Mens Tennis Forums banner

1 - 20 of 35 Posts

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
54,604 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
At 2-2 down break pt in set 1, Medvedev hit a first serve in the Ad court that was allegedly long but which was not called nor overruled. Thiem managed to connect the return which landed near the baseline and Medvedev swiped the ball with his FH into the net before calling "Challenge". The chair umpire Dumusois interpreted the situation with the view that Medvedev called for a Challenge after having hit the FH (Meddy arguing he called it before hitting the shot), therefore losing the right to challenge.

Video incident available here:
or here:

I can understand the umpire's interpretation, but the timing wasn't too far out. I think Daniil reflexively hit the FH and knew the return was out and called challenge as soon as he could refocus, which was right after netting the FH. So I think it was a harsh call.

Medvedev escalated this further by crossing the net to check the ball mark, receiving a code violation for doing so. I understand his frustration but that was poor form. He then spoke to the tournament supervisor who told him he wasn't allowed to do that (cross the net), to which Medvedev sarcastically responded like he killed somebody by crossing the net. Flashback to Roland Garros 1999 women's final where Martina Hingis did the exact same thing Medvedev did after not accepting a call she felt was contentious and crossed the other side. That resulted in the crowd siding against her. The commentators there actually stated that it was against the rules and in the men's game would equate a default (Hingis got a point penalty for that)!

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,209 Posts
This changed the outcome of the 1rst set, and I am certain Med was right. The serve WAS long (hawkeye showed it on TV) and Med challenged as fast as was possible, the serve was back on him in a second, and he batted the serve into the net and challenged at exactly moment. He had not time to challenge with the return coming right back at him.

That ump fucked up and it was the same ump USO that Med had the run in with last year. Med remained mad for the rest of the 1rst set and lost as a result. He might have won that set.
Thiem was fantastic but I wonder if that one bad call affected the outcome of the entire match.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,879 Posts
The call was harsh, but it surely didn't warrant such a meltdown, I guess it explains it if Medvedev already had some incidents with the umpire, he would be inclined to feel that it was a robbery. In truth, I rarely see players challenge their own serve when the return isn't a clean winner, Medvedev probably should either have hit the shot normally or just stopped altogether after the serve, I feel that he wasn't too sure and only decided to challenge when he saw the return coming so deep, which is kind of borderline for the umpire's decision. He definitely shouldn't have let it get into his head and affect his game though, that's just a lack of professionalism.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
11,640 Posts
Had Med been given right to challange, replay would prove him right and that set may as well could have gone to the Bear. It was the turning point of the match. Even Dominic repeatedly said he got lucky re the incident, in his presser. Not to mention him telling umpire 'I would rather let him challange' while the arguing was going on. Both are class acts.
 

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
54,604 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Why are players not allowed to cross the net? Such a weird rule
etiquette. Doing such a thing is considered disrespecting the umpire's or ruling official's authority.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,984 Posts
Madvedev is also not the full package mentally, like Djokovid. You just can't be surprised when he loses the plot. This is another reason Fed is so popular, he is actually the most 'normal' despite his great talents, unlike these other tightly-strung drama queens.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
473 Posts
etiquette. Doing such a thing is considered disrespecting the umpire's or ruling official's authority.
So if you're playing on clay and your shot is called out on the other side of the net, the umpire comes to check and confirms, and you want to have another look yourself, you can't cross over the net and have a look?
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
11,640 Posts
So if you're playing on clay and your shot is called out on the other side of the net, the umpire comes to check and confirms, and you want to have another look yourself, you can't cross over the net and have a look?
think that has happened, it is not so rare, OP is in the wrong
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,451 Posts
Reason - wrong call.
Solution - ECL.
But we have to wait.

Meddy right ofc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,103 Posts
Right or not, Medvedev showed absolutely disgusting colors of his behavior. I think he loves to get mad(like the thing with the crowd last year) and this way he is playing better. He was playing better in the 2 and 3 set than he was before the situation. Djokovic taught this kids how to play better when u are angry. What an inspiration!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,846 Posts
I think based on Med's behaviour during the point, the umpire should've allowed the challenge. That said, not sure how it seemed though from where he was sitting and during the heat of the moment. To avoid unnecessary controversies, the umpire, or if not him/her then at least the supervisor should have the ability to go back and look at a replay. From that I think it was pretty clear Med thought the serve was long and just punched the ball into the net (just at a pace which made it seem more like an actual shot attempt).
 

·
Administrator | Chaos Theory
Joined
·
54,604 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
So if you're playing on clay and your shot is called out on the other side of the net, the umpire comes to check and confirms, and you want to have another look yourself, you can't cross over the net and have a look?
yeah, you can come forward to the net to take a closer look but you can't cross. Sometimes umpire will make mistake on clay calls but generally speaking they get it right so to respect their authority, you can come forward to look but not over the net.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,111 Posts
Normally, I'm all for allowing challenges after a shot, as they could do nothing but ensure the legitimacy of the result.

However, when its about someone's own shot which you want to see be called out, the claim loses leverage.

The opponent did nothing wrong and could really only be faulted in these instances for winning the point already.

Medvedev only challenged after losing, and this happened AGAIN in the 2nd set TB at 0-1 in a more egregious incident.

Medvedev hit a serve, Thiem returned, Medvedev was at the net, and missed the volley...

THEN CHALLENGED HIS OWN SERVE.

How the referee allowed this is beyond me.

Thiem won the point off a good return already.

But the serve was long, it was replayed, and Medvedev won the replay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Henrik and guitarra

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,657 Posts
I've seen worse calls, much much worse. Unfortunately Medvedev let it get to him too much and didn't help himself by being a sarcy bastard. Bit like Murray with feathergate, gonggate and Fakervic Aus Open 2015. He allowed these moments to define the match.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
8,846 Posts
Normally, I'm all for allowing challenges after a shot, as they could do nothing but ensure the legitimacy of the result.

However, when its about someone's own shot which you want to see be called out, the claim loses leverage.

[...]
It's one thing to try to finesse after knowing you've lost the point, but there can be moments where even challenging your own shot is merely about ensuring the legitimacy of the result in your favour, mainly a situation like this, i.e. a 1st serve (as other moments where you want to see your shot being called out would lead to losing the point anyway). This incident to me seems like one such moment. Why (this or any other similar incident)? For the fact that if your instinct is that a serve is long/wide, you may stutter or halt your actions, if only for a brief moment. One may think/argue that you should never react so (and always continue as if a shot is in), but I reckon a reaction may be instinctual. Then the legitimate outcome should be to proceed to the 2nd serve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,111 Posts
It's one thing to try to finesse after knowing you've lost the point, but there can be moments where even challenging your own shot is merely about ensuring the legitimacy of the result in your favour, mainly a situation like this, i.e. a 1st serve (as other moments where you want to see your shot being called out would lead to losing the point anyway). This incident to me seems like one such moment. Why (this or any other similar incident)? For the fact that if your instinct is that a serve is long/wide, you may stutter or halt your actions, if only for a brief moment. One may think/argue that you should never react so (and always continue as if a shot is in), but I reckon a reaction may be instinctual. Then the legitimate outcome should be to proceed to the 2nd serve.
Thats true, but in both cases, especially the 2nd, Med was fully intent on playing on.

And its just problematic when he's in a position where he can play on and make it to win the point, but also play on and miss it and get a replay...

that creates a loophole which shouldnt exist in sports.

One has to ask, if Medvedev had made the volley, would Thiem be granted a challenge on the serve?

Arguably not, and thats horrible because he'd have more of a claim to challenging it than Medvedev.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fedjokodal and MWW
1 - 20 of 35 Posts
Top