Tennis anyone?

[Papy Oli]

That gave me a good laugh when I read that yesterday:

https://www.skysports.com/tennis/news/12110/13290192/danielle-collins-american-revels-in-being-pantomime-villain-after-beating-home-hope-destanee-aiava-at-australian-open

[Kalevala]

That gave me a good laugh when I read that yesterday:

https://www.skysports.com/tennis/news/12110/13290192/danielle-collins-american-revels-in-being-pantomime-villain-after-beating-home-hope-destanee-aiava-at-australian-open

I can appreciate that people want to support players from their own countries...truly.  I also think that (re sports in general) that it's gotten out of control.  Whatever happened to kindness, self-respect, and appreciating the opponent(s)?  And yes, I've seen some examples of that lately (Thank God, and good for them.  It's hard to lose or also to be a gracious winner.). Good for her for being able to dig in and find a way to look after and support herself mentally.  These days too, there's so much harassment on social media.

K

[Kalevala]

Papy,

Are you watching any of the tennis?

K

[Papy Oli]

Papy,

Are you watching any of the tennis?

K

Not a sport I enjoy to watch for too long that much, K 

[Kalevala]

Not a sport I enjoy to watch for too long that much, K 

That's o.k.

Had missed this earlier, but saw it on t.v....too precious!  Made me laugh out loud and smile....cute kid and, looks like, he was having the time of his life. 

K

[Kalevala]

No tennis fans?  I feel like I will die alone--like a Masterpiece Theater animé.

K

[LKB]

No tennis fans?  I feel like I will die alone--like a Masterpiece Theater animé.

K

My interest has waned with the retirement of Nadal and Federer. While the " new crop " of stars are making a good job of establishing themselves, they've yet to attract my interest in the same way N and F did.

Perhaps they will, in time. 

[Madiel]

That gave me a good laugh when I read that yesterday:

https://www.skysports.com/tennis/news/12110/13290192/danielle-collins-american-revels-in-being-pantomime-villain-after-beating-home-hope-destanee-aiava-at-australian-open

I am becoming less keen to watch certain matches in the Australian Open, or to go back to it in person, because there are more and more examples of people who don't understand (even when the umpire TELLS them) when to stop making noise and shut up. They seemingly have no impulse control. In some cases, thousands of people in a stadium have gone quiet and some fool thinks this provides the perfect opportunity for them to shout their banal idea.

In certain matches you get young men making this ridiculous whooping noise to each other, and I want to ask them why the hell they're doing it and whether it's evidence that they don't know how to make words.

By contrast, a couple of times that I went to the tournament one of the absolute highlights were groups of fans who had planned routines for the breaks between games. They had timed them to perfection. They would start straight after the umpire had called the game score, they would end just before the umpire called time. They would entertain everyone else in the crowd and they would not disrupt play in any way.

[Papy Oli]

I am becoming less keen to watch certain matches in the Australian Open, or to go back to it in person, because there are more and more examples of people who don't understand (even when the umpire TELLS them) when to stop making noise and shut up. They seemingly have no impulse control. In some cases, thousands of people in a stadium have gone quiet and some fool thinks this provides the perfect opportunity for them to shout their banal idea.

In certain matches you get young men making this ridiculous whooping noise to each other, and I want to ask them why the hell they're doing it and whether it's evidence that they don't know how to make words.

By contrast, a couple of times that I went to the tournament one of the absolute highlights were groups of fans who had planned routines for the breaks between games. They had timed them to perfection. They would start straight after the umpire had called the game score, they would end just before the umpire called time. They would entertain everyone else in the crowd and they would not disrupt play in any way.

It looks like there have been more issues tonight as some of the crowd booed Djokovic for retiring injured in the semi-final?

As for general crowd behaviour, I seem to remember it was similar in Roland Garros last year. More troublesome than in the past (even if the French crowd can be a bit "over-patriotic" at times). I think they were reviewing matters for this year's, including alcohol consumption in the RG grounds, etc...

[Madiel]

It looks like there have been more issues tonight as some of the crowd booed Djokovic for retiring injured in the semi-final?

Yes. And in the post-match on-court interview Zverev did an absolutely superb job putting them in their place.

[Kalevala]

Yes. And in the post-match on-court interview Zverev did an absolutely superb job putting them in their place.

Yes, I really appreciated what he had to say and how he said it.

Am currently watching the repeat of the Shelton vs. Sinner semi.

K

[Madiel]

This isn't even specific to tennis, but... is anyone else completely fed up with the ridiculous behaviour of the WADA?

That's supposed to stand for World Anti-Doping Agency. But I've openly said to them they should consider changing their name because they don't seem to actually understand what "doping" is. They're the World Anti-positive-drug-tests-no-matter-the-cause Agency.

They have explicitly accepted that Jannik Sinner's positive drug result was due to accidental cross-contamination. Sinner wasn't cheating, and Sinner derived no sporting advantage from the small traces of the drug.

But this didn't stop them pursuing Sinner for the offence of... failing to force another grown adult to wash his hands.

That's it. That's agreed to be the key step in the positive drug test. Sinner's physiotherapist had traces of something on his hands from a spray he'd been using on his cut finger. In fact the physiotherapist wasn't aware that there was a prohibited substance in the spray, but he was using the spray, and it did contain a prohibited substance.

This is hardly the only instance of WADA accepting that an athlete had no intent to take a drug, but still wanting a punishment. To be fair to them it's actually in the rules to some extent, and the rules themselves are quite deranged in my view with a penalty of 2 years possible even for accidental consumption. But in this case, Sinner somehow managed to clear the huge hurdle of getting the decision-makers to accept that he was in the category where he really couldn't possibly be expected to have done something to prevent the contamination, and WADA still appealed.

And this examination of the AGREED facts is completely lost on most people it seems. People label Sinner as a cheat despite WADA explicitly saying that he was not cheating. Most people cannot imagine any reason why Sinner would be punished for not cheating, so they assume he's been caught cheating.

It's utterly absurd. And it's high time it stopped.

[Kalevala]

This isn't even specific to tennis, but... is anyone else completely fed up with the ridiculous behaviour of the WADA?

That's supposed to stand for World Anti-Doping Agency. But I've openly said to them they should consider changing their name because they don't seem to actually understand what "doping" is. They're the World Anti-positive-drug-tests-no-matter-the-cause Agency.

They have explicitly accepted that Jannik Sinner's positive drug result was due to accidental cross-contamination. Sinner wasn't cheating, and Sinner derived no sporting advantage from the small traces of the drug.

But this didn't stop them pursuing Sinner for the offence of... failing to force another grown adult to wash his hands.

That's it. That's agreed to be the key step in the positive drug test. Sinner's physiotherapist had traces of something on his hands from a spray he'd been using on his cut finger. In fact the physiotherapist wasn't aware that there was a prohibited substance in the spray, but he was using the spray, and it did contain a prohibited substance.

This is hardly the only instance of WADA accepting that an athlete had no intent to take a drug, but still wanting a punishment. To be fair to them it's actually in the rules to some extent, and the rules themselves are quite deranged in my view with a penalty of 2 years possible even for accidental consumption. But in this case, Sinner somehow managed to clear the huge hurdle of getting the decision-makers to accept that he was in the category where he really couldn't possibly be expected to have done something to prevent the contamination, and WADA still appealed.

And this examination of the AGREED facts is completely lost on most people it seems. People label Sinner as a cheat despite WADA explicitly saying that he was not cheating. Most people cannot imagine any reason why Sinner would be punished for not cheating, so they assume he's been caught cheating.

It's utterly absurd. And it's high time it stopped.

You might appreciate this (Q&A with Djokovic): 

K

[Iota]

This isn't even specific to tennis, but... is anyone else completely fed up with the ridiculous behaviour of the WADA?

That's supposed to stand for World Anti-Doping Agency. But I've openly said to them they should consider changing their name because they don't seem to actually understand what "doping" is. They're the World Anti-positive-drug-tests-no-matter-the-cause Agency.

They have explicitly accepted that Jannik Sinner's positive drug result was due to accidental cross-contamination. Sinner wasn't cheating, and Sinner derived no sporting advantage from the small traces of the drug.

But this didn't stop them pursuing Sinner for the offence of... failing to force another grown adult to wash his hands.

That's it. That's agreed to be the key step in the positive drug test. Sinner's physiotherapist had traces of something on his hands from a spray he'd been using on his cut finger. In fact the physiotherapist wasn't aware that there was a prohibited substance in the spray, but he was using the spray, and it did contain a prohibited substance.

This is hardly the only instance of WADA accepting that an athlete had no intent to take a drug, but still wanting a punishment. To be fair to them it's actually in the rules to some extent, and the rules themselves are quite deranged in my view with a penalty of 2 years possible even for accidental consumption. But in this case, Sinner somehow managed to clear the huge hurdle of getting the decision-makers to accept that he was in the category where he really couldn't possibly be expected to have done something to prevent the contamination, and WADA still appealed.

And this examination of the AGREED facts is completely lost on most people it seems. People label Sinner as a cheat despite WADA explicitly saying that he was not cheating. Most people cannot imagine any reason why Sinner would be punished for not cheating, so they assume he's been caught cheating.

It's utterly absurd. And it's high time it stopped.

That does indeed seem unfair on Sinner. I imagine WADA had no option but to issue the punishment  if the rules say it should, but clearly the rules need refining in the light of this case.

[Madiel]

That does indeed seem unfair on Sinner. I imagine WADA had no option but to issue the punishment  if the rules say it should, but clearly the rules need refining in the light of this case.

They absolutely have an option. They APPEALED against him not being punished.

He's done a plea deal to make them go away.

[Iota]

They absolutely have an option. They APPEALED against him not being punished.

He's done a plea deal to make them go away.

Ah right, I obviously missed what they appealed. So you're saying WADA appealed against their own decision makers and had them overruled, or against an external panel who take such decisions?

[Madiel]

Ah right, I obviously missed what they appealed. So you're saying WADA appealed against their own decision makers and had them overruled, or against an external panel who take such decisions?

The original decision was by the International Tennis Integrity Agency. I believe each professional sport initially handles its own cases.

WADA then has the right to go beat up any sport they don't think is tough enough. And apparently saying that Sinner had no fault or negligence in failing to make sure a grown adult had sterilised his hands wasn't okay.

[Iota]

Okay right that's clear enough. But from what you'd said I'd understood that WADA seeking punishment even in such circumstances is in their rules, leaving them without any other option but to do so. Is that not the case?

[Madiel]

Okay right that's clear enough. But from what you'd said I'd understood that WADA seeking punishment even in such circumstances is in their rules, leaving them without any other option but to do so. Is that not the case?

That is never the case. Police and prosecutors always have a discretion whether or not to prosecute someone. I think one of your difficulties here is that you keep thinking WADA is the court that "issued" the punishment. They're not. They're the police/prosecutors. Sinner made a plea deal with them. You don't make a plea deal with a court.

And it's not "their" rules in that sense. The rules are the exact same rules that the original decision-makers were applying. The original decision-makers decided that Sinner had met the very high bar for being found to not be at fault in any way. WADA decided they disagreed and lodged an appeal. That's about interpretation of the facts. Which brings me back to the factual point - WADA decided that they thought that Sinner was required to force another grown adult to wash their hands.

[Kalevala]

It seems very arbitrary about how they arrive at their judgements.  And, of course, the top players are (normally) the only ones who can afford the better legal teams.  Iga S. also  recently ran afoul of WADA (because she took some contaminated melatonin).

And, yes, it seems very strange that they accept that someone a) Didn't take "X" on purpose, b) That it wasn't enough to be performance enhancing, but they still go ahead and punish and temporarily ban them from playing tennis [Note:  they also take away any points and prize money from them for the tournament during which they tested positive too].

K