THIS IS IT! FEDERER VS GULBIS AT RG 2014

[ICEMAN_9588]

Happy for Roger and for Gulbis.
Federer could not win this tournament anyway, it was not a priority, so this loss is not a catastrophy.
Ernests is back in a Grand Slam QF after 6 years (2008, Paris, agst Nole), he's having a good season, with best ranking (that will improve after RG), and hopefully this achievement will give him more confidence.

Plus, I think he has his chances against Berdych.

[Corbon]

I BET GULBIS IN 4, NO ONE'S GONNA BELIEVE ME!

[Ali-Iqb93]

Here's what federer had to say about gulbis medical time out



“I went through the same thing against Tursunov, you know. So if the rules allow you to do that, you know, what can you do? There is nothing much.

It's definitely something that hasn't happened very often against me. Back to back matches, they leave the court, go for treatment and then come back. You don't know what they were doing. Must be lower back or thigh or groin or something like that, because the rest they have to do on the court.

So, I mean, that's part of the game, you know. In the past I guess it's been abused much more than today, but still, what can you tell? He didn't look hurt in any way. But if you can use it, you know, might as well do it.”

Federer continued:
"Well, is three, five, seven minutes really that much of a problem? I'm just asking, you know. It's actually not. It could be a little rain and it could be the same thing. Here it's just a little timeout, and that's it.

Clearly you can interpret it in so many ways, and I think, you know, you're not allowed to go to the toilet anymore during the set. I came through my career in the beginning where everybody used to take a toilet break at 5 4 when you're serving for the match (laughter). Everybody had to run to the bathroom at that point when I was younger. So that was like a given, almost.

Then there was an injury timeout maybe just before that, or right after that, depending on how you used it (laughter).

So I grew up with that. So now, I mean, it's like a big deal when a guy goes to the bathroom like on the set breaks. Give me a break, it's like, when it's cold like this, you have to go to the toilet. Sometimes when you go deep in a match, sometimes you can have treatment because the rule allows you to.

But clearly you don't want anybody to abuse it, you know. I hope that Ernests didn't or whatever, whoever did it doesn't do it for that.

But you can call the doctor and the trainer at any time and talk to them, you know."

[Lucian86]

Gulbis in the press conference felt the need to justify himself by saying: "I hate to do that, in fact I did it 3 times I think in my career but I needed to do it to prevent an injury" or something like that. I believe him but he should have waited the end of the set.

I agree with Roger. I'm very firm about this. Locker room treatment shouldn't be allowed; only toilet breaks between the sets in 3 minutes time. 3 minutes that every player can ask between the sets for medical reasons on court. During the match, you have 1 minute break every two games when you can ask the physiotherapist to assist you every single time. (and I'm not firm enough since you can make a case by banning the medical treatments in any circumstances)

Same thing about the time warnings for players who don't respect the 25 seconds rule between the games. Should be almost automatic. Sure, there are factors that should be taken into consideration: players injuring, sliping, strong wind passing. Long rallies don't count. Playing long rallies it's a playing style for some players. They shoudn't benefit from a long break. An offensive style should perform better against a tired defensive player.
For instance I hate when Nadal is complaininig about the time warnings he receives when he's breaking the rule almost every single time with umpires closing an eye every single time (look the statistics, he's on 30 seconds average). Sharapova same thing. Djokovic used to do it but now he improved a lot (remember the 25+ ball bounces ? it's all history fortunately)

You all have to agree that Roger is a raw model from this point of view. He never slows down the game and he never ask for medical treatment (happened once only in Wimbledon in 2012). You can say: "but he never gets injured"....Exactly. Injuries are not random but depend on your playing style. He should fully benefit from it.

[djarvik]

It feels like Federer using this a backhanded excuse - even though he won the set. Gulbis felt the need to bring it up for that reason and because he was asked directly about it.

I have no problem with players going of the court for treatment. I don't see why anyone would have an issue with that? ...what is the difference if the player is receiving treatment indoors or on the court? ...as long as he stays within allotted time. There is absolutely nothing can be done to improve the situation on the court (game-wise) by leaving it. Sure you can say "disrupt momentum".....but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that. So is going for winners on every shot or going for serves. The whole game is about throwing opponent of his game.

I am with you on abusing it, it should not get abused and agree wholeheartedly about the time between points (Rafa's issue). If a player feels an injury coming on, a slight sprain of a muscle perhaps, a piece of tape can make a difference between ending a year in injury or continuing a match. So I don't like the notion of the injury needs to be "life threatening" in order to take the MTC. Cramping is not an injury - rather a condition and should not be treated as an injury, but if there is a genuine concern that player has - he has the right to be examined and treated ANYTIME he is allowed to by the rules.

Sure, it may seem like Gulbis in this case picked his time perfectly, but it was likely not the case....I have seen him hold his hamstring earlier in the match and commented in ITST chat about it, he was holding his hamstring and lower back a few times. So the injury is not manufactured, which only leaves the timing of the injury. Personally, I don't think it was an issue. HE picked a time when the opponent was serving for the set with 2 breaks up. Surely he didn't think he would come back to win the set and all he had in mind was to start the fifth set AFTER being treated to give himself the best chance. If he would have waited, he would have had to start the 5th set on a medical time out - it would look even worse and he would not have the chance to test out the injury, something he has done in the end of the 4th set.....he first stared to unload more on his shots/returns as any injured player would do (happen to hit a few winners), then started moving and realized he will be OK till the end of the match.

Fed's press conference sounded bitter, you could see he really wanted to win this match, and you could see that Gulbis was not his main problem with the match (he actually likes the guy and had nothing but good things to say about him). I hope he takes it the "right" way as he usually does, shrugs it off, and will have a nice run and Wimby - because if he gets kicked out before QF - we might start thinking about a farewell party.

[Lucian86]

I have no problem with players going of the court for treatment. I don't see why anyone would have an issue with that? ...what is the difference if the player is receiving treatment indoors or on the court? ...as long as he stays within allotted time. There is absolutely nothing can be done to improve the situation on the court (game-wise) by leaving it. Sure you can say "disrupt momentum".....but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that. So is going for winners on every shot or going for serves. The whole game is about throwing opponent of his game.

Because it's unfair to the opponent. I repeat, if he's fitter, he should benefit from it.
A sports match is an event where there shoud not be any external interference. Two players fighting for the victory and nothing more. That if you want to make a case to prohit any type of medical treatment. But I'm not necessarly for that (I wouldn't be against it for sure). I understand and tolerate some medical help but just don't stop the rhythm of the match. In the long run it won't change much, Rafa would still have won 8 RG but in some matches it can make the difference. You're saying "but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that"..sure, that's part of the game. Stopping a match for injury time isn't. That's not tennis.
Why the medical treatment should be on court and not off the court ? Because the other player has the right to see what's being done with his opponent (that's what Wawrinka asked in AO final). Sure, there's a supervisor that controls the player. Fine but the opponent still has the right to see it with his own eyes. Alternatively, he could send a guy from his staff to supervise.

As I said, I believe Gulbis of what he said. He's an honest guy. Nothing against him but again, he should have waited the end of the set. Fed was serving with 2 breaks up; you're saying that the set is almost over. Not necessarly and we saw how close Gulbis was to come back. Just wait the end of the set; if you can't make it, just stop fighting, loose the set and start over (that's what Monfils did against Fognini; nothing wrong about that).

I'm asking you now. What other sport allows a player to stop a match and get medical treatment ?
Football ? sure, you get on court medical treatment but the game doesn't stop (in theory cause in practice it does and teams are abusing and you can clearly see how unfair it is; in theory though, the player should be taken away from the court right away and happens a lot of times that team is playing for 2-3 minutes with 1 player less). Other ? It doesn't come in my mind any

[djarvik]

I have no problem with players going of the court for treatment. I don't see why anyone would have an issue with that? ...what is the difference if the player is receiving treatment indoors or on the court? ...as long as he stays within allotted time. There is absolutely nothing can be done to improve the situation on the court (game-wise) by leaving it. Sure you can say "disrupt momentum".....but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that. So is going for winners on every shot or going for serves. The whole game is about throwing opponent of his game.

Because it's unfair to the opponent. I repeat, if he's fitter, he should benefit from it.
A sports match is an event where there shoud not be any external interference. Two players fighting for the victory and nothing more. That if you want to make a case to prohit any type of medical treatment. But I'm not necessarly for that (I wouldn't be against it for sure). I understand and tolerate some medical help but just don't stop the rhythm of the match. In the long run it won't change much, Rafa would still have won 8 RG but in some matches it can make the difference. You're saying "but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that"..sure, that's part of the game. Stopping a match for injury time isn't. That's not tennis.
Why the medical treatment should be on court and not off the court ? Because the other player has the right to see what's being done with his opponent (that's what Wawrinka asked in AO final). Sure, there's a supervisor that controls the player. Fine but the opponent still has the right to see it with his own eyes. Alternatively, he could send a guy from his staff to supervise.

As I said, I believe Gulbis of what he said. He's an honest guy. Nothing against him but again, he should have waited the end of the set. Fed was serving with 2 breaks up; you're saying that the set is almost over. Not necessarly and we saw how close Gulbis was to come back. Just wait the end of the set; if you can't make it, just stop fighting, loose the set and start over (that's what Monfils did against Fognini; nothing wrong about that).

I'm asking you now. What other sport allows a player to stop a match and get medical treatment ?
Football ? sure, you get on court medical treatment but the game doesn't stop (in theory cause in practice it does and teams are abusing and you can clearly see how unfair it is; in theory though, the player should be taken away from the court right away and happens a lot of times that team is playing for 2-3 minutes with 1 player less). Other ? It doesn't come in my mind any

By that token lets prohibit water drinking on the court. It is being consumed for medical reasons only. Let the more hydrated person before the match win, right?

You're saying "but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that"..sure, that's part of the game. Stopping a match for injury time isn't. That's not tennis.

Well, so is change over is not tennis......the lack of actual ball hitting does not constitutes being not part of the game. Hell, even who goes through on a change over first is a part of a mental game if you will... screaming Common! is also a good example. Rafa jumping in the air. Talking to the umpire. Questioning the line judge. Wiping the sweat of your face. Taking 5 balls only to keep one.....etc...etc... Tennis extends beyond live action and every area can be influential in the match and throw one of his rhythm.

I understand what you mean, and I agree with Abusing MTC, but I have seen none of that in Gulbis match. Abusing would be a chronic use of the timeout - not the timing. Player has no control on when the injury occurs.

Also, being fit does not necessarily constitutes no injury, It has to do a lot with genetics. Some people despite being fit are prone to injuries. This is not something you as a player can work on, if your knees are weak because of the way you were born - not much you can do. Sure, you can say - don't be a professional tennis player.....can't argue with that....but just remember, even those players that do get injured are genetically likely better build then you and me. it is the rigorous playing contributes.

Why the medical treatment should be on court and not off the court ? Because the other player has the right to see what's being done with his opponent (that's what Wawrinka asked in AO final). Sure, there's a supervisor that controls the player. Fine but the opponent still has the right to see it with his own eyes. Alternatively, he could send a guy from his staff to supervise.

And why is that? ....was this ever a specific rule of tennis?

I'm asking you now. What other sport allows a player to stop a match and get medical treatment ?
Football ? sure, you get on court medical treatment but the game doesn't stop (in theory cause in practice it does and teams are abusing and you can clearly see how unfair it is; in theory though, the player should be taken away from the court right away and happens a lot of times that team is playing for 2-3 minutes with 1 player less). Other ? It doesn't come in my mind any

You bringing examples of a team sport. Not relevant. Boxing is one. You would have to find a sport that is "live action" as opposed to turn by turn and individual to better illustrate your point.

Regardless, there are rules in place....and as long as a player follow the rules - all is fair. It is similar to hitting a tennis ball and catching the line - sure its within rules, but also pushing them, sorta right? ....wrong. Rules are clear and as long as you follow them - you should be ok. You do not consider a player unethical for hitting the ball on the line, so close to out - why? Rules state the ball is in play.

In case of Rafa - there is a clear violation of rules. (not only Rafa) That is different to me.

[Lucian86]

By that token lets prohibit water drinking on the court. It is being consumed for medical reasons only. Let the more hydrated person before the match win, right?

Let's no go to the extreme. Drinking water, moreover in a sport event, is a natural thing for humans to do. There's a line to draw for sure and drinking water is far beyond that.

Well, so is change over is not tennis......the lack of actual ball hitting does not constitutes being not part of the game. Hell, even who goes through on a change over first is a part of a mental game if you will... screaming Common! is also a good example. Rafa jumping in the air. Talking to the umpire. Questioning the line judge. Wiping the sweat of your face. Taking 5 balls only to keep one.....etc...etc... Tennis extends beyond live action and every area can be influential in the match and throw one of his rhythm.

I don't see how going through on a change over first is a part of mental game or opponent jumping in the air, wiping the sweat of their face (really ??), taking 5 balls only to keep one (explain me that). Talking to the umpire or questioning the line judge could break the rhythm, sure, but it's within the right of a player to defend himself from a potential injustice. Not relevant.
Sure, there's the mind game between the players and there's nothing wrong with that; I actually like it. Everything is done though during the match and during the regular time (without crossing a certain limit, of course).
Delaying the game for an injury is something else. IT STOPS THE GAME; that's a big difference. You're supposed to play in 1 minute but it takes 5 because your opponent is injured. Not fine. Then if you're saying that this is a way for players to break the rhythm then you justify them to abuse it.

Player has no control on when the injury occurs.
Also, being fit does not necessarily constitutes no injury, It has to do a lot with genetics. Some people despite being fit are prone to injuries. This is not something you as a player can work on, if your knees are weak because of the way you were born - not much you can do. Sure, you can say - don't be a professional tennis player.....can't argue with that....but just remember, even those players that do get injured are genetically likely better build then you and me. it is the rigorous playing contributes.

Sure, there's bad luck but there's also a big part that's correlated with your playing style and the way you train. It's obvious why Fed hasn't got knees problems but Rafa does. You have to respect that.
Let's not go into genetics ok and try to solve world's problems. Everybody is different. And BTW, there's a way to beat the genetics (not entirely): doping but that's another story (heard some experts saying that without doping, some sportsmens would never win because of their bad genetics)

You bringing examples of a team sport. Not relevant. Boxing is one. You would have to find a sport that is "live action" as opposed to turn by turn and individual to better illustrate your point.
Regardless, there are rules in place....and as long as a player follow the rules - all is fair. It is similar to hitting a tennis ball and catching the line - sure its within rules, but also pushing them, sorta right? ....wrong. Rules are clear and as long as you follow them - you should be ok. You do not consider a player unethical for hitting the ball on the line, so close to out - why? Rules state the ball is in play.

I'm bringing an example of a team sport because there's no individual sport that came to my mind. I'm big fan of boxing and no, you can't ask for injury time-out; but it would be stupid there since that's the purpose of the game (to hurt your opponent). You can receive medical treatment between the rounds. Just like I want it in tennis
Cycling is a half individual, half team sport. You get injured in Tour de France, you're out. Same as in running, track and field in general.

Regardless, there are rules in place....and as long as a player follow the rules - all is fair. It is similar to hitting a tennis ball and catching the line - sure its within rules, but also pushing them, sorta right? ....wrong. Rules are clear and as long as you follow them - you should be ok. You do not consider a player unethical for hitting the ball on the line, so close to out - why? Rules state the ball is in play.

Rules can and have always changed throughout the time.

You do not consider a player unethical for hitting the ball on the line, so close to out - why? Rules state the ball is in play.

That's not a point Djarvik

[djarvik]

OK, I see your point.

[Corbon]

djarvik, can you check who picked Gulbis in 5?

[Cro Morgan]

djarvik, can you check who picked Gulbis in 5?

Whoever picked "Gulbis in 5" did so after the match was complete.

[djarvik]

Cro is right.


Shame on FEDERER2 who voted after the match

[Corbon]

I have no problem with players going of the court for treatment. I don't see why anyone would have an issue with that? ...what is the difference if the player is receiving treatment indoors or on the court? ...as long as he stays within allotted time. There is absolutely nothing can be done to improve the situation on the court (game-wise) by leaving it. Sure you can say "disrupt momentum".....but so is every shot in the game is meant to do just that. So is going for winners on every shot or going for serves. The whole game is about throwing opponent of his game.

Huge difference imo. Away from the crowd, the player and everyone else looking. Maybe that's what Federer was implying in his presser, something else going on? And yes, time outs are chosen strategically, not at a point when you feel that you can't go on without treatment. It's a cheap tactic but not against the rules. Nadal and Nole have been doing that for years, it's sometimes part of their winning ugly plan.

But I also agree that it is a cheap excuse on Federer's part. I mean he nannied a smash into the court on double set point for a 2-0 lead, no excuse whatsoever to still lose the set.

[Corbon]

Federer wins Halle in 2 tie breaks and Dimitrov wins Queens in 3 tie breaks