old guy 74 wrote:
It's great to hear that most people never make mistakes. If it's unintentional, it's a mistake. He obviously didn't intend to hit anyone. The 'rules are rules' people who only see black and white, never gray are the very people who are obsessed with political correctness. Life is chaotic and unpredictable. Use common sense to deal with it, not a rigid set of laws or rules.
Great point
It's like crossing the line or stepping on the rail in track - by accident. It in many cases really didn't give an athlete an adv but it's a rule and he broke it.
Yes yes mo should have been banned but it's not up to me is it?
how many athletes/teams have lost like 4 x 100m relays/medals due to an inch?
If a grown ass man can't control his emotions in the line of duty, he's got more problems than a simple dq.
old guy 74 wrote:
It's great to hear that most people never make mistakes. If it's unintentional, it's a mistake. He obviously didn't intend to hit anyone. The 'rules are rules' people who only see black and white, never gray are the very people who are obsessed with political correctness. Life is chaotic and unpredictable. Use common sense to deal with it, not a rigid set of laws or rules.
You obviously didn’t go to law school, if she has actual injuries it’s pretty clearly a civil cause of action, evident that Djokovic was negligent and there was proximate cause. We should all be thankful the judicial system doesn’t rely on old guy’s “common sense” as the barometer of liability. He should absolutely have been DQ’d, if intent is not a standard of tort law it shouldn’t be (and it isn’t) one in sanctioned tennis tournaments.
Hardloper wrote:
old guy 74 wrote:
It's great to hear that most people never make mistakes. If it's unintentional, it's a mistake. He obviously didn't intend to hit anyone. The 'rules are rules' people who only see black and white, never gray are the very people who are obsessed with political correctness. Life is chaotic and unpredictable. Use common sense to deal with it, not a rigid set of laws or rules.
Great point
disagree - you can't allow the players to be smacking the ball around anywhere (without looking) when the officials/ball people are not watching the ball. Suppose it hit her in the eye? Zero tolerance is right in this case. How about a baseball playing flinging his bat on the way back to the dugout after striking out and having it hit a fan or attendant in the head?
Tim Henman was disqualified for the exact same thing in Wimbledon 1995. He was frustrated and hit the ball away and struck a ball-girl. Absolutely fair although obviously I don't think Djokovic meant to hit her.
https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/henman-and-bates-are-disqualified-in-doubles-1588962.html
therewasnobattle wrote:
If it was a man that got hit he would have shrugged it off and the day would continue as usual.
Like this guy?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4e1L-NcIqckmaclam wrote:
Thelonesomeloser wrote:
There would be a high stakes lynching.
My first thought was that if Serena had done this, they would have crucified her.
Serena is the most class-less player there is. She deserves the criticism.
He has chosen better targets in the past
ReallybroReally wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
Great point
disagree - you can't allow the players to be smacking the ball around anywhere (without looking) when the officials/ball people are not watching the ball. Suppose it hit her in the eye? Zero tolerance is right in this case. How about a baseball playing flinging his bat on the way back to the dugout after striking out and having it hit a fan or attendant in the head?
Yeah, I’m anti-PC but am all for a strict rule here. The whole point is to prevent the players from intentionally OR unintentionally hurting people.
Joker is now officially a villain and he has earned it. What a punk. He should NEVER be allowed on a tennis court again. Obviously he does not have any concern for the welfare of other people. The people defending him obviously are the same people who go into a rage when driving and many of these psychos will be triggered by my post.
He should be behind bars! The NYPD should haul him out of his hotel room in leg irons!
Timmy Treadmore wrote:
He should be behind bars! The NYPD should haul him out of his hotel room in leg irons!
He might even be a spy. Waterboarding might even be called for. This Joker is potentially like the Joaquin Phoenix character. Is anybody safe with him on the court?
Thelonesomeloser wrote:
Timmy Treadmore wrote:
He should be behind bars! The NYPD should haul him out of his hotel room in leg irons!
He might even be a spy. Waterboarding might even be called for. This Joker is potentially like the Joaquin Phoenix character. Is anybody safe with him on the court?
Make no mistake: this was a terrorist attack. Retribution against Croatia must be swift and devastating.
trollism wrote:
Intent is irrelevant.
Any ball hit in anger that hits an official or ballkid is a DQ. Doesn't matter if you were aiming at them or not.
Bingo. No intent to hit anyone; doesn't matter.
His coach was in the stands and kind of "shlumped" as soon as he saw the ball hit. He knew what it meant.
Armstronglivs wrote:
take that s**t back to the suburbs wrote:
Well, the authorities who were on site obviously deemed him to be a threat to the lineswoman, and they also deemed him to have acted deliberately. Let's not make excuses for his aggressive behavior. White on white crime is not okay.
It wasn't a "crime". Nor was it aggressive, as he wasn't aiming for anybody. It was a breach of the rules of the sport. It had nothing to do with what he intended or didn't intend. But I don't expect you know the first thing about tennis.
No question it was a breach of the rules and grounds for an immediate DQ. However, the referee could've overruled the breach in this case and assessed a milder penalty. Djokovic clearly didn't intend to hit her, and, more than anything, she was caught by surprise rather than hurt. Also, he was immediately repentant in the moment. I think her reaction was what did him in. If she had just laughed and sloughed it off, no harm no foul. I've certainly seen tennis players do worse, including incessant verbal abuse. But, he knows the consequences. I doubt you will ever see him do anything like this again. I personally wouldn't have DQ'd him unless the linesperson wanted him DQ'd.
He is having marriage problems.. here is once of his confirmed side pieces, a Serbian DJ Lady Lee.
Another confirmed side piece, Bollywood actress Deepika Padukone.
Johnny Mac wrote:
No question it was a breach of the rules and grounds for an immediate DQ. However, the referee could've overruled the breach in this case and assessed a milder penalty. Djokovic clearly didn't intend to hit her, and, more than anything, she was caught by surprise rather than hurt. Also, he was immediately repentant in the moment. I think her reaction was what did him in. If she had just laughed and sloughed it off, no harm no foul. I've certainly seen tennis players do worse, including incessant verbal abuse. But, he knows the consequences. I doubt you will ever see him do anything like this again. I personally wouldn't have DQ'd him unless the linesperson wanted him DQ'd.
Lol, yeah you're right, those were cries of surprise I heard from the lineswoman, not pain. She fell to the ground with shock! Even had to leave the court just to calm herself down at the sudden turn of events.
And wonderful idea -- we should make the linespeople be the arbiters of these types of decisions.
Few years ago Nalbandian was DQ'd from Queens club final for kicking an advertising board. The board gave way and line judge sitting behind the board was cut on his shin. no way he intended to hurt the guy but if you lash out you run the risk. All the players no that before they set foot on court