Serena Williams at the US Open

[FLOW]

For those with the stomach to watch the whole video, it's hard to pin down what's most embarrassing here: Serena's behavior, the commentator's condoning it, the fans booing Osaka at the stadium, or the media who has refused to do anything but excuse Serena's actions. 

I don't believe we should judge people off their best moments or their worst moments... but can't we still call bad behavior out when it's obvious?  It seems like Serena is using feminism to armor herself from criticism of her behavior. 

This should have been a wonderful moment for the Osaka family, and Serena hijacked the moment.  Just really shameful stuff.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiBrForlj-k

[Kris]

Personally, I think one of the worst aspects is the ref's taking first one point, and then an entire game, from Serena when: a) that kind of behavior from a man does not result in similar penalties (as others including Billie Jean King has said); and: b) as a result, Osaka was robbed of getting to enjoy the feeling of a complete victory in her first Grand Slam because of the point and game taken from her opponent.

[caffeine]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opinion/serena-williams-tennis-usopen.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage#commentsContainer

Reading the comments on this article is cathartic.

The article title is irritating. The framing that Serena did Osaka any favors is awful.

My understanding (I don't normally follow tennis) is that because the umpire gave Serena a warning instead of an unofficial "soft" warning for coaching, it required him to penalize her a point for her breaking her racket. Further, losing the match for calling the umpire a thief in a heated exchange.

Her coach admitted to coaching and warrants some sort of warning regardless as to whether she actually received the coaching. Perhaps Serena doesn't understand that the warning wasn't necessarily finding her character lacking or 'cheating' as much as discouraging that behavior of her coach.

In the end, I hope everyone takes away that Osaka handily defeated Serena. Even if play continued uninterrupted, Osaka was dominating.

[sequoia]

Personally, I think one of the worst aspects is the ref's taking first one point, and then an entire game, from Serena when: a) that kind of behavior from a man does not result in similar penalties (as others including Billie Jean King has said); and: b) as a result, Osaka was robbed of getting to enjoy the feeling of a complete victory in her first Grand Slam because of the point and game taken from her opponent.

After the first and second code violations, she knew what the next step was.  Seemed to me that she continued to berate him until she got the 3rd code violation.  So she either wanted to get that 3rd code violation, or she was extremely reckless and negligent about avoiding it.  When you already have 2 code violations, you don't call the referee a "liar" or "thief". 

Based on the run of play, I really think Serena knew she was going to lose, and she wanted a way out.

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

Yep she knows she is getting beaten badly by this unknown 20 yr old Japanese girl at her home court, and she needed an excuse. There is no excuse to behave like that. She is a veteran, have been playing how many years? She should know the rules. Later her coach admitted that he was trying to coach her. If this is a potential issue, she should have tell her coach to stay in the locker room.

She lost one point. We can give that one point back and she still lose the game. It is not like that one point is the deciding factor. Remember that the final score was 6-2, 6-4.

[patchyfacialhair]

It's the usual stuff: standards for thee but not for me.

Straight trashy. Win with grace, lose with grace, both sides get bad calls, it's the nature of sports. "Act like you've been there."

[daverobev]

https://news.sky.com/story/serena-williams-isnt-the-first-tennis-player-umpire-carlos-ramos-has-upset-11494215

The umpire has a history of giving out violations (edit - code violations that were correct, by the way) while other umpires might not. Williams has a history of yelling/acting in a very unsportspersonlike way.

To cry race and sex is unbelievable.

[Samuel]

To me the only thing the ref can be legitimately criticized for is not giving a final ultimatum ("if you don't stop immediately I will issue a violation") before penalizing the verbal abuse. Not required, but probably a good idea in a finals match.

But Serena (and her coach) definitely did the things they were penalized for. She was getting beaten badly, got frustrated, and completely lost her composure. The coaching from her box was getting blatant in reaction to her unraveling, so the ref (a known hardass) skipped the soft warning. Smashing the racquet is an automatic penalty (so she cost herself that point). Then, knowing a third violation would cost her a game Serena berates the ref at length until she got called for it, which either means she was completely out of control or wanted her loss to come with an asterisks. 

Disappointing to say the least. She screwed Osaka.
 

[mm1970]

Personally, I think one of the worst aspects is the ref's taking first one point, and then an entire game, from Serena when: a) that kind of behavior from a man does not result in similar penalties (as others including Billie Jean King has said); and: b) as a result, Osaka was robbed of getting to enjoy the feeling of a complete victory in her first Grand Slam because of the point and game taken from her opponent.

After the first and second code violations, she knew what the next step was.  Seemed to me that she continued to berate him until she got the 3rd code violation.  So she either wanted to get that 3rd code violation, or she was extremely reckless and negligent about avoiding it.  When you already have 2 code violations, you don't call the referee a "liar" or "thief". 

Based on the run of play, I really think Serena knew she was going to lose, and she wanted a way out.

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

Yep she knows she is getting beaten badly by this unknown 20 yr old Japanese girl at her home court, and she needed an excuse. There is no excuse to behave like that. She is a veteran, have been playing how many years? She should know the rules. Later her coach admitted that he was trying to coach her. If this is a potential issue, she should have tell her coach to stay in the locker room.

She lost one point. We can give that one point back and she still lose the game. It is not like that one point is the deciding factor. Remember that the final score was 6-2, 6-4.

Unknown?

She has dual Japanese and American Citizenship
She's been living in Florida since she was 3.
She plays tennis for Japan, yes.

[PDXTabs]

Without expressing an actual opinion, because I haven't fully formed one yet, isn't it possible that she acted poorly and was also a victim or sexism at the same time? That is, she behaved badly and was called on her bad behavior in a way that a man would not have been?

[vern]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZImerCCuoD4

[dragoncar]

On the sexism, I think male players should be held to the rules.

But on Serena's actions in isolation I think she handled the first warning very well.  But then she broke her racket.  What kind of dumb ass does that when she already has a warning?  I believe she deserved her penalty and, yes, male players should also get a similar penalty.  This is coming from someone with no understanding of the sport and therefore it's not like I see male players do this all the time (which I'm led to believe they do?).

If white people murder black people all the time without consequence, and a black person gets the death penalty for murdering a white person, is the answer not to punish the black person or to also punish white people equally? 

In other words, I think it's good to call sexism into question, but I don't think that should change the outcome of the actual match

[Paul der Krake]

The first warning was BS. Maybe the ref had something against her personally, maybe he hates all women, maybe he had reason to believe the coach pushed the boundaries of what's usually ignored. We'll never know. Questionable calls happen.

The rest was her own undoing.

I'm also glad the French Open drew the line at the catsuit. In fact they should go further and bring the dress code to something closer to Wimbledon's, and get their crowds under control while they're at it. There are some pretty fucking horrendous outfits on the men's side too. #whitewashing

[Little Aussie Battler]

I don't watch much tennis these days.

Do men regularly act that badly (or worse) with no consequences?

[runbikerun]

This feels like one of those things that can simply happen even with the best will in the world. The umpire could be consistently stringent and strict, and be absolutely even-handed with regard to race and gender; however, the relatively low overall incidence of severe sanction means that Williams may never have seen such strict sanctions occur before, and may feel that there is a racial or gender element to the punishment. Add in the sheer level of competitive drive required to dominate a sport as utterly as Williams has for the last two decades, and I'm not surprised that something like this can happen.

However, I don't like to assume that "playing the sexism/racism card" is illegitimate. As I mentioned, Williams may well have a legitimate basis for believing there was a racial element, and a lot of the coverage since then has been flat-out disgusting. There's a double standard applied to her: Agassi admitted to meth consumption during his professional career, and Sharapova has just come back from a doping ban, but those events don't draw mainstream ire in the way that Williams losing her temper in the heat of the moment does. I doubt that this forum, for example, has a thread dating from Sharapova's press conference in which various posters deride her sustained doping programme as "really shameful stuff".

[DreamFIRE]

https://news.sky.com/story/serena-williams-isnt-the-first-tennis-player-umpire-carlos-ramos-has-upset-11494215

The umpire has a history of giving out violations (edit - code violations that were correct, by the way) while other umpires might not. Williams has a history of yelling/acting in a very unsportspersonlike way.

To cry race and sex is unbelievable.

Agreed, yet I'm not surprised at all to hear some people pull those cards as they always do.

[runbikerun]

There is something remarkable about people producing a litany of occasions on which white male players were not docked a game by this particular umpire as evidence that Serena Williams was utterly out of line. As far as I can see, he's had run-ins with perhaps half a dozen of the top players in the men's game, and has not penalised then as severely as he did Williams.

[former player]

Without expressing an actual opinion, because I haven't fully formed one yet, isn't it possible that she acted poorly and was also a victim or sexism at the same time? That is, she behaved badly and was called on her bad behavior in a way that a man would not have been?

Yes, this.  One of the less immediately obvious forms of discrimination is that people are treated equally until they aren't.  As long as everyone is happy, women or gays or people with disabilities or people of colour get treated approximately equally with able bodied white heterosexual men.  It's almost as though they were real people!   But as soon as there is a "problem" the pretence ends.   

Part of it is that what is a "problem" is not seen on equal terms ("driving while black", "argumentative women are shrill and shrewish" "disabled people aren't grateful for a wheelchair seat off to the side" and so on).   So the non-white, non-male, non-heterosexual and non-abled bodied person is outed as "other" by whatever the problem is, in a way that would not be applied to someone without that characteristic.

And part of it is because the consequences for falling out of that favoured category of white male heterosexual and able bodied are worse (harsher sentencing by the courts, loss of promotions at work, and so on).

Serena's coach is a white male who has admitted breaking the rules.  But the tennis authorities don't seem (that I have heard) to have seen his actions as a problem and have not applied any consequences to him.

Serena's actions were seen as problematic, in cases where (apparently demonstrably) similar actions by white males have not been seen as problematic, and the punishment to which she was subjected has been demonstrably more severe than has been applied to white males.


None of which is to say that Serena was in the right.  But nor were any of the actions of the tennis authorities.  And a lifetime of living with knowing that one cannot be seen to even be approaching breaking the rules because the consequences will be more severe than they should be just because of characteristics (being a woman, being black) that one cannot change must be more wearing on the temperament than someone not in that position can imagine.

[FrugalToque]

This is fairly simple to me.

a) Williams broke the rules and was punished.  While some of the rules are open to interpretation, especially "coaching" and "insulting the umpire", the racquet breaking was clear.
Did she act badly?  Yes.
Did she deserve that level of punishment?  Yes, however ...

The thing about "open to interpretation" rules is that they have to be interpreted equally for everybody.  So if a white man breaks a rule and a black woman breaks a rule, they get punished equally, right?

b) It is clear that major male players do not get this level of punishment.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90234350/was-serena-williams-treated-fairly-ask-these-tennis-bad-boys-who-did-much-worse
For example:

1) Novak Djokovic got into an argument with the same umpire, Ramos, at the French Open, and called him “crap”. While he received multiple warnings, he did not have any points or games docked.

2)Rafael Nadal threatened Ramos at the 2017 French Open. He got two verbal warnings, but did not have a point or game docked.

So somehow, these dudes threatened the same umpire, called him names, got multiple warnings, but didn't get any real punishment beyond the warning.

That's where you have to call into question the whole impartiality of the umpire.  For some reason, he lets a big time male player or two get away with yelling insults and threatening his career, but he draws the line at a woman doing it.  And yes, I've heard the "ain't no sexism" crowd trying to make some fine distinction between Serena's grevious "thief" insult and Nadal's "you'll never umpire again" insult.  "Like, ZMG, "thief and liar" is a direct insult to his integrity!!1!!"  Whatever.  I don't buy that.  Nadal threatened the guy's livelihood on the court.  Djokovic angrily waved his racquet at the guy like it was a club.

The men just get consecutive warnings without the "code violations" that actually mean something.

Was Williams' behaviour bad?  Yes.
Was the punishment fair, in light of how male players are punished?  It certainly doesn't look like it.

I imagine this guy, Ramos, will be under a microscope from now on, having to make sure his behaviour towards men is just as strict as it was that day against Williams.

Toque.

[daverobev]

There is something remarkable about people producing a litany of occasions on which white male players were not docked a game by this particular umpire as evidence that Serena Williams was utterly out of line. As far as I can see, he's had run-ins with perhaps half a dozen of the top players in the men's game, and has not penalised then as severely as he did Williams.

From what I can see, in the other cases, the player didn't continue to harangue the umpire.

[FrugalToque]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opinion/serena-williams-tennis-usopen.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage#commentsContainer

Reading the comments on this article is cathartic.

The article title is irritating. The framing that Serena did Osaka any favors is awful.

My understanding (I don't normally follow tennis) is that because the umpire gave Serena a warning instead of an unofficial "soft" warning for coaching, it required him to penalize her a point for her breaking her racket. Further, losing the match for calling the umpire a thief in a heated exchange.

Her coach admitted to coaching and warrants some sort of warning regardless as to whether she actually received the coaching. Perhaps Serena doesn't understand that the warning wasn't necessarily finding her character lacking or 'cheating' as much as discouraging that behavior of her coach.

In the end, I hope everyone takes away that Osaka handily defeated Serena. Even if play continued uninterrupted, Osaka was dominating.

A more detailed account is available here:

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/serena-williams-tells-chair-umpire-youre-a-thief-us-open-1141285

Williams was given a warning code violation (no penalty), then a second violation for the racquet (one point), then a third violation for insulting the umpire (a game violation, not a match).

When the first violation happened, Williams was winning the second set, having lost the first.
By the time the third violation happened, it put Osaka up 5-3, all but ending the second set and match.

Toque.

[runbikerun]

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

Get out of town with this "PC gone mad!" schtick. You started a thread, and people disagreed with your assessment. Have you been called a racist or sexist in this thread?

[bwall]

John McEnroe was the master at insulting the umpire. Going into the match, you knew he'd do it. In fact was almost expected of him!

Was he ever penalized? Dunno. I'm not that big of a fan. Can anyone out there provide info?

[former player]

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

[FrugalToque]

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

Get out of town with this "PC gone mad!" schtick. You started a thread, and people disagreed with your assessment. Have you been called a racist or sexist in this thread?

No, he hasn't.  But there's a cliche that it's really hard to be a white man these days, where you can't even breathe a word without getting charged with sexual harassment, sexism or racism.

I haven't noticed it personally, but other white guys totally swear it's out there, somewhere.

Toque.

[FrugalToque]

When the first violation happened, Williams was winning the second set, having lost the first.
By the time the third violation happened, it put Osaka up 5-3, all but ending the second set and match.

So are you arguing that Osaka wasn't dominating the match?  Or even stronger, are you saying you believe Serena would have won the match, but for the code violations?  Help me understand.

I said that Osaka won the first set.  Why would you put words in my mouth like that?

You seem to want to play the wounded animal here, and it doesn't go along with anything that's actually happening in this thread.

Toque.

[Davnasty]

There is something remarkable about people producing a litany of occasions on which white male players were not docked a game by this particular umpire as evidence that Serena Williams was utterly out of line. As far as I can see, he's had run-ins with perhaps half a dozen of the top players in the men's game, and has not penalised then as severely as he did Williams.

From what I can see, in the other cases, the player didn't continue to harangue the umpire.

This is what I'm wondering about. It seems everyone is trying to compare incidents based on how rude the players were, but was that really the issue? It seems most of the people sharing their opinions don't watch tennis and don't really understand the rules (myself included).

Maybe someone with a better understanding of the rules and how they're applied can help us out. What I see is that the verbal warning is given. Was that right? I don't know but it sounds like some umpires would call it and others wouldn't. Maybe there was bias but at that point it's not apparent. Then she breaks the racquet. That seems like a clear cut incident in which the umpire has little choice but to call it. Is he required to deduct a point based on the fact that he already issued a warning? I don't know, but that seems important to whether this was fair or not. Could he have given a second warning?

Then for the last bit, she just kept going. What is the umpire supposed to do? honest question, I don't know. Could he have come off the stand to talk to her? Could he have asked someone else to step in and get the match back on track?

[former player]

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

The problem is that it's all too easy to create a "problem" that is then criticised.  When it's pointed out that the "problem" wouldn't have been a problem, or not so much of a problem, or wouldn't have attracted so much criticism, if the "perpetrator" had been a white male then pointing out that fact is itself made into another "problem".

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

Get out of town with this "PC gone mad!" schtick. You started a thread, and people disagreed with your assessment. Have you been called a racist or sexist in this thread?

No, he hasn't.  But there's a cliche that it's really hard to be a white man these days, where you can't even breathe a word without getting charged with sexual harassment, sexism or racism.

I haven't noticed it personally, but other white guys totally swear it's out there, somewhere.

Toque.

When someone has been used to favourable treatment all their life it has two consequences.  The first is that the favourable treatment isn't noticed but is taken for granted.  How many siblings think they were "the golden child"?  The second consequence is that taking away that favourable treatment looks unfair and like a punishment or restriction on accustomed circumstances.

[FrugalToque]

When the first violation happened, Williams was winning the second set, having lost the first.
By the time the third violation happened, it put Osaka up 5-3, all but ending the second set and match.

So are you arguing that Osaka wasn't dominating the match?  Or even stronger, are you saying you believe Serena would have won the match, but for the code violations?  Help me understand.

I said that Osaka won the first set.  Why would you put words in my mouth like that?

You seem to want to play the wounded animal here, and it doesn't go along with anything that's actually happening in this thread.

Toque.

I guess I'll just ask again.  So are you arguing that Osaka wasn't dominating the match?  Or even stronger, are you saying you believe Serena would have won the match, but for the code violations?  Help me understand.

Osaka was winning the match.  Williams was trying to come back.

None of that is relevant to whether or not the punishments she was given were in line with punishments generally given to tennis players.

Toque.

[Malloy]

Honestly, I am interested to know that the OP voted for Obama and Clinton.  For me, it gives him standing to complain.  I'd also be interested to know in general how many people on the internet tut-tutting about Serena's unacceptable behavior voted for Trump.  If so, I wonder how it is they justify holding a woman who plays a leisure activity for money to a higher standard than the guy with the nuclear codes.  If you didn't vote for Trump, at least you have a past history of considering decorum in your decision-making. 

I think Serena threw a tantrum, but I also think Ramos was unjustified in giving her the initial coaching call.  When you have rules that are poorly and unevenly enforced, it creates an atmosphere of subjective judging, not impartial judging which should be the goal.  Serena generally gets the short end of the stick when the refs are permitted wide latitude in their calls.  Hell, people were such dicks to her that we now have an automatic line calling system because it turns out that the refs can't be trusted when it comes to her (2004 Open vs. Capriati).  If I were the GOAT and I had been battling a system that had been stacked against me for over a decade, I might be on edge.  She was correct to dispute the call-not because her coach was't coaching but because the rule is never enforced-but she did let her temper get the best of her.  Here's hoping she puts this behind her, because I want to see her pick up another grand slam.


 

[Davnasty]

This feels like one of those things that can simply happen even with the best will in the world. The umpire could be consistently stringent and strict, and be absolutely even-handed with regard to race and gender; however, the relatively low overall incidence of severe sanction means that Williams may never have seen such strict sanctions occur before, and may feel that there is a racial or gender element to the punishment. Add in the sheer level of competitive drive required to dominate a sport as utterly as Williams has for the last two decades, and I'm not surprised that something like this can happen.

However, I don't like to assume that "playing the sexism/racism card" is illegitimate. As I mentioned, Williams may well have a legitimate basis for believing there was a racial element, and a lot of the coverage since then has been flat-out disgusting. There's a double standard applied to her: Agassi admitted to meth consumption during his professional career, and Sharapova has just come back from a doping ban, but those events don't draw mainstream ire in the way that Williams losing her temper in the heat of the moment does. I doubt that this forum, for example, has a thread dating from Sharapova's press conference in which various posters deride her sustained doping programme as "really shameful stuff".

These events don't draw mainstream attention for a couple of other reasons as well though. 1) We know they were wrong so if there's nothing to debate, it doesn't make the news. Which threads on this forum get the most attention, threads where we all agree or threads where the opinions are split? 2) Issues of racial and sexist bias are a big deal right now. (they've always been a big deal of course, I mean in the media and popular culture)

You see the same effect with improper shootings by the police. There have been a number of clear cut cases where the officer was in the wrong that got far less media attention than the cases where it wasn't so clear. People with no expertise and no insider knowledge like to create their own theories when the evidence is too thin to make a clear cut decision.

ETA: Keep in mind there is no individual or group of people who decide which stories get attention. The beast decides and the media feeds the beast.

[dragoncar]

Honestly, I am interested to know that the OP voted for Obama and Clinton.  For me, it gives him standing to complain.  I'd also be interested to know in general how many people on the internet tut-tutting about Serena's unacceptable behavior voted for Trump.  If so, I wonder how it is they justify holding a woman who plays a leisure activity for money to a higher standard than the guy with the nuclear codes.  If you didn't vote for Trump, at least you have a past history of considering decorum in your decision-making. 

I think Serena threw a tantrum, but I also think Ramos was unjustified in giving her the initial coaching call.  When you have rules that are poorly and unevenly enforced, it creates an atmosphere of subjective judging, not impartial judging which should be the goal.  Serena generally gets the short end of the stick when the refs are permitted wide latitude in their calls.  Hell, people were such dicks to her that we now have an automatic line calling system because it turns out that the refs can't be trusted when it comes to her (2004 Open vs. Capriati).  If I were the GOAT and I had been battling a system that had been stacked against me for over a decade, I might be on edge.  She was correct to dispute the call-not because her coach was't coaching but because the rule is never enforced-but she did let her temper get the best of her.  Here's hoping she puts this behind her, because I want to see her pick up another grand slam.

That’s it, I’m docking trump five points

[Malloy]

Honestly, I am interested to know that the OP voted for Obama and Clinton.  For me, it gives him standing to complain.  I'd also be interested to know in general how many people on the internet tut-tutting about Serena's unacceptable behavior voted for Trump.  If so, I wonder how it is they justify holding a woman who plays a leisure activity for money to a higher standard than the guy with the nuclear codes.  If you didn't vote for Trump, at least you have a past history of considering decorum in your decision-making. 

I think Serena threw a tantrum, but I also think Ramos was unjustified in giving her the initial coaching call.  When you have rules that are poorly and unevenly enforced, it creates an atmosphere of subjective judging, not impartial judging which should be the goal.  Serena generally gets the short end of the stick when the refs are permitted wide latitude in their calls.  Hell, people were such dicks to her that we now have an automatic line calling system because it turns out that the refs can't be trusted when it comes to her (2004 Open vs. Capriati).  If I were the GOAT and I had been battling a system that had been stacked against me for over a decade, I might be on edge.  She was correct to dispute the call-not because her coach was't coaching but because the rule is never enforced-but she did let her temper get the best of her.  Here's hoping she puts this behind her, because I want to see her pick up another grand slam.

That’s it, I’m docking trump five points

I'd be satisfied with you docking him your vote, but that's just me.  I love tennis, and I get why people are frustrated with the final.  Serena's a generational talent, but Osaka was outplaying her.  It would have been better to see the outcome without the ref inserting himself to a level that isn't normal.  I predict that Serena will use the frustration and come back better than ever. What an achievement to be back at a grand slam final so quickly after being bed-ridden. 

[partgypsy]

Honestly, I am interested to know that the OP voted for Obama and Clinton.  For me, it gives him standing to complain.  I'd also be interested to know in general how many people on the internet tut-tutting about Serena's unacceptable behavior voted for Trump.  If so, I wonder how it is they justify holding a woman who plays a leisure activity for money to a higher standard than the guy with the nuclear codes.  If you didn't vote for Trump, at least you have a past history of considering decorum in your decision-making. 

I think Serena threw a tantrum, but I also think Ramos was unjustified in giving her the initial coaching call.  When you have rules that are poorly and unevenly enforced, it creates an atmosphere of subjective judging, not impartial judging which should be the goal.  Serena generally gets the short end of the stick when the refs are permitted wide latitude in their calls.  Hell, people were such dicks to her that we now have an automatic line calling system because it turns out that the refs can't be trusted when it comes to her (2004 Open vs. Capriati).  If I were the GOAT and I had been battling a system that had been stacked against me for over a decade, I might be on edge.  She was correct to dispute the call-not because her coach was't coaching but because the rule is never enforced-but she did let her temper get the best of her.  Here's hoping she puts this behind her, because I want to see her pick up another grand slam.

That’s it, I’m docking trump five points

I'd be satisfied with you docking him your vote, but that's just me.  I love tennis, and I get why people are frustrated with the final.  Serena's a generational talent, but Osaka was outplaying her.  It would have been better to see the outcome without the ref inserting himself to a level that isn't normal.  I predict that Serena will use the frustration and come back better than ever. What an achievement to be back at a grand slam final so quickly after being bed-ridden.

I haven't watched the entire video, but there was a period of time where I watched US open matches regularly. My sense if that yes Serena acted badly. She showed poor form. Finals are high stakes games and tensions are high. What I question, is whether the punishments she got in response to her actions are out of line. I have noticed that coaching, coaching gestures, are generally ignored at the finals level, male or female. So that being called out was relatively unusual. So few times that an entire game is docked, not enough to compare. I did feel that while Serena allowed her temper to flare, the referree made it worse, and basically inserted himself in the game, rather than allowing it to play out naturally. So in a sense both Williams and Osaka were robbed. You can't hide behind rules are rules, if rules are being enforced asymmetrically. That's what they did for Jim Crow voting laws.   

Here is another example where a referee in response to bad behavior of a player, inserts himself into the game. The difference here, instead of penalizing the male player the referee gets down from his chair to give him encouragement. IMO both the Williams and the Krygios referees should have shown restraint and allowed the games to proceed naturally
 https://www.theguardian.com/sport/video/2018/aug/31/controversy-follows-nick-kyrgios-after-umpires-pep-talk-at-us-open-video

[dragoncar]

Honestly, I am interested to know that the OP voted for Obama and Clinton.  For me, it gives him standing to complain.  I'd also be interested to know in general how many people on the internet tut-tutting about Serena's unacceptable behavior voted for Trump.  If so, I wonder how it is they justify holding a woman who plays a leisure activity for money to a higher standard than the guy with the nuclear codes.  If you didn't vote for Trump, at least you have a past history of considering decorum in your decision-making. 

I think Serena threw a tantrum, but I also think Ramos was unjustified in giving her the initial coaching call.  When you have rules that are poorly and unevenly enforced, it creates an atmosphere of subjective judging, not impartial judging which should be the goal.  Serena generally gets the short end of the stick when the refs are permitted wide latitude in their calls.  Hell, people were such dicks to her that we now have an automatic line calling system because it turns out that the refs can't be trusted when it comes to her (2004 Open vs. Capriati).  If I were the GOAT and I had been battling a system that had been stacked against me for over a decade, I might be on edge.  She was correct to dispute the call-not because her coach was't coaching but because the rule is never enforced-but she did let her temper get the best of her.  Here's hoping she puts this behind her, because I want to see her pick up another grand slam.

That’s it, I’m docking trump five points

I'd be satisfied with you docking him your vote, but that's just me.  I love tennis, and I get why people are frustrated with the final.  Serena's a generational talent, but Osaka was outplaying her.  It would have been better to see the outcome without the ref inserting himself to a level that isn't normal.  I predict that Serena will use the frustration and come back better than ever. What an achievement to be back at a grand slam final so quickly after being bed-ridden.

Lol you think I voted for trump?

That’s your first warning

[mm1970]

Without expressing an actual opinion, because I haven't fully formed one yet, isn't it possible that she acted poorly and was also a victim or sexism at the same time? That is, she behaved badly and was called on her bad behavior in a way that a man would not have been?

Pretty much this.  It's not either/or people.

[FrugalToque]

Without expressing an actual opinion, because I haven't fully formed one yet, isn't it possible that she acted poorly and was also a victim or sexism at the same time? That is, she behaved badly and was called on her bad behavior in a way that a man would not have been?

Pretty much this.  It's not either/or people.

It seems clear to me that her behaviour was unacceptable.  And probably, for the good of the sport, that sort of behaviour should be severely punished.

But the deal there is easy: everyone gets the same punishment for the same behaviour.  The NHL had the same problem for a decade or two back when I was a kid.  One guy does an illegal hook to slow down another player, but the ref won't call it.  Then the other player does the same hook a bit later, he gets a penalty.  And then they have a fight because they get angry, because the referees were horribly inconsistent at enforcing rules.

If every player, no matter their gender, colour or caliber, got the same punishments for the same crimes (not four "warnings" for person X, but two "code violations" for person Y).  If each thrown or broken racquet, swear word, shaken fist or threatening gesture, each threatening word - were all rated at the same level - then no one would have a problem with Serena's treatment.

But the women are telling us, rather consistently all things considered, that these rules are enforced on them much more harshly than on men.  We should probably listen to them and we should probably believe them on the basis that similar things happen between men and women in almost every other area of human association.

Toque.

[MasterStache]

https://news.sky.com/story/serena-williams-isnt-the-first-tennis-player-umpire-carlos-ramos-has-upset-11494215

The umpire has a history of giving out violations (edit - code violations that were correct, by the way) while other umpires might not. Williams has a history of yelling/acting in a very unsportspersonlike way.

To cry race and sex is unbelievable.

Agreed, yet I'm not surprised at all to hear some people pull those cards as they always do.

Just pointing out on a political forum you pulled the "illegal immigrant card" on the perp who murdered an innocent women as a justification for your stance on immigration. You have also to admitted to complete support of Trump's immigration policies which includes inhumane practices on the basis of citizenship. I realize this is completely off topic but felt the need to point out your blatant hypocrisy.

[DreamFIRE]

In North America, it is quite difficult to criticize the behavior of a woman or a minority, without then being called a racist or a sexist.  And anyone who makes a critique has to now prove they are not a racist or a sexist. 

And they have to prove that they are qualified to make a critique, by saying things like, I"m actually not the straight white male everyone in this thread is assuming me to be.  Or I can note that I voted for both Obama and Clinton...

What an odd world we're putting together.

^This

Yeah, I see that all the time.  It's getting worse in recent years.

[PizzaSteve]

When the first violation happened, Williams was winning the second set, having lost the first.
By the time the third violation happened, it put Osaka up 5-3, all but ending the second set and match.

So are you arguing that Osaka wasn't dominating the match?  Or even stronger, are you saying you believe Serena would have won the match, but for the code violations?  Help me understand.

I said that Osaka won the first set.  Why would you put words in my mouth like that?

You seem to want to play the wounded animal here, and it doesn't go along with anything that's actually happening in this thread.

Toque.

I guess I'll just ask again.  So are you arguing that Osaka wasn't dominating the match?  Or even stronger, are you saying you believe Serena would have won the match, but for the code violations?  Help me understand.

Osaka was winning the match.  Williams was trying to come back.

None of that is relevant to whether or not the punishments she was given were in line with punishments generally given to tennis players.

Toque.

+1 Osaka was dominating set 2 as well and Serena lost it (I watched the whole match as it played out).  I believe her tantrum was on purpose, in an  effort to try to get back into it.  It is a solid tactic.  She was down a break and Osaka was holding serves easily (watch the final game), up a set and had just broken Serena to basiclly cement the match, unless she suddenly started serving less effectively.   Based on her response in the final game, that was not happening, though Serena is capable of anything.

Even the game penalty was on Osakas serve, which had been extremly solid all match. Serena had not dented her service game. 

Honestly, I dont think either penalty even impacted the match, as neither created a break, and this was with two dominating serve type players.  Best case, if Serena manages to break her, she still only even for  tiebreak.  The game with the point penalty was handily won with multiple aces following the Williams outburst.  Osaka seemed unshakeable and her serve was smoking Serena.  I would add that smashing a racket is a veteran move by a player losing badly to a young, possibly shakable opponent.

Serena, the greatest of all time, double digit major champion knew exactly what she was doing and got properly penalized for it.

I love Serena, but it was not a good moment. She let her need to win get the better of her and it cost Osaka a dream end to the tourney.  the penalties sped up the match, but Serena was going down, which is why she was so frustrated and lost it.

PS.  I agree that coaching warning was not necessary.  All player look at box and occasionally get coaching.  For all we know, he signaled her to break a racket to try to shake the dominating player with gamesmanship.  We will never know.

[DreamFIRE]

https://news.sky.com/story/serena-williams-isnt-the-first-tennis-player-umpire-carlos-ramos-has-upset-11494215

The umpire has a history of giving out violations (edit - code violations that were correct, by the way) while other umpires might not. Williams has a history of yelling/acting in a very unsportspersonlike way.

To cry race and sex is unbelievable.

Agreed, yet I'm not surprised at all to hear some people pull those cards as they always do.

Just pointing out on a political forum you pulled the "illegal immigrant card" on the perp who murdered an innocent women as a justification for your stance on immigration. You have also to admitted to complete support of Trump's immigration policies which includes inhumane practices on the basis of citizenship. I realize this is completely off topic but felt the need to point out your blatant hypocrisy.

Since that is off topic and incorrect while also being an attack on me that misrepresents my thoughts on the issue, I will respond in my own defense and to set the record straight.

So,...Ummm..... no, my stance on illegal immigration has not changed since an illegal alien recently murdered a young American girl who was out jogging.  It's tragic, of course, but it's not the justification for my views on illegal immigration.  I have had the same views for many years.  I commented on that strictly because it was a very sad and new news story that didn't seem to be getting much media attention.

Oh, and my views on illegal immigration, border security, national security were solidified many years before Trump ever came along.  I do believe in peaceful and lawful enforcement.  Illegals should not be treated inhumanely.   I also don't confuse legal immigration with illegal immigration, so I try to make that clear also by specifically stating "illegal" to clarify that where relevant.

And as someone else mentioned, I didn't vote for Trump, either, as I oppose him on other various issues, like healthcare, even though it's good to see a president who takes illegal immigration seriously.  But I'm a free thinker, so I come to my own opinions on various issue rather than letting either party or the media tell me what to think.

Anyway, just wanted to defend myself.  I hope we can get back to the topic of this thread.

[MasterStache]

https://news.sky.com/story/serena-williams-isnt-the-first-tennis-player-umpire-carlos-ramos-has-upset-11494215

The umpire has a history of giving out violations (edit - code violations that were correct, by the way) while other umpires might not. Williams has a history of yelling/acting in a very unsportspersonlike way.

To cry race and sex is unbelievable.

Agreed, yet I'm not surprised at all to hear some people pull those cards as they always do.

Just pointing out on a political forum you pulled the "illegal immigrant card" on the perp who murdered an innocent women as a justification for your stance on immigration. You have also to admitted to complete support of Trump's immigration policies which includes inhumane practices on the basis of citizenship. I realize this is completely off topic but felt the need to point out your blatant hypocrisy.

Since that is off topic and incorrect while also being an attack on me that misrepresents my thoughts on the issue, I will respond in my own defense and to set the record straight.

So,...Ummm..... no, my stance on illegal immigration has not changed since an illegal alien recently murdered a young American girl who was out jogging.  It's tragic, of course, but it's not the justification for my views on illegal immigration.  I have had the same views for many years.  I commented on that strictly because it was a very sad and new news story that didn't seem to be getting much media attention.

Oh, and my views on illegal immigration, border security, national security were solidified many years before Trump ever came along.  I do believe in peaceful and lawful enforcement.  Illegals should not be treated inhumanely.   I also don't confuse legal immigration with illegal immigration, so I try to make that clear also by specifically stating "illegal" to clarify that where relevant.

And as someone else mentioned, I didn't vote for Trump, either, as I oppose him on other various issues, like healthcare, even though it's good to see a president who takes illegal immigration seriously.  But I'm a free thinker, so I come to my own opinions on various issue rather than letting either party or the media tell me what to think.

Anyway, just wanted to defend myself.  I hope we can get back to the topic of this thread.

I wasn't attacking you personally I was pointing out your blatant hypocrisy. I didn't say a single thing about your stance on immigration changing either. Nothing you responded with disputes my comments. Just attempted diversion.

[Malloy]

Lol you think I voted for trump?

That’s your first warning

This ref is legit.  Ramos should pay attention.

[sequoia]

Personally, I think one of the worst aspects is the ref's taking first one point, and then an entire game, from Serena when: a) that kind of behavior from a man does not result in similar penalties (as others including Billie Jean King has said); and: b) as a result, Osaka was robbed of getting to enjoy the feeling of a complete victory in her first Grand Slam because of the point and game taken from her opponent.

After the first and second code violations, she knew what the next step was.  Seemed to me that she continued to berate him until she got the 3rd code violation.  So she either wanted to get that 3rd code violation, or she was extremely reckless and negligent about avoiding it.  When you already have 2 code violations, you don't call the referee a "liar" or "thief". 

Based on the run of play, I really think Serena knew she was going to lose, and she wanted a way out.

Thank you for sharing your perspective.

Yep she knows she is getting beaten badly by this unknown 20 yr old Japanese girl at her home court, and she needed an excuse. There is no excuse to behave like that. She is a veteran, have been playing how many years? She should know the rules. Later her coach admitted that he was trying to coach her. If this is a potential issue, she should have tell her coach to stay in the locker room.

She lost one point. We can give that one point back and she still lose the game. It is not like that one point is the deciding factor. Remember that the final score was 6-2, 6-4.

Unknown?

She has dual Japanese and American Citizenship
She's been living in Florida since she was 3.
She plays tennis for Japan, yes.

Yes unknown as in not known or not well-known player. What is her dual citizenship and where she live got anything to do with this?

[Kris]

The referees are threatening to unionize and boycott Serena Williams.

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2018/09/12/tennis-umpires-consider-forming-union-boycotting-over-serena-williams-drama-report.html

Are we still going to keep arguing that she's being treated the same as any other player would be? 

[marty998]

Chiming in late here, but I saw it and was absolutely disgusted by her behaviour. Can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of tennis-playing children watching that debacle, who will grow up believing it is acceptable to call the umpire a cheat and when you don't like the penalty, start arguing with the tournament referee. Nobody is above the rules of the game.

Also - is anyone following the drama around the cartoon drawn by Australia's Mark Knight?

It was obvious to any Australian he was poking fun at her spitting the dummy and acting like a baby. I don't think anyone here expected it to blow up overseas like it did and be called racist...

How does one caricature a non-white person in this day and age without offence being taken? (Note I am not a white guy, and I found the cartoon hilarious. Basically nailed the episode in a nutshell).

[nnls]

Chiming in late here, but I saw it and was absolutely disgusted by her behaviour. Can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of tennis-playing children watching that debacle, who will grow up believing it is acceptable to call the umpire a cheat and when you don't like the penalty, start arguing with the tournament referee. Nobody is above the rules of the game.

Also - is anyone following the drama around the cartoon drawn by Australia's Mark Knight?

It was obvious to any Australian he was poking fun at her spitting the dummy and acting like a baby. I don't think anyone here expected it to blow up overseas like it did and be called racist...

How does one caricature a non-white person in this day and age without offence being taken? (Note I am not a white guy, and I found the cartoon hilarious. Basically nailed the episode in a nutshell).

I think it was because of the use of racial stereotypes as opposed to being a caricature of Serena it was seen as a caricature of black people in the same way minstrels are

[former player]

Chiming in late here, but I saw it and was absolutely disgusted by her behaviour. Can you imagine the hundreds of thousands of tennis-playing children watching that debacle, who will grow up believing it is acceptable to call the umpire a cheat and when you don't like the penalty, start arguing with the tournament referee. Nobody is above the rules of the game.

Also - is anyone following the drama around the cartoon drawn by Australia's Mark Knight?

It was obvious to any Australian he was poking fun at her spitting the dummy and acting like a baby. I don't think anyone here expected it to blow up overseas like it did and be called racist...

How does one caricature a non-white person in this day and age without offence being taken? (Note I am not a white guy, and I found the cartoon hilarious. Basically nailed the episode in a nutshell).

I think it was because of the use of racial stereotypes as opposed to being a caricature of Serena it was seen as a caricature of black people in the same way minstrels are

Yes.  And any defence of "not racist" is completely negated by the cartoon showing Osaka (dark haired Japanese) as white skinned and blonde.

[Kris]

That cartoon was one of the most blatantly racist things I’ve seen in a while. It made my stomach churn.

[Sailor Sam]

That cartoon was one of the most blatantly racist things I’ve seen in a while. It made my stomach churn.

Yes.

[FrugalToque]

That cartoon was one of the most blatantly racist things I’ve seen in a while. It made my stomach churn.

In your view, Kris, what was so blatantly racist about the cartoon?  (We don't have to agree on this, but I am interested in finding out which elements you find to be most blatant and offensive.)

Please google "Sambo racist", then click on images. 
Or try "racist cartoons from the 1950s".

The caricature of Serena was clearly based on Jim Crow era depictions of black people, making her look like a monkey/ape with large lips etc. etc.
Does the cartoonist have to put a banana in her hand and watermelon slices scattered around her to make it clear?  Or would we be able to find an excuse for that, too?

I mean, yeah, it could have been an accident.  But, really, that's a pretty clueless accident and we're giving him a lot of latitude if we believe that.

Toque.