, Julia Lemigova. When same sex wedding proposals start becoming the norm, it’s safe to say that “We’ve come a long way, baby”.
- Steve Johnson retired from his first-round match after debilitating cramps in the August heat of a New York summer. That’s the simple version of the story. The actual version was that Steve started to cramp, and fought it as long as he could without any MTO (medical timeout) help while also enduring the forfeiture of code violation points. All this as he lay on the court in tears, racked with pain and visible muscle spasms. Fast-forward to Peng Shuai’s semifinal against Wozniacki, and the same situation was turned dramatically on its’ head when Peng – suffering from cramps – was allowed to delay play before being taken off court by medical personnel for evaluation and treatment.
My gut impulse is to call out the outrageous of penalizing one player while allowing the other player over ten minutes of tournament assistance to help them compete. I’ll temper that impulse by merely imploring the WTA, ATP, ITF, and Grand Slam committees to come up with clear and consistent rules regarding the distinction between and treatment of cramps versus heat illness.
- On a more positive note, the Bryan brothers won their only Slam title of the year at the US Open, but boy was it a doozy! By defeating the Spanish team of Granollers and Lopez in the men’s doubles final, Mike and Bob reached their mind-boggling 100th tournament title win as a team…and with no signs of stopping anytime soon. As Dick Enberg would say, “Oh my!”
- BTW, can we stop with the “death of American tennis” stories already while we still have Serena Williams and the Bryans producing top-level results? (And NO, Patrick McEnroe’s departure from USTA Player Development isn’t going to help.)
- Michaela Gordon, Noah Rubin, Francis Tiafoe, and Stefan Kozlov are NOT the saviors of American tennis. Can we all just let them develop in peace?
When I start kvetching like a curmudgeonly grandpa, it’s time to call it a day on my final thoughts. Even with a few bumps in the road, it was an ultimately satisfying tournament with a nice mix of the new, the old, and the historic. And to be honest, I’m hoping that I witness all of this on the other side next year if I get a chance to work as a tournament official. Fingers crossed. Lastly, I never got a chance to mention anything about my time at the Connecticut Open, so I’ll leave you with this: Run, don’t walk, to Orangeside Donuts for the best freakin’ donuts in New Haven.
Serena Williams earned entry to an elite group yesterday by defeating Caroline Wozniacki in the US Open women’s final for her 18th Slam title. Afterwards, she was joined on court for a presentation by Hall of Famers Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova, the two other members of the “18” club.
Chris and Martina are tennis legends. By joining them with 18 of her own, Serena is in rarified air. Fittingly, it’s an accomplishment for which she was given full due after the win. But it wasn’t always this way for the 3-peating US Open champion.
Mention her name to anyone and they can tell you something about her. Generally the comments are positive ones about Serena’s power, her dominance over the other women (particularly Maria Sharapova), and her presumably atypical body type for a tennis player.
Many are also justifiably negative, like those regarding her tirade towards the “foot fault” linesperson, or her treatment of the chair umpire after being called for hindrance against Sam Stosur.
Regardless of merit, they show precisely the reason why she resonates so strongly in a sport that previously boasted benign heroines like Evert. On her good days, she’s almost mythical in her abilities. On her bad days, she’s flawed beyond belief. It’s that humanity that we either love, or love to hate.
But with this step up to “legend” status, she’s become much more. In fact, her path to respectability reminds me an awful lot like that of another great champion: Andre Agassi.
Back in his younger days, Andre’s ball-striking talent was undeniable. But along with that talent was a rebellious streak a mile long, and a piss-poor attitude to boot. He was all about the show, and didn’t really care if you liked it or not.
After early success, Andre sank to spectacular lows. There were many who counted him out. But as he worked his way back from the tennis wilderness, crowds began to cheer for him in spite of, or maybe even because of, his difficulties. They continued this support as he went on to achieve late-career success.
When Andre finally retired, he’d completed a remarkable transformation from young punk to career-Slam champion and elder statesman. I believe the same will eventually hold true for Serena.
In spite of her talent, acceptance from the tennis establishment was initially begrudging, at best. There always seemed to be too much drama, like the Capriati fiasco at the US Open (that led to the use of Hawkeye), or the Henin “hand” incident at the French Open. Few players have been involved with as much controversy as Serena.
She’s also did few favors for herself with the myriad of excuses that would flow after a loss. After losing to Davenport in the 2000 US Open quarterfinals, she exclaimed, “I don’t know how I lost that match.” Later, when told of a joke between Davenport and Hingis with regards to knocking them both out before the final, she stated: ”Obviously, no one would want to see an all-Williams final because everyone doesn’t really like us.”
Excess drama, faux-outrage, and persecution pity parties aren’t especially endearing. Consequently, many fans struggled to embrace Serena regardless of her early successes.
Then came the career-threatening injuries and the murder of her older sister, Yetunde. Serena still managed some big wins, but under extreme emotional duress. The turning point came after a seemingly benign foot injury in 2010 eventually led to a prolonged absence from tennis with a life-threatening pulmonary embolism.
Few things endear an athlete to their fan base like a life-or-death struggle. When Serena finally emerged from this health scare in order to compete on the grass at Eastbourne, adoration for her among fans, even those who’d once been indifferent, began in earnest.
To be certain, her transformation is still a work in progress. Her threat to shove a tennis ball down a line umpire’s throat was appalling. Her tirade towards the chair umpire after a hindrance violation was also unnecessary. Fortunately for Serena, she’s been able to hang on to the positive cachet built when one looks at her behavior in totality.
Also, let’s not forget the crucial maturation that occurs for these athlete’s over the course of their careers. Andre turned pro at 16, and retired at 36. Serena turned pro at 14, and is just shy of her 33rd birthday. Maybe we gain an appreciation for their humanity simply as a function of watching them struggle, then learn to be better champions as they get older because of those struggles.
Serena is by no means a perfect champion. She’s played the game on her own terms, and begrudgingly gained our respect, admiration, and her own legendary status along the way. And in spite of all the drama we’ve witnessed over the years, it will still be a sad day when she leaves the game.
There wasn’t much extra time for writing today, but I still wanted to throw my hat into the men’s quarterfinal ring. So here are my quarterfinal quick picks for what look to be some pretty terrific quarterfinal match-ups.
Novak Djokovic (SRB)  vs Andy Murray (GBR) 
H2H: Djokovic leads 12-8
I can’t believe that this is a quarterfinal match! After all, these two have contested 4 previous Slam finals with two won by Novak (Australia ’12, ’13) and two won by Andy (US Open ’11, Wimbledon ’13). Unfortunately for Andy, these were contested before his season-ending back surgery after last year’s US Open. He’s come a long way in his recovery, but is still not quite at the level needed to derail Novak.
Stan Wawrinka (SUI)  vs Kei Nishikori (JPN) 
H2H: Wawrinka leads 2-0
Kei played a great match to topple Milos Raonic in the R16, but was clearly running on fumes by the end. By contrast, Stan seems to be getting stronger and feistier with each round. With Kei on the verge of breaking down physically (again), I can’t see him beating Stan, or outlasting him in a protracted duel.
Tomas Berdych (CZE)  vs Marin Cilic (CRO) 
H2H: Berdych leads 5-3
This won’t be the most exciting match of the four, but it will most definitely feature big hitting from both men. Cilic hasn’t beaten Berdych on a hard court since 2011, and was fairly well-throttled in their last hard court meeting in the Rotterdam final (6-4, 6-2). On top of that, Cilic was pushed hard in his R16 4-hour (plus) marathon against Gilles Simon, while Berdych breezed past Dominic Thiem in just over 1.5 hours with the loss of 7 games. Bottom line: it doesn’t look good for the Croat.
Gael Monfils (FRA)  vs Roger Federer (SUI) 
H2H: Federer leads 7-2
Gael and Roger have the potential to be the most entertaining of the men’s quarterfinal matches. However, after a grueling win over Grigor Dimitrov, I can’t see Gael having the legs to withstand the oncoming Federer onslaught over the long haul. I’m sure there will be plenty of entertaining points, and a few jaw-dropping “Monfils Moments”. But Gael’s great run will end here.
I wasn’t able to do any pre-tournament write-ups or picks for this year’s US Open because of my assignment in New Haven. But now that I’m back in San Francisco with a bit of free time on my hands, the quarterfinals seemed like as good a place as any to get back on the horse and make some picks for the last Slam of the year. Ladies first!
Belinda Bencic (SUI) vs Shuai Peng (CHN)
H2H: No previous meetings
There’s no match history between these two players, so there’s not much to say on the prospects for this match other than generalities.
Bencic has played good tennis to reach the quarters; particularly in her match against the veteran Jelena Jankovic. I fully expected Jankovic to dig deep into her bag of tricks for a win against her 17 year-old opponent, but it didn’t happen. Bencic, young and prone to some impatience/volatility, kept it together on one of the game’s biggest stages; and in one of the biggest matches of her life.
Can she give a repeat performance in the quarters? That depends on her opponent, Peng Shuai. Peng steadily knocked off an impressive roster of players in reaching the quarters (Zheng, Radwanska, Vinci, and Safarova), and did so impressively without dropping a set. She’s not a flashy player, and doesn’t possess any huge weapons. But she will make you play solid and consistent tennis to beat her.
Bencic is certainly talented enough, but I’m not sure if she’s steady enough at this stage in her career to rise to the occasion in a Slam quarterfinal. For that reason alone, I’ll go with Peng. But I won’t be surprised if it goes either way given the volatility of this year’s tournament.
Pick: Peng Shuai
Caroline Wozniacki (DEN)  vs Sara Errani (ITA) 
H2H: Wozniacki leads 2-1
Underestimate Sara Errani at your own risk; especially after her revenge-fueled victory over Venus Williams the other day. It wasn’t pretty. And yes, Venus is not the “Venus” we remember from her pre-Sjogren days. But none of that mattered in the end. Sara came away with the hard-fought victory, and has a chance to redeem her disappointing year in singles.
The same could be said for Caroline. After spotty results earlier in the year, she’s played like Dane possessed during the summer hard court swing. She took Serena the distance in their two last tournaments (Montreal and Cincinnati), and knocked out Maria in a brilliant R16 match to reach the quarters. She’s serving harder, hitting her forehand harder, and is notably mixing up her shot patterns to keep opponents off-balance. Moreover, her backhand winner on match point against Maria, a pre-2014 rarity, tells you everything you need to know about where Caro is with her game. (Hint: aggressive.)
I don’t want to risk getting Sara riled up again, but I’m going with Caro in this one. Sara has picked up her game, but Caro’s the one most primed for a breakthrough.
Pick: Caroline Wozniacki
Serena Williams (USA)  vs Flavia Pennetta (ITA) 
H2H: Williams leads 5-0
Serena is, of course, the prohibitive favorite in any match-up at any tournament. But this particular version of Serena is a bit more vulnerable and prone to meltdowns than the one we’ve come to know in recent years. With time winding down on her Hall of Fame career, she’s put tremendous pressure on herself to reach coveted milestones. That pressure has virtually crippled her in the Slams this year, with early exits in Melbourne, Paris, and London. It says a ton that this is her first Slam quarterfinal of 2014.
Flavia’s year has also been underwhelming after her early success in winning the title at Indian Wells. Her match results have been unpredictable at best, and haven’t come close to those reaching the earlier highs of the year. In spite of it all, she’s made it through to the second week, and is facing off against Serena for the second time at the Open.
Unfortunately for Flavia, she’s only won a grand total of six games in her last four hard court sets against Serena. Even in a tournament filled with upsets, this does NOT bode well. I’m picking Serena to reach her first Slam semifinal with a routine win over the Italian.
Pick: Serena Williams
Victoria Azarenka (BLR)  vs Ekaterina Makarova (RUS) 
H2H: Azarenka leads 3-2
Ekaterina won their last match on clay in three sets (2013), but has yet to beat Vika on a hard court. She’s a great player with big weapons who has managed some stunning Slam upsets over the past couple of years. Unfortunately, she’s never backed up those upsets in the later rounds when the pressure was at its’ highest.
Vika, on the other hand, lives for the big moments in the big matches. Sometimes she’s a bit too prickly on court for my taste, but you can’t deny her competitive fight. It’s taken her to the Open final the past two years, and could very well again for a hat trick of final appearances in successive years. She came into New York with a ton of rust and lack of match play, but she’s found a way to make it through.
She may not be playing her best tennis right now, but I’ve got to go with Vika for the win on her chutzpah alone.
Pick: Victoria Azarenka
After a third-round loss to qualifier Coco Vandeweghe at the Sony Open (7-5, 5-7, 5-7), Sam Stosur continues a ’14 season that started on a positive note in Hobart, but has since returned to a disappointing norm.
Words are useless these days in describing the torture of watching a Sam Stosur loss. Rarely has an ex-Slam champion and top-ranked player frustrated so many with exasperating results from one week to the next. Need proof? Think back to last year’s puzzling Stanford loss to Olga Govortsova followed by an equally puzzling Carlsbad title win over Vika Azarenka.
The “how’s” and “why’s” of Sam’s performance fluctuations aren’t easy to answer. An obvious go-to is always a player’s coach. David Taylor, the longtime coach that helped her achieve the big win in New York, was let go after the win over Azarenka in Carlsbad. There was no animus in the split, simply a mutual parting of ways. In short, nothing that would explain a drop in her results.
Sam flew solo from the summer season through Sofia, and then realized that she preferred having a coach. So she hired Miles Maclagan, a noteworthy from his past work with Andy Murray. She began working with Maclagan in December, and the results so far in 2014 appear underwhelming.
Looks can be deceiving, however. One can’t really be underwhelmed with Sam’s results when the prevailing evidence, her WTA win-loss record, actually points to a “more of the same” performance level. An examination of her record over the past five years reveals a remarkably consistent, and winning, win-loss percentage.
2009 39 wins – 21 losses (.65)
2010 47 wins – 19 losses (.71)
2011 45 wins – 23 losses (.66)
2012 44 wins – 24 losses (.66)
2013 42 wins – 23 losses (.65)
There’s a slight uptick from 2009 to 2010 as she made her move up the rankings, and an equivalent downtick as she settled into her new status. Overall though, the numbers are fairly consistent in terms of the mid-40 range for her # of wins, and low-20 range for her # of losses.
In spite of her relative consistency, the perception is that Sam comes up short in big matches, and under-performs on a weekly basis. One could quibble that the plus/minus range on her losses represent potentially career-changing matches, but we can’t speculate in what could have happened if only…
Such discussions are often lively, but players don’t win titles via “woulda, coulda, shoulda”. Sam’s missed opportunities are what they are, and need to be replaced with new ones. Whether Maclagan is the one to help her get there is anyone’s guess. A coach can only do so much if the player isn’t able to effectively execute.
That leads to a larger discussion of what many feel is Sam’s biggest liability. Her lack of winning results, at least in the big matches, seems to be more one of Sam’s temperament affecting her ability to execute under duress than of technical or strategic issues.
Sam is a likable player, but there’s an air of vulnerability that comes across when talking with her. Unfortunately for her, it’s also readily apparent on court to her opponents. When pressed, Sam starts to press in her game, and eventually succumbs to her demons (and defeat). The only time I remember NOT seeing that side of her was in her winning US Open final match against Serena.
For once, there were no nerves; just the flawless execution of a clear strategy to take down the favorite. The frustration comes for us when we’ve seen her do such a great job of it one moment, then crashing out in a late-night flourish as in her match to Vandeweghe.
The truth is that tennis has never been that simplistic. Though we all would have loved to see her continue in that winning vein, she might never see another Slam final. Some players learn from their matches, regardless of success or failure, and some don’t. Her record speaks for itself: Sam will win, but not the matches we want her to win, and not on our timetable.
So rather than bemoan Sam’s great slide from Slam champion to forgotten player in the upper echelons of the WTA, we should celebrate a player who consistently performs at a top level. Maybe it’s a level that’s below our expectations, but that’s our issue and not hers. For better or worse, Sam is right where she’s always been.
Question: Is it better to simply threaten someone, or does it became a greater offense when you lay your hands upon them?
Answer: Both are wrong. It isn’t okay to do either.
If David Ferrer doesn’t receive some kind of fine from tennis’ governing bodies, we’ve got a problem!
For those who didn’t see it, David went to retrieve a towel from a ballkid. After wiping his face, he thought he could put the towel down on the chair behind the center line official. He seemed to believe that the official was in his way, so he pushed him to the side in order to lay the towel down on the chair. The push was accompanied by a look of exasperation.
The problem with David’s actions was that the official was in the correct position on court, and David had no cause (or right) to touch him, let alone push him. He was frustrated by his level of play against his opponent, and let that spill over onto a court official. He’s not a junior. He’s a veteran professional and knows better than to lay hands on an official.
Afterward, David said it was “but nothing”. That’s not true. It WAS something. And if the Grand Slam committee doesn’t address this, the stage will be set for a) further hands on moments with on-court officials and, b) legitimate charges of a double standard in terms of player discipline. For an obvious example of this, one only needs to consider the case(s) of Serena Williams.
Serena’s been fined twice for threat-laced verbal tirades at the US Open. The first, and probably most infamous, came during a semifinal match against Kim Clijsters in 2009 after Serena was called for a foot fault. In what can only be described as a moment of temporary insanity, Serena unleashed a scary verbal tirade that stunned everyone with its pointed ferocity.
In the post-match aftermath, Serena was fined a record $82,500 and given a 2-yr probationary period that threatened suspension if she committed another “major offense” at any Grand Slam. Unfortunately, she would erupt again in 2011.
The second incident occurred when Serena lost a point after hitting a shot then shouting “Come on” while the ball was still in play. The chair umpire correctly ruled the shout to be an intentional hindrance and awarded the point to Stosur. That’s when the fireworks began.
An incredulous Serena then went on (yet another) verbal tirade towards the chair that included statements like, “You’re totally out of control, you’re a hater, and you’re unattractive inside” and “I promise you, don’t look at me, ’cause I am not the one”.
Luckily, this outburst was deemed to be not a “major offense”, so Serena only received a fine of $2000.
In each of these incidents, Serena’s behavior was less than stellar, but she never laid a hand on either official. Sure, she told Shino Tsurubuchi that she would “take this f***in tennis ball and shove it down your throat”, but to my knowledge, Ms. Tsurubuchi has never required surgery to remove a foreign object from her throat.
Admittedly, Ferrer’s actions weren’t as egregious as David Nalbandian’s kick that caused a bleeding injury to an on-court official at the pre-Wimbledon Queens Club event. Her first tirade aside, Serena received a $2k fine for a verbal outburst at an official with no physical contact. At a minimum, this type of fine is clearly warranted for someone who makes actual contact.
So again I ask, is it better to simply threaten someone, or does it became a greater offense when you lay your hands upon them? If you fine for the lesser (non-physical) offense, you need to fine for both. Let’s hope the committee does the right thing.