So basically what happened is, during the US Open finals, Serena Williams:
- got a conduct warning for receiving coaching from her box
- got a second conduct violation for smashing her racket
- got a third conduct violation for berating the official and eventually calling him a 'thief'
And the way it works is the penalty for conduct violations mount each time: (1) a warning, (2) a point penalty, and (3) a game penalty.
It's pretty weird.
coaching warning
I used to play tennis, but am not really familiar with coaching and what the rules are and how it's called etc. So I don't have any way to know whether that was a standard ruling or not.
But what's interesting is how Serena insists that she "doesn't cheat" and that they don't have hand signals. And then her coach after the match just admits to coaching, lol.
The coach explains it as "everyone coaches", and that seems exactly true. But I guess he didn't think about how it would throw Serena and her storyline under the bus. (Or he didn't care, and wasn't willing to lie and try to deny that those were indeed hand signals.)
Even if she didn't see him and receive the coaching, it shows that she's lying when she tells the umpire that they don't have hand signals. Clearly they do, if the coach was attempting to give her a signal.
So basically it's like she got called for something that wasn't a big deal and didn't need an explanation. But then in her sensitivity to it, she's caught bullshitting.
after the warning
In between games Serena has a heart-to-heart with the umpire. It seems unnecessary, that she's still talking about it, but they patch it up and have a nice moment.
2nd violation
Serena smashes her racket.
[Personally, I don't think there should be a rule against that. But there is, and it's just a standard clear-as-day thing that the umpire is calling here.]
He issues the conduct violation, and because it's her 2nd one, it means she loses a point. And then Serena erupts.
But harken back to a few moments ago when she was on perfectly loving terms with the umpire. If everything was fine at that point, what are you mad about now? He's infracting you for smashing the racket, which is a clear violation according to the rules as they exist.
Why would you expect to not be called for it?
Even if the coaching warning was questionable or aggressive umpiring, you know that it happened. So at this point if you decisively earn a violation, of course it follows that you get a point penalty.
3rd violation
Upset over the point penalty, Serena berates the umpire for several minutes, and eventually when she tells him he's a 'thief' for taking the point from her, he issues a 3rd conduct violation, which now means she loses a game.
Serena is classless here and out of line to be berating him for what was a standard and completely correct ruling.
Whether she deserves an infraction for it is open to interpretation. This 3rd violation is arbitrary and you can say that the umpire should just let her spaz out and ignore it. And I'd tend to vibe with that.
At the same time, that's easy to say when you're not the one being insulted.
While "you're a thief" isn't exactly fighting words, it's essentially challenging his professional integrity, to suggest that he had a motivation of wronging her. And it's easy to see how someone would draw the line there, and consider it to be verbal abuse.
conduct penalties
Conduct penalties just shouldn't be a thing. Maybe they could impact prize money. These days, just going viral on YouTube seems like enough. But in any case, things that happen outside the lines should have a consequence that's outside the lines, not inside them.
Same with football. Taunting and things like that shouldn't have a penalty that impacts the game.
But, as long as this is how the rules are written, of course this is how it works and this is how it gets called.
sexism
Serena could say that the 3rd violation was too loose and a bad decision. But to allege sexism is just silly.
Being a woman doesn't mean you're guaranteed to never have a borderline call go against you.
When you berate him and basically say that he's unethical and deliberately being impartial to you, your first assumption should be that it's based on what you did. (Kind of like how the 2nd violation was based on smashing the racket, not on him being a thief.)
You just have no way to know it had to do with what gender you are. It's a random accusation because you're mad.
Even if there is a stricter standard on woman players that should be addressed, one anecdotal experience of you being a woman and this happening doesn't do anything to demonstrate that.
First she makes the 'sexist' allegations to the tournament overlords on the court. It's in the heat of the moment and maybe she's doing it as a tactic to try to get the call changed. So whatever. But then she doubles-down and martyrs herself pretty hard in the press conference.
What an insult to any people who face actual injustices.
Here she is in her tennis match showered with millions of dollars and being a brat over a rule being called correctly, and she wants to believe she represents the disadvantaged or whatever.
What she wants is not equality. She apparently wants the privilege of not being called for it when she breaks a rule. And then to be able to insult and berate, free from the possibility of any consequence. (If there's a consequence, it must necessarily be sexism.)
@9:22 he's never took a game from a man because he said 'thief'
I know right???
Probably because this exact thing of someone berating him and calling him a thief while sitting on two conduct violations has never come up before.
Conclusion
I feel like she should have skipped the press conference. Make sure she wants to go down this path before she does something irreversible.
It's pretty weird to tell the umpire he's a thief for following the rules. But you can easily walk that back as emotions were high, etc.
But now she's kind of stuck with it. When she acts righteous about it and positions herself as the victim, it's hard to ever walk back. She could, but it would mean we should just ignore the bullshit in the press conference. And that seems wildly humbling and hard to ever do.
So it's like she's committed to actually standing behind her side of it now.
I don't think this stuff is political or whatever. I think it's basically psychological, like she's mad that she lost (and that losing control of her emotions was a part of the loss), and wants something to blame. She wants to feel victimized rather than she's responsible for it.
If there's a privilege or advantage to being a man, maybe it's that we aren't as likely to be babied or coddled and shielded from taking responsibility for what we do. So we're less likely to develop these entitled feelings.
So Serena actually is doing a disservice to women here, to whatever extent people buy it and take her example.
She's wanting things to be unfair in her favor, and then trying to manipulate you into seeing her as the victim when that doesn't happen.
very good summary of what happened in the US Open final.
thanks
You're welcome
๐๐
Serena Williams messed up big time. I guess she's either not used to losing; or she isn't used to losing to 'a small fry'
In other news, what's your take on this?
Despite outrage, Australian newspaper defends Serena Williams cartoon
Interesting.
A couple things.
Serena is in general graceful and great. And one thing shouldn't define her. But her behavior in that match just was not graceful.
Some of it is like pretending to be graceful or spinning it (like she berates him and tells him he's a thief for following the rules correctly .. not graceful .. but then by trying to turn it into a social justice and equality issue, it can kind of deflect and distract, and she can sound graceful talking about equality but still was not graceful on the court that day.)
So I think the cartoon is more on point than this quote or similar quotes would have you believe.
As far as whether it's racist, it's hard to say. There's no way to be in the artist's mind and know what his motivations were, of course.
On first glance I don't see why it would be racist, it seems like just a caricature. But I don't know enough about the "Sambo" term they mention. And so if someone looked at that and had the opinion that it seems racist, I respect the perspective and consider that it could be right.
In general with these things, I wish there was more room for shades of gray. I tend to see it as some % chance or degree of likelihood or possibility that race was being expressed. It would be one of the infinite different things being expressed. And then you can factor that in to what you think of the artist or the newspaper. But it seems hard to know definitively one way or the other whether racism was in there.
Honestly, I'm not buying the racist thing.
I'm black. If someone does a caricature of me, do I expect to look Caucasian?
Plus, the hair is right and Serena has her fair share of bulging muscles from exercises and swinging the racket.
The only thing they got wrong is stomping the racket. But hey,it still leads to a broken racket.
From what I see, Serena Williams is flexing her muscles. She wants to feel like she's still in charge. Like she's still relevant despite her loss. She wins the US Open, she's got the media attention. She loses the US Open, claims she was treated unfairly and she gets the media attention.
You know, I also think she wants the championship to mean less to Naomi Osaka: like it wasn't a fair game. I guess someone needs a lesson on losing.
And then there are her cult followers. Serena Williams can never do wrong in their eyes. Add that to the black folks who believe every successful black person is going to be treated unfairly by whites and you catch my drift.
Playing the victim is simply her way of dealing with an unexpected failure.
That's it. I'm feeling drowsy from my medication. I'm out
Ya, I feel like that's basically it. It would be hard to identify racism with much confidence, because a caricature will just always look silly and ridiculous.
Ya, as great as she is I bet it's like she never wants to give up an edge, she doesn't like being bettered in a grand slam final.
I'm sure it's mostly all subconscious. But losing probably conjures up some feeling of "victim" in its own right, like in her mind she isn't supposed to lose. And so then it kind of is a vicious cycle when she starts having run ins with the ref.
As professional and experienced Serena was, this one game completely changed my mind about her. She lost it and she literally became a bully who thought she was above everyone. She just couldnโt control her emotions. She took it too personaly and I was wondering โis she like that in her personal life?โ. She just lost it, which might have caused her that game and itโs she, who should apologize in my opinion. Her sticking to what she did is another nail in the coffin.
yup! spot on imo. Losing her cool is a non-issue and happens. But standing behind it and trying to manipulate the whole thing as her being a victim is really weird.
I think it's definitely a reflection of her and how she is.
It probably just doesn't come up much. Like a raccoon in a corner behaves different than in the normal course of things.
Oh boy! she dug herself a hole there for herself, didn't she?
You are right about that...... to say something on the court, in the heat of the moment is one thing, but to try justify something like this is going to cause her trouble.
No matter your 'weight' as a player, f***** with the umpires/referees have killed careers before. Serena might not suffer the same fate but it would be interesting to see how far she'll mire herself up in this.
PS: This video seems to have been taken down. I searched for another one on YouTube.
Ya! Should be interesting to see how hard she pushes, and what the general reaction is.
It probably helps that persecution complexes play pretty well in the MSM, but it's like pushing on a string, this may be too clearly out of line to work.
I'm sure she'll find a way to come out of it okay, but it probably involves backing off. If she really pushes the idea that she was wronged here, it just seems like a hard sell.
hmmmm. It's still working for me. Maybe it's a geographic restriction?
Thanks for letting me know in any case, I'll keep my eye on it.
Oh shit! You are right! I think I overlooked the message the first time:
ahh nice! ya, I'd be likely to not actually read the words too lol, just looks like standard error message
weird that they put country restrictions on it
Is it a coaching violation if he signals to her to act with poise like a world class athlete who's been there before?
hahahah. ๐๐
since the beginning of this year it has gone bad for Serena, I see it as a baby tantrum for not being able to measure up in that game.
It's about time they'll take up the matter and I agree that they're victimizing when they have full responsibility for their actions.
ya it's been a tough year for her! being a mom now too, I guess things boiled over a little
I'm afraid I'm with serena here ๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ. The argument is that the guys say worse shit to umpires all the time with little or no consequence.
As for the call itself, IMO it's definitely within the wheelhouse of what can reasonably be considered "verbal abuse", whether or not I think I would have called it myself.
I don't know exactly how it compares to other things that were called or weren't called, but it's tennis, I doubt worse than this happens very often.
If you take it in a vacuum and ignore that it's a grand slam final and that it's Serena and that she's presently sitting on 2 violations, I feel like berating him for several minutes and calling him an insult that demeans his integrity is actually like a picture perfect example of what "verbal abuse" of an official looks like.
I don't know what would qualify if not that.
So the reasons not to call it mostly have to do with deference to it being a finals match and/or to the superstar.
I feel like you don't get to push it to the brink like that and then "oh, must have been sexism".
It seems this ref has a reputation for being strict, calling verbal abuse on Andy Murray for saying "stupid umpiring", and other examples. If the call against Serena is bad, the most likely explanation is that he has a tighter standard than most.
I've said that I don't think rules like "verbal abuse" should be a thing, but not calling it when it indeed is one of the rules seems to just be unfairly favoring a player at the expense of the other, and so it's hard to say that would be a great thing to do either.
"Unsportsmanlike conduct" in football maybe shouldn't be a thing, but as long as it's a rule, you'd probably feel cheated if the other side did it and the ref sat on their whistle.
She can call bullshit and that the call sucks and she got screwed etc., like basically every other athlete who disagrees with a borderline call would do.
The only double-standard I can see is that she reacts this way instead and actually draws a little bit of support for it.
Shit, I'm sold! I thought it was pretty whiny at first too but then someone hit me with the men say worse shit all the time argument and I thought, oh that's terrible!!!
It probably wasn't the argument itself that had me convinced but my love for Serena; basically I suppose at that point I was just waiting for someone to say something in her defense and it happened.
Now that you mentioned it, though, it really doesn't sound like a very sensible or matured argument. I suppose she just got riled up and lost it ๐ฃ๐ญ.
Also, I still don't like that refree -__- haha
hahah ya for sure man, Serena's awesome and she's GOAT. I have no problem with not liking the call, or with her being mad about it, just with calling it sexism ๐๐
In a sense it's probably hard to blame her, cause like, the sexism thing is something that some people will respond to and rally behind. So like.. it certainly seems effective, in terms of having a way to lash back at the ump hehe.
So if she feels like it will stick and people will believe her, it's like she knows she has that weapon.
I guess it's kind of mixed and polarized. Some people agree and others are like "wat?"
๐ญ๐ญ๐ญ๐ฎ๐ญ
that's the argument, but does it make any sense? lol
I'm sure you can find times where guys say worse and don't get called... And where girls say worse and don't get called and where guys say less and do get called.
One thing happening doesn't show a double-standard.
Like pass interference is called, you can always find other times of worse not being called. But it wouldn't mean "oh there's a different standard for the Steelers". Some calls get missed, some refs have different standards, yadee yada. I don't get the whole "look, this happened, therefore double-standard" thing.
Just seems random.
And classless, because it's not just about Serena. How would you like to be going about your job, and because somebody doesn't like a decision you make you get accused of being sexist?
Bad for tennis too. This kind of thing will ward off good referees and be less of a concern to people who are into being political and playing to the crowd.
[really late reply .. Steemit kept not working for me yesterday]
Yeaah, apparently hard fork 20 did the wrong kind of "fork" on the blockchain, haha. Glad it's back running now.
hahah omg, friggin' thing