2018 US Open Final: S. Williams vs. N. Osaka

[Moxie]

Again... you are not comparing apples with oranges.

Kyrgios had a pep talk for what I suppose the umpire thought was possibly tanking. Serena called the umpire a liar, thief and said he would never umpire another one of her matches.

If you want to compare apples and apples - go out and find me a situation where the umpire has climbed out of his chair and put their around a man being so abusive and questioning their integrity (not just complaining about a bad call or mistake).

This is laughable considering you considered the Tomic example irrelevant (where the situation was much the same) and a totally different situation with Kyrgios.

You have really dug your feet in. Not even trying to discuss. All Tomic did was ban his dad. I'm not sure the point there, as everyone knows his dad is poisonous. Serena wasn't going to ban Morataglou, if that's your suggestion. I find that a tangent and a distraction from the discussion, but forgive me if I've missed a larger point.

You've missed the earlier discussion on the point of what Serena said to Ramos. As a point of code, no matter how she said it, she was impugning his umpiring. That's a violation. But how she says it is not differentiated in the code. Forget about how she said it. It makes no difference. You're just taking umbrage on his part for no reason.

However, if you think that the Kyrgios incident is totally different, I will beg to differ with you on this. It's the basic point of sexism: a man behaves badly, and he gets a cuddle, or a slap on the wrist. A woman acts out, and the sanctions are immediate. I realize that tanking is not the same thing as Serena's code violations, but it's not like Kyrgios is otherwise some saint. Is that really so hard to see? I'd like to think I'm wrong, but I'm likely whistling into the wind on that last question.

 

[Moxie]

I think most of it was down to Serena, yes. But I don't really hold her accountable for the crowd boos - that's on the crowd more than her... and at least she had the courtesy to try and de-escalate during the ceremony... so some positive kudos for that.

But you have nothing to say about how Ramos handled it?

 

[britbox]

You have really dug your feet in. Not even trying to discuss. All Tomic did was ban his dad. I'm not sure the point there, as everyone knows his dad is poisonous. Serena wasn't going to ban Morataglou, if that's your suggestion. I find that a tangent and a distraction from the discussion, but forgive me if I've missed a larger point.

You've missed the earlier discussion on the point of what Serena said to Ramos. As a point of code, no matter how she said it, she was impugning his umpiring. That's a violation. But how she says it is not differentiated in the code. Forget about how she said it. It makes no difference. You're just taking umbrage on his part for no reason.

However, if you think that the Kyrgios incident is totally different, I will beg to differ with you on this. It's the basic point of sexism: a man behaves badly, and he gets a cuddle, or a slap on the wrist. A woman acts out, and the sanctions are immediate. I realize that tanking is not the same thing as Serena's code violations, but it's not like Kyrgios is otherwise some saint. Is that really so hard to see? I'd like to think I'm wrong, but I'm likely whistling into the wind on that last question.

The specific Kyrgios incident you picked is totally different - he wasn't abusing anybody. If you want to pick out violations by Kyrgios where he has received violations for smashing racquets or verbal abuse... then maybe I should find some for you... because he has received violations plenty of times for similar actions to Serena.

Likewise, the Tomic incident I mentioned was also similar... he received a coaching violation because of the coach signalling (not to do with receiving and acting on that coaching).

Keep blaming Ramos if it makes you feel better. If Serena hadn't acted up we wouldn't even be discussing Ramos.

 

[britbox]

But you have nothing to say about how Ramos handled it?

I've said already. Ramos handled his umpiring duties just fine. It's not his job to educate the crowd on the rules of tennis nor interject into the ceremonies after the match is over. There is no precedent for doing it.

 

[Moxie]

The specific Kyrgios incident you picked is totally different - he wasn't abusing anybody. If you want to pick out violations by Kyrgios where he has received violations for smashing racquets or verbal abuse... then maybe I should find some for you... because he has received violations plenty of times for similar actions to Serena.

Likewise, the Tomic incident I mentioned was also similar... he received a coaching violation because of the coach signalling (not to do with receiving and acting on that coaching).

Keep blaming Ramos if it makes you feel better. If Serena hadn't acted up we wouldn't even be discussing Ramos.

I've not been blaming Ramos. You can read back across the thread. #subtletieslostonyou You're just happy to see the angry black woman get what she deserves. No fine points, no histories to discuss, no inequities. As I said before: that's you. I get it.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I actually have some sympathy for your argument. But the fact is that Rafa's box is prolific at coaching. On this very forum, many Rafa fans claim that Nadal is one of the greatest problem solvers of all time. I would argue that he gets a hell of a lot of help from his box. You can't seriously be telling me that umpires aren't wise to this after well over a decade. The simple fact is that they largely ignore it. My point is that they are more willing to punish women for this than men. My issue with Ramos is not about whether he followed the letter of the law, he did. I question whether he would have dealt with a hostile response from a man in quite the same way. He had an inherent bias against Williams. Whether it was due to her gender or race is a matter of speculation, but his reaction was shaped by who she was. How many players have been defaulted a game in the last decade? I was listening to a pundit saying that they had looked at the data and it hadn't happened once in. the last 3,500 slam matches. You're seriously telling me her behaviour was so outside of the norm she was the only one who deserved it? And in a slam final? Sorry.. don't believe it

Ramos is actually quite consistent in his refereeing business. He never bowed down to big name male players either. See his
history of rulings over the years .

I think it is extremely unfair to call Ramos a sexist or racist when you look at the history. The maximum one could accuse him is of not showing prudence, despite being technically correct.

 

[britbox]

I've not been blaming Ramos. You can read back across the thread. #subtletieslostonyou You're just happy to see the angry black woman get what she deserves. No fine points, no histories to discuss, no inequities. As I said before: that's you. I get it.

Her colour or sex makes no difference to me. Sorry, you'll have to find somebody else to listen to the sexism and racism you're putting onto this. It makes no sense particularly with the completely unrelated examples you are putting forward.

Finally, you are now saying Ramos is not to blame, saying the crowd are not blame... that doesn't really leave you with anywhere else to go other than to Serena herself. You already decided the outcomes on a point of identity politics but are having problems joining the dots backwards to make it fit.

 

[Jelenafan]

Look the "free" game awarded to Osaka was a game in which she will be serving (and so likely to win it). If the same thing happened at a slightly different time, Osaka would have been awarded "free break" of serve. So, even though it was game penalty, the impact is not all that high as it could have been.

Oh I don’t disagree that the way Osaka was playing she was most likely going to win the match , * if * she held her nerves through her last two serving games.

My response was to Britbox stating “lets's not pretend this had any real impact on the match.” How do we know that?

To restate my point: it’s the Finals of the USO, there has already been 3 breaks of serve in the 2nd set ( 1 by Serena, 2 by Osaka) to say that automatically giving a service game to Oksana would make no difference would imply Serena had absolutely no chance to break again regardless. When she had broken Oksana in her prior service game.

To say breaks of serve don’t happen in women’s tennis all that frequently is literally not to watch women’s tennis. For that matter, anyone can be cruising along holding serve easily and a particular game if it hits the fan, the server can crack, especially with the pressure of closing in on winning a Major.

I’m not even arguing whether the infraction was warranted or not. I’m not questioning Oksana was more likely to win. I’m just saying literally giving someone a free service game at 4-3 of course has impact.

ETA: correction- Serena broke for 3-1 in second set, so it was two previous service games of Oksana when the break occurred.

 

[Moxie]

Ramos is actually quite consistent in his refereeing business. He never bowed down to big name male players either. See his
history of rulings over the years .

I think it is extremely unfair to call Ramos a sexist or racist when you look at the history. The maximum one could accuse him is of not showing prudence, despite being technically correct.

I don't think racism came into play in this match. My point of that is that there has been a history of judging Serena as an "angry black woman," or giving her a harder time for not being the reflexion of the country club way that tennis can see itself. This is my argument for her out-sized anger...that she's felt called out more than others. As to Ramos, I take your point that he's strict, and I also agree with you that he could have used more prudence. Which is really all I've ever said against him.

 

[GameSetAndMath]

I don't think racism came into play in this match. My point of that is that there has been a history of judging Serena as an "angry black woman," or giving her a harder time for not being the reflexion of the country club way that tennis can see itself. This is my argument for her out-sized anger...that she's felt called out more than others. As to Ramos, I take your point that he's strict, and I also agree with you that he could have used more prudence. Which is really all I've ever said against him.

That was in response to Federberg who actually feels that Ramos's action was due to racism or sexism or some sort of specific bias against Serena. There is simply no evidence to support that.

 

[Moxie]

That was in response to Federberg who actually feels that Ramos's action was due to racism or sexism or some sort of specific bias against Serena. There is simply no evidence to support that.

Spoken like a white guy.

 

[mrzz]

Spoken like a white guy.

When you people finally have us in concentration camps, I hope I get someone as nice as you as camp commander.

 

[Moxie]

When you people finally have us in concentration camps, I hope I get someone as nice as you as camp commander.

That's pretty crass and cynical. Are you seriously about to say that the world is no longer safe for white guys? Because that's not the way things seem to be trending, to me.

 

[mrzz]

That's pretty crass and cynical. Are you seriously about to say that the world is no longer safe for white guys? Because that's not the way things seem to be trending, to me.

I am obviously joking but if one day this happens I know who I should blame.

 

[Moxie]

I am obviously joking but if one day this happens I know who I should blame.

Because concentration camp jokes are so funny? The white guys still hold all the cards. I'm just trying to hold up the other end around here. I'd leave the Nazi jokes to the professionals.

 

[mrzz]

My great-grand father died in Auschwitz, but I always assume anyone can make any joke.

Point is: a racist white guy reads a post like the one I quoted above. He becomes:

a) A bit more racist
b) A bit less racist

Or: The chances of someone believing that all white people are racists, after reading that post are:

a) Larger
b) Smaller.

Both answers are pretty obvious to me.

 

[Moxie]

Now you're the only one that gets to make a joke. And I'm responsible for racists on the internet? Sorry about your great-grandfather.

 

[Chris Koziarz]

My great-grand father died in Auschwitz, but I always assume anyone can make any joke.

Point is: a racist white guy reads a post like the one I quoted above. He becomes:

a) A bit more racist
b) A bit less racist

Or: The chances of someone believing that all white people are racists, after reading that post are:

a) Larger
b) Smaller.

Both answers are pretty obvious to me.

Let me guess your thoughts: a)
Racism is a deep cultural bias that tends to self-reinforce when the subject of said bias encounters any discriminative (in a popular sense) statements against the race lines, it does not matter if said statements are about black supremacy or white supremacy or if the subject of the bias is black or white. In all 4 cases, the bias is reinforced. The only way to alleviate the bias is to purposely deflect the subject's attention from the discriminative process and create the cooperative environment, fostering the development of interracial friendships.

 

[mrzz]

Now you're the only one that gets to make a joke.

Oh, I didn't get it from the start. My bad.

And, no, you're not responsible for the racists on the internet, but you know the saying, the responsibility of tolerance lies with those who have the wider vision. (or something like that).

 

[britbox]

Now you're the only one that gets to make a joke. And I'm responsible for racists on the internet? Sorry about your great-grandfather.

Well, you appear to be the only person around here that seems to be stereotyping people by race.