FrontPage YAHOO........."Coaching signals are bad sign, says Hewitt" [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

FrontPage YAHOO........."Coaching signals are bad sign, says Hewitt"

mangoes
06-01-2006, 08:10 PM
Hewitt is responding to this article:
http://sport.independent.co.uk/tennis/article622680.ece




http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060601/ts_afp/tennisfraopenhewitt_060601175437

Coaching signals are bad sign, says Hewitt
by Dave James
2 hours, 10 minutes ago



PARIS (AFP) - Former world number one Lleyton Hewitt believes there is no room in tennis for clandestine coaching from the sidelines and wants the practice to remain banned.

The fiery Australian hit back at veteran American coach Nick Bollettieri, the man behind the rise of legions of players including Maria Sharapova, who claimed that coaching from the sidelines should be allowed.

"I don't think it should be allowed. That's the great thing about our sport, once you are out there, it's a matter of doing what you need to do against your opponent and working it out for yourself," said Hewitt.

Bollettieri revealed on Thursday that he had used discreet signals to pass on tips to players during matches despite the practice being against the rules.

A similar controversy sparked a furious reaction from world number one Roger Federer during the recent Rome Masters final against Rafael Nadal when the Swiss star claimed that his opponent was getting advice from his coach Toni Nadal.

"I know there's been times in the past where I'm sure coaches have been giving little signals at the back of the court," continued Hewitt.

"There's not a whole heap you can do about it. At the end of the day, the player still has to go out there and execute."

Hewitt didn't need any help on Thursday to reach the French Open third round with a 7-5, 6-3, 6-3 win over wildcard Mathieu Montcourt of France.

The 14th seed now faces Slovakian 22nd seed Domimik Hrbaty, who beat Croatia's Ivo Karlovic, for a place in the last 16.

The 25-year-old Hewitt played his first clay court match in two years in Austria last week, lost in the first round and suffered an ankle injury.

But after saving a set point in the 10th game here on Thursday, Hewitt was never really troubled by an opponent ranked 213 in the world and who was playing in his first tour event.

"It was a tough first set," said Hewitt. "I knew nothing about him before the match so it took time to work him out. But once I got the first set under my belt, I got better as the match went on."

Hewitt admitted, however, that his ankle was still causing him problems.

"It's not 100-percent but I'm getting through and doing all I need. I've played with pain before and a week ago I wasn't sure I would be able to play at all."

Hewitt had been 4-1 ahead in the first set before the 21-year-old Frenchman rallied to 5-5 but once he had squandered his set point, the former world number one cranked up the pressure.

The first set was wrapped up after 67 minutes when Montcourt buried an easy forehand in the net before Hewitt raced through the second set taking it with a trademark sweeping forehand of his own.

Hewitt picked up another crucial break of serve in the seventh game of the third and wrapped up the affair in the ninth game when Montcourt hit long.

At least the Frenchman had the consolation of seeing his bank balance taking on a healthier complexion with his 23,280 euros prize money representing almost as much as he has made from his entire career - 27,000 euros.

DrJules
06-01-2006, 08:45 PM
Hewitt always speaks his mind which generates a lot of chatter.

Rex
06-01-2006, 09:09 PM
yeh, i think the same. Tennis is a one on one game, kinda like boxing... u cant look to the side at your coach or your opponent will not hesistate to knock you out! In tennis YOU have to think the tactics, YOU have to come up with the shots, YOU need to excute.

fenomeno2111
06-01-2006, 09:24 PM
I don't even think a little signal helps a lot...You're still out there and if your coach tells you to attack your opponent's backhand you already know that...I think is more on the player's head than anything else.

alfonsojose
06-01-2006, 09:30 PM
on court coaching is coward and stupid

Jairus
06-01-2006, 09:36 PM
yeh, i think the same. Tennis is a one on one game, kinda like boxing... u cant look to the side at your coach or your opponent will not hesistate to knock you out! In tennis YOU have to think the tactics, YOU have to come up with the shots, YOU need to excute.

Umm...aren't trainers or managers or coaches or some advisor allowed to give advice/encouragement to players in between rounds? Which would mean that its not like boxing?

KoOlMaNsEaN
06-01-2006, 11:28 PM
I dont like coaching either. You're there to figure it out for yourself out there and that's what makes it exciting.

flip_fan
06-01-2006, 11:31 PM
Umm...aren't trainers or managers or coaches or some advisor allowed to give advice/encouragement to players in between rounds? Which would mean that its not like boxing?

lol, i was thinking the same thing.. boxers are coached all the way through their fights. - during the breaks, but also during the fight.. all you hear is the coach/trainers screaming their lungs out giving advise whilst they fight. So boxing is not really the best example rex.

I guess tennis is quite a rare/unique sport, when u think about it. Most other sports do involve coaching advise throught the game... the only other major sport i can think of right now that is similar to tennis is swimming - but thats over so fast, its not really a good comparison.

scoobs
06-01-2006, 11:31 PM
I dont like coaching either. You're there to figure it out for yourself out there and that's what makes it exciting.
Agreed.

But it's also virtually impossible to stop - obviously verbal coaching is the most easily spotted but if, as Bollettieri says, there's a code worked out between player and coach, that's impossible to stop.

Player still has to play ball though and all the courtside coaching in the world won't bring a non-functional forehand into line.

scoobs
06-01-2006, 11:34 PM
lol, i was thinking the same thing.. boxers are coached all the way through their fights. - during the breaks, but also during the fight.. all you hear is the coach/trainers screaming their lungs out giving advise whilst they fight. So boxing is not really the best example rex.

I guess tennis is quite a rare/unique sport, when u think about it. Most other sports do involve coaching advise throught the game... the only other major sport i can think of right now that is similar to tennis is swimming - but thats over so fast, its not really a good comparison.
True

Tennis is a unique sport in many ways - the lack of coaching, and the scoring that keeps going until someone wins by a clear enough margin. It's what I love about it - 2 people head to head going at it for as long as it takes to find a winner.

ezekiel
06-01-2006, 11:39 PM
I am for coaching because it would improve the game . It would help players mentally to play but they still have to execute like in every sport . As a matter of fact, I would initiate each player have an option for one 2 minute timeout with coach in each set .

scoobs
06-01-2006, 11:45 PM
And where does that leave players who can't afford a full-time coach?

soraya
06-02-2006, 12:13 AM
Interesting that this comes up again.

Yesterday on my way to work I was listening to NPR Radio, and they were talking about the novel rivalry between Nadal and Federer.

Then the radio reporter talked about Federer's allegation on side coaching in the Rome final against Nadal. The Reporter went furhter and reiterated what Nadal said in defence of his uncle and asked Bud Collins what he knew about the episode. Bud said that he further investigated and someone close to him was sitting in the vicinity of Tony Nadal and there was some hand gestures involved.
As expected, my son who is a Rafa-maniac and I being a moderate:angel: Fed fan had a lively discussion :boxing: ... I had to exercise my parental rights to silence him.

In case you are interested, the whole conversation is on audio on the NPR (Seattle) website, check yesterday's date.

nobama
06-02-2006, 12:34 AM
Right on. :yeah:

nobama
06-02-2006, 12:45 AM
I am for coaching because it would improve the game . It would help players mentally to play but they still have to execute like in every sport . As a matter of fact, I would initiate each player have an option for one 2 minute timeout with coach in each set .But that's the beatuy of tennis once you're out on court it's up to you to get the job done. That's what impresses me about the sport. You don't have teammates to help you out, you don't have time outs with your coach. It's all up to the player to get the job done. Federer was able to win four slams without a coach present during the entire two weeks. If he can do that I think players can complete a match without having to run to their coach for advice. Besides often times a player is familiar with his opponent and has played him before so you can discuss tactics with your coach before the match.

mangoes
06-02-2006, 12:58 AM
Tennis is a unique sport in many ways - the lack of coaching, and the scoring that keeps going until someone wins by a clear enough margin. It's what I love about it - 2 people head to head going at it for as long as it takes to find a winner.

Couldn't have said that any better........that's one of the core reasons I love tennis.

mandoura
06-02-2006, 01:17 AM
I dont like coaching either. You're there to figure it out for yourself out there and that's what makes it exciting.

Yes, exactly. For me, a coach is like a parent who helps his/her kid studying for an exam but, at the end, it's the kid who takes the exam, passes or fails, on his own.

Otherwise, it will be the clash of the coaches. At the end of the match the winner will not be 100% sure the victory is all his/hers: Could I have done it on my own?

Besides, what if the player and the coach disagree on something during the match? Will it not affect the player in a negative way? And what should the player do? Listen to his coach or go with his instincts? Will it not put more pressure on him?

I like tennis the way it is. :)

robinhood
06-02-2006, 01:26 AM
Yes, exactly. For me, a coach is like a parent who helps his/her kid studying for an exam but, at the end, it's the kid who takes the exam, passes or fails, on his own.

Otherwise, it will be the clash of the coaches. At the end of the match the winner will not be 100% sure the victory is all his/hers: Could I have done it on my own?

Besides, what if the player and the coach disagree on something during the match? Will it not affect the player in a negative way? And what should the player do? Listen to his coach or go with his instincts? Will it not put more pressure on him?

I like tennis the way it is. :)

A GREAT POINT! MANDOURA

bad gambler
06-02-2006, 02:46 AM
Hewitt has spoken

soraya
06-02-2006, 03:40 AM
I am for coaching because it would improve the game . It would help players mentally to play but they still have to execute like in every sport . As a matter of fact, I would initiate each player have an option for one 2 minute timeout with coach in each set .

Can you imagine a time out in the middle of a crucial point? IMO,tennis is not like a team sport where the coach has also the task to mediate conflicts among players. The only other game I can compare Tennis with is the game of chess, a mental game that requires extra focus and astuteness in most cases.

dmit424
06-02-2006, 04:14 AM
Well I agree with Hewitt and Federer on this one. Although I don't agree with Roger about the whole "banning instant replay" thing. Instant replay is a natural modernaziation of the game, but it doesn't interfere with tradition in any way. Most other sports have gone away from relying 100% on human judgement in order to improve the fairness of the event. Nothing wrong with that.

As far as coaching, I agree. Tennis is an individual game. Hewitt was spot on about that.

Personally, I don't like it how tennis players are too whiny about planes flying overhead or some petty crowd noise (or how Serena broke down at the French Open a few years ago). I mean, athletes in other sports go through far worse adversity and it is common in their setting so they think nothing of it. The disallowance of coaching in tennis is one of the few "toughness" aspects that tennis has to it. Tennis relies on individual perserverence, and every time Maria looks up at her dad, it makes me sick.

ezekiel
06-02-2006, 11:34 AM
Can you imagine a time out in the middle of a crucial point? IMO,tennis is not like a team sport where the coach has also the task to mediate conflicts among players. The only other game I can compare Tennis with is the game of chess, a mental game that requires extra focus and astuteness in most cases.


not crucial point of course :rolleyes: but in between games or sets, it would allow players to regroup and get more focused and quality of play rises as well as legally stop the momentum and stop all

Coaches mediate conflicts , what is that mean?
These are not kids. In any sport, if there is conflict between players it means coach is not communicating. Anyway the main point of a coach is to maximize the player's potential and put him in a position to win

Anyway I don't think there is difference between individual or team sport, tennis is a very strategic and mental game and it's only right to use a coach when you have one. It would help improve the game a lot. I mean even in soccer there is no coach input during games except occacional shout and that's why the game is so tedious and players are often stalling and that's a big turnoff to people here in north america and a mjaor reason why it's not popular

Angle Queen
06-02-2006, 11:49 AM
Hewitt? Making sane comments...that generate sane discussion on MTF? My eyes deceive me.

I'm still on the fence on this one. Can see both sides. But if it's gonna continue to be banned, they should make a better effort at enforcing it, maybe even to the point of keeping coaches out of the stadium. They can watch on closed-circuit TV (does such a thing even exist anymore...or am I really showing my age :lol: ).