Serena Williams

2»

Comments

  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    To be fair, if your coach is coaching during a match, then you are a cheat.

    Tremendous tennis player, but I can't side with her on this one.
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,223
    rjsterry wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    The thing that gets me is the blatant attempt to put herself into groups protected by modern cultural trends - woman, mother etc. At least she didn't say "is it because I is black?", but plenty of people are doing it for her.

    What about the fact that she is an extremely rich, powerful person - and she was effectively trying to bully the umpire (roared on by the crowd too) to force him to rule her way.

    She should have forfeited the match straight away. $17K fine? That's less than one percent of her prize money for that tounament, never mind however many hundreds of millions she has in the bank.

    Personally I think the umpire should sue her for defamation - surely calling someone a liar and cheat is exactly that?

    He effectively called her a cheat first.

    No he didn't. He accused her coach of trying to coach her on court - which he has said he was doing. It doesn't matter whether she saw him or not.

    If that warning hadn't happened, the racket abuse wouldn't have been a point penalty, it would have been a warning, and she probably wouldn't have called him a thief, so wouldn't have got the game penalty.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    rjsterry wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    The thing that gets me is the blatant attempt to put herself into groups protected by modern cultural trends - woman, mother etc. At least she didn't say "is it because I is black?", but plenty of people are doing it for her.

    What about the fact that she is an extremely rich, powerful person - and she was effectively trying to bully the umpire (roared on by the crowd too) to force him to rule her way.

    She should have forfeited the match straight away. $17K fine? That's less than one percent of her prize money for that tounament, never mind however many hundreds of millions she has in the bank.

    Personally I think the umpire should sue her for defamation - surely calling someone a liar and cheat is exactly that?

    He effectively called her a cheat first.
    Yes. That's because, according to the rules of tennis, it's his job to decide who is and who isn't a cheat. Not hers.
  • kingstongraham
    kingstongraham Posts: 26,223
    The voice of reason: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opin ... -open.html
  • Matthewfalle
    Matthewfalle Posts: 17,380
    bompington wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    The thing that gets me is the blatant attempt to put herself into groups protected by modern cultural trends - woman, mother etc. At least she didn't say "is it because I is black?", but plenty of people are doing it for her.

    What about the fact that she is an extremely rich, powerful person - and she was effectively trying to bully the umpire (roared on by the crowd too) to force him to rule her way.

    She should have forfeited the match straight away. $17K fine? That's less than one percent of her prize money for that tounament, never mind however many hundreds of millions she has in the bank.

    Personally I think the umpire should sue her for defamation - surely calling someone a liar and cheat is exactly that?

    He effectively called her a cheat first.
    Yes. That's because, according to the rules of tennis, it's his job to decide who is and who isn't a cheat. Not hers.

    thats because he is the ref or umpire or whatever and he is there to enforce the rules and if the rules say she is cheating he is there to say so.

    #rules
    Postby team47b » Sun Jun 28, 2015 11:53 am

    De Sisti wrote:
    This is one of the silliest threads I've come across. :lol:

    Recognition at last Matthew, well done!, a justified honour :D
    smithy21 wrote:

    He's right you know.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,568
    Apparently, there were twice as many conduct violations for men as there were for women.
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,624
    bompington wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    bompington wrote:
    The thing that gets me is the blatant attempt to put herself into groups protected by modern cultural trends - woman, mother etc. At least she didn't say "is it because I is black?", but plenty of people are doing it for her.

    What about the fact that she is an extremely rich, powerful person - and she was effectively trying to bully the umpire (roared on by the crowd too) to force him to rule her way.

    She should have forfeited the match straight away. $17K fine? That's less than one percent of her prize money for that tounament, never mind however many hundreds of millions she has in the bank.

    Personally I think the umpire should sue her for defamation - surely calling someone a liar and cheat is exactly that?

    He effectively called her a cheat first.
    Yes. That's because, according to the rules of tennis, it's his job to decide who is and who isn't a cheat. Not hers.

    Sure. I've already said it was a valid point badly made. If she wanted to dispute one of his decisions there are much better ways to do it, but the idea that a referee's decisions cannot be challenged is a bit odd.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    So does that mean her defence is wrong or could there have been a really big number of violations and most didn't get pinged?

    What I mean is male players could be significantly more likely to conduct themselves in a way that sbould garner conduct violations. Could the percentage of violations not resulting in sanctions be higher for men than women? For example if there were 20 sanctions for male players out of 40 violations in total and 10 samctions out of 20 violations by women. Then would that not mean there's no bias just a poor standard of umpiring and a really bad standard of male tennis player conduct?

    Stats without context or incomplete stats don't explain what is happening. IMHO tennis authorities need to look at the complete set of statistics and review umpiring across a few tournaments to get the whole story of what is happening in tennis. It then needs to decide on actions based on good evidence. We can only express our suspicions that tennis has a lot of problems with umpiring and player conduct. The serena Williams incident only highlights the issues. Would be good to know what the reality is.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,568
    rjsterry wrote:
    Sure. I've already said it was a valid point badly made. If she wanted to dispute one of his decisions there are much better ways to do it, but the idea that a referee's decisions cannot be challenged is a bit odd.

    A referee's decision can be queried, it can be challenged, but it can't be suggested to be impartial.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    TheBigBean wrote:
    rjsterry wrote:
    Sure. I've already said it was a valid point badly made. If she wanted to dispute one of his decisions there are much better ways to do it, but the idea that a referee's decisions cannot be challenged is a bit odd.

    A referee's decision can be queried, it can be challenged, but it can't be suggested to be partial.
    FTFY :)
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 20,568
    I think I was going with not impartial, but yours works.
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    She was getting coached clearly and corroborated by others. Her coach admitted it and she has denied it. She has then smashed a racket up giving the umpire no option but to penalise. This then starts a spiral of racism, sexism and whatever other ism's people can come up with. The umpire in question is not white so presumably he likes to penalise other people who are not white for some bizarre reason that we don't know. He is sexist apparently again which is a baseless accusation unless you can demonstrate that this umpire routinely lets male players get away with this which no one has presented. My mum is also a mother and guess what she is not an entitled twat so not sure how that works as an argument.

    She has called the umpire a liar and a cheat when what is evident on the two points above she is clearly the liar and the cheat as lets face it her coaches actions were obvious to her whether she say them or not and as it is pointed out prior she as a player is responsible for her coaches behaviour. Whilst it is professional sport and therefore a heated environment you cannot defend the indefensible but merely call for more consistency of penalties if that is in fact a problem.

    Using the racism and sexism card is a bit like that bird on big brother claiming she was assaulted. It trivialises real issues.
  • tangled_metal
    tangled_metal Posts: 4,021
    TheBigBean wrote:
    I think I was going with not impartial, but yours works.
    More efficient by a few letters. :D
  • capt_slog
    capt_slog Posts: 3,944
    The sexism bit.

    I would say the only way she could fairly call that, is if she was playing against a male opponent whilst he was getting away with the same behaviour.


    The older I get, the better I was.

  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    john80 wrote:
    She was getting coached clearly and corroborated by others. Her coach admitted it and she has denied it. She has then smashed a racket up giving the umpire no option but to penalise. This then starts a spiral of racism, sexism and whatever other ism's people can come up with. The umpire in question is not white so presumably he likes to penalise other people who are not white for some bizarre reason that we don't know. He is sexist apparently again which is a baseless accusation unless you can demonstrate that this umpire routinely lets male players get away with this which no one has presented. My mum is also a mother and guess what she is not an entitled fool so not sure how that works as an argument.

    She has called the umpire a liar and a cheat when what is evident on the two points above she is clearly the liar and the cheat as lets face it her coaches actions were obvious to her whether she say them or not and as it is pointed out prior she as a player is responsible for her coaches behaviour. Whilst it is professional sport and therefore a heated environment you cannot defend the indefensible but merely call for more consistency of penalties if that is in fact a problem.

    Using the racism and sexism card is a bit like that bird on big brother claiming she was assaulted. It trivialises real issues.

    She never said anything about racism, that is maybe your prejudices creeping in assuming she did!
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Chris Bass wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    She was getting coached clearly and corroborated by others. Her coach admitted it and she has denied it. She has then smashed a racket up giving the umpire no option but to penalise. This then starts a spiral of racism, sexism and whatever other ism's people can come up with. The umpire in question is not white so presumably he likes to penalise other people who are not white for some bizarre reason that we don't know. He is sexist apparently again which is a baseless accusation unless you can demonstrate that this umpire routinely lets male players get away with this which no one has presented. My mum is also a mother and guess what she is not an entitled fool so not sure how that works as an argument.

    She has called the umpire a liar and a cheat when what is evident on the two points above she is clearly the liar and the cheat as lets face it her coaches actions were obvious to her whether she say them or not and as it is pointed out prior she as a player is responsible for her coaches behaviour. Whilst it is professional sport and therefore a heated environment you cannot defend the indefensible but merely call for more consistency of penalties if that is in fact a problem.

    Using the racism and sexism card is a bit like that bird on big brother claiming she was assaulted. It trivialises real issues.

    She never said anything about racism, that is maybe your prejudices creeping in assuming she did!

    Her supporters were fully on the racism card. Read the fourth sentence above as maybe your prejudices are creeping in.
  • chris_bass
    chris_bass Posts: 4,913
    john80 wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    She was getting coached clearly and corroborated by others. Her coach admitted it and she has denied it. She has then smashed a racket up giving the umpire no option but to penalise. This then starts a spiral of racism, sexism and whatever other ism's people can come up with. The umpire in question is not white so presumably he likes to penalise other people who are not white for some bizarre reason that we don't know. He is sexist apparently again which is a baseless accusation unless you can demonstrate that this umpire routinely lets male players get away with this which no one has presented. My mum is also a mother and guess what she is not an entitled fool so not sure how that works as an argument.

    She has called the umpire a liar and a cheat when what is evident on the two points above she is clearly the liar and the cheat as lets face it her coaches actions were obvious to her whether she say them or not and as it is pointed out prior she as a player is responsible for her coaches behaviour. Whilst it is professional sport and therefore a heated environment you cannot defend the indefensible but merely call for more consistency of penalties if that is in fact a problem.

    Using the racism and sexism card is a bit like that bird on big brother claiming she was assaulted. It trivialises real issues.

    She never said anything about racism, that is maybe your prejudices creeping in assuming she did!

    Her supporters were fully on the racism card. Read the fourth sentence above as maybe your prejudices are creeping in.

    can't see where you said it was her supporters?
    www.conjunctivitis.com - a site for sore eyes
  • Ben6899
    Ben6899 Posts: 9,686
    Chris Bass wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    Chris Bass wrote:
    john80 wrote:
    She was getting coached clearly and corroborated by others. Her coach admitted it and she has denied it. She has then smashed a racket up giving the umpire no option but to penalise. This then starts a spiral of racism, sexism and whatever other ism's people can come up with. The umpire in question is not white so presumably he likes to penalise other people who are not white for some bizarre reason that we don't know. He is sexist apparently again which is a baseless accusation unless you can demonstrate that this umpire routinely lets male players get away with this which no one has presented. My mum is also a mother and guess what she is not an entitled fool so not sure how that works as an argument.

    She has called the umpire a liar and a cheat when what is evident on the two points above she is clearly the liar and the cheat as lets face it her coaches actions were obvious to her whether she say them or not and as it is pointed out prior she as a player is responsible for her coaches behaviour. Whilst it is professional sport and therefore a heated environment you cannot defend the indefensible but merely call for more consistency of penalties if that is in fact a problem.

    Using the racism and sexism card is a bit like that bird on big brother claiming she was assaulted. It trivialises real issues.

    She never said anything about racism, that is maybe your prejudices creeping in assuming she did!

    Her supporters were fully on the racism card. Read the fourth sentence above as maybe your prejudices are creeping in.

    can't see where you said it was her supporters?

    "whatever other isms people can come up with"
    Ben

    Bikes: Donhou DSS4 Custom | Condor Italia RC | Gios Megalite | Dolan Preffisio | Giant Bowery '76
    Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ben_h_ppcc/
    Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/143173475@N05/
  • robert88
    robert88 Posts: 2,696
    I think she is showing her age.
  • john80
    john80 Posts: 2,965
    Oh dear if half of this article is true then it seems that Serena may be full of bull.

    https://www.independent.ie/sport/other- ... 05939.html

    I do like her false apologies. Very humbling.
  • drlodge
    drlodge Posts: 4,826
    Williams is a petulant narcissist.
    WyndyMilla Massive Attack | Rourke 953 | Condor Italia 531 Pro | Boardman CX Pro | DT Swiss RR440 Tubeless Wheels
    Find me on Strava
  • proto
    proto Posts: 1,483
    Interesting reading here:

    https://www.quora.com/Is-Serena-Williams-on-steroids
  • FocusZing
    FocusZing Posts: 4,373
    drlodge wrote:
    Williams is a petulant narcissist.

    McEnroe's a guy with character.
  • bompington
    bompington Posts: 7,674
    FocusZing wrote:
    drlodge wrote:
    Williams is a petulant narcissist.

    McEnroe's a guy with character.
    Which is funny, because the word I seem to remember getting used most at the time was "brat".
  • FocusZing
    FocusZing Posts: 4,373
    bompington wrote:
    FocusZing wrote:
    drlodge wrote:
    Williams is a petulant narcissist.

    McEnroe's a guy with character.
    Which is funny, because the word I seem to remember getting used most at the time was "brat".

    True.

Categories