Nadal Gets Call, Gets Past Goffin To Reach Monte Carlo Finals Against Ramos-Vinolas
by Sean Randall | April 22nd, 2017, 4:21 pm

Rafael Nadal probably didn’t need to get a beneficial call but he got one today in the Monte Carlo semifinals. The 9-time tournament champion was down early to the hot-handed David Goffin who held 3-2 with a game point when a Rafa backhand went long but the chair ump overruled. While the ump confirmed the out call (pointing to the wrong mark), the hawkeye system showed Nadal’s shot was long but review is not used on clay. Oops!

So upon replay, Nadal won the point to get back on serve at 3-3 and then cruised to a 6-3, 6-1 victory winning 10 of the last 11 games.

“I imagine the ball was out but I was on the other side, I could not see the mark,” said Nadal.

Added Goffin on the call, “It’s wrong, it’s wrong.”

And Goffin’s right, it was wrong. It was a crap call. But had Nadal not got that call and Goffin were to have gone up 4-2, would the Belgian really have won the match? Still unlikely. Again, it was early in the first set, not late in the third.

The Belgian, though, should be pleased with his week beating two top 10 players in Dominic Thiem and Novak Djokovic.

“It was a beautiful tournament. I gave it my all. I’m very satisfied with what I achieved against the best players in the world on a surface that I like. It’s only positive,” said Goffin. “I have to keep working in that direction. I think I improved this week and I know now that I can have high ambitions.”

In his 11th Monte Carlo final, Nadal will play fellow Spanish lefty Albert Ramos-Vinolas. The 29-year-old ARV took out Lucas Pouille 6-3, 5-7, 6-1 to reach his first career Masters final. The Frenchman Pouille was hobbled by a back injury late in the match, but credit to ARV who won his third straight 3-set match after wins over Andy Murray and Marin Cilic.

“I improved my tennis a little, my backhand a little bit,” said Ramos-Vinolas. “I improved my physical condition. I improved a little bit my mental condition. I also have more confidence. I think there are a lot of things that are going better. It helps me get better results than before.

“I think everything started in reaching the Roland Garros quarterfinals last year. I think for sure it gave me more confidence. I think since then, over the past year, I’ve been playing better. After I won a tournament on clay court. In South America, two months ago, I made a final, two semifinals and one quarterfinal. Last week also a quarterfinal. Here a final. The results are getting better.”

Nadal is going to be the big favorite in the final. Rafa’s also trying to win a title for a 10th time for the first time in his career.

“It’s tough to believe that I’m in a final again here,” Nadal said. “It’s unbelievable news for me. It’s another great event. Having all these great results since the beginning of the season allows me to still have a position in the top eight. That’s a very important thing for me.

“I’m able to start the clay-court season playing a final in one of the most important events of the year. It’s a very special place for me and this is something that makes me feel very happy. Very excited about it.

Nadal has won both prior meetings against ARV, both in straights in Barcelona.

“Albert’s playing better than ever,” assessed Nadal. “He’s winning huge matches during the whole week. He’s playing with big confidence, with great spirit and fight, overcoming tough situations in every match and playing a high level of tennis all the time. I know that I need to be at my best to keep having chances, to fight for another title here. That’s what I am looking for.”

Rafa hasn’t won a title since Barcelona almost a year ago. So this is a huge match for him and if it gets close let’s see how he handles the nerves — remember we thought he’d get through Sam Querrey in Acapulco.

Querrey has a serve while Ramos-Vinolas, for a guy 6-foot-2, doesn’t get much pop on his. And Nadal’s played pretty well all week, so if he can manage the nerves and the expectations like he used to do, I expect this to go straights tomorrow.

COURT RAINIER III start 11:30 am
R. Bopanna (IND) / P. Cuevas (URU) vs [7] F. Lopez (ESP) / M. Lopez (ESP)

Not Before 2:30 pm
[15] A. Ramos-Vinolas (ESP) d [4] R. Nadal (ESP)

You Might Like:
Djokovic Upset By Goffin, Nadal Draw Opens in Semifinals at ATP Monte Carlo
Nadal Rolls to 10th Monte Carlo Title Setting Numerous ATP Records
Nadal Rolls, Djokovic Survives, Murray And Wawrinka Fall In Monte Carlo; Friday QFs
1st Time Winner Carballes Baena Raises Trophy at ATP Ecuador Open
Rafael Nadal Closes Gap With Roger Federer For Rankings Race Lead

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get the FREE TX daily newsletter

114 Comments for Nadal Gets Call, Gets Past Goffin To Reach Monte Carlo Finals Against Ramos-Vinolas

LUCY Says:

I don’t buy into this ‘oh Goffin would have lost anyway and it’s only one point’ argument. Tennis is a game that is won or lost on the finest of margins and once a player gets the momentum, things can turn around very fast indeed. Goffin was the better player for the first part of the match and whilst Nadal is pretty awesome, I have a feeling that had Goffin gone 4-2 up, he would have taken the set, which could have made a huge difference to his confidence later on in the match. We will never know of course but he gets another chance in Barcelona this week….

tennisfanQC Says:

Momentum can shift quickly and in a best of three, there may not be time for a reaction. It’s irresponsible to assume that had the bad call not been made, Nadal would still have won so easily. Goffin would have been up 4-2 and pressure would have been on Nadal’s side to hold serve.
I didnt see the match. How was the chair umpire? I wonder if Nadal will request this person from now on to officiate his matches, just like he had the temerity to request for the banning of Bernandes.

rognadfan Says:

Oh boy,

Probably Nadal would’ve won, but like LUCY pointed, Goffin could have easily taken the set too.So, we’ll never know.

That said, I think this is the first time ever a masters series final has be so disinteresting (this probably is not even an actual word) to the entire tennis audience. While clay matches are always fun to watch no matter how lopsided they are, this’s go to be on the top of that list.

Vinolas did a great job reaching the final. I’ll just say that.

Humble Rafa Says:

I will be happy to give the coaches and trainers $10 each so they can get a haircut. Have you seen my uncle Toni and his neat look. These guys need to learn from my uncle.

J-Kath Says:

Yes, Lucy – Goffin could indeed get another chance in Barcelona – he’s in Rafa’s half.

Tennis king Says:

Cedric Mourier should be banned from tennis. This is not first time that he made terrible call. That ball was miles out and he missed it. He actually made one against Rafa.

Danica Says:

I didn’t see the match but was not surprised by the result knowing that Goffin had previously pretty tough and lengthy matches. What I am reading now is really interesting. Goffin could’ve been rattled by the wrong call. But then again, these types of calls happen all the time, specially on clay where hawk eye is not used to challenge them. It’s on the player to overcome the disappointment and continue the fight.

Rafa for the 10th title in Monte Carlo.

Lyle nubbins Says:

Hawkeye is so great and really sets tennis apart from other sports. how many times have you seen a huge basketball, football etc turn on a crappy call? I’m a Rafa fan bit Goffin was totally robbed and I don’t get why Hawkeye is not used at these clay events.

Danica Says:

Agree. The fact that you can see where the ball landed on clay doesn’t mean that hawkeye is obsolete.

lakie Says:

It is ridiculous this outrage over a point lost early in the match. Had it been matchpoint these cries of Goffin has been robbed would have made sense. In any case Nadal cannot be blamed as the mark was on the other side of the court which he could not verify. All cases of sportingly conceding a point have happened when the “sporting” player could see for himself that the call was bad. No one will concede a point relying on the opponent’s outrage.

Zachary Grace Says:

Iakie, that ball was way out. There’s no way a pro player, let alone Nadal wouldn’t be able to tell immediately. Is it his responsibility to give up the point? I’m not sure, but don’t give us that bs.

lakie Says:

How do you know what you saw on replay is the same as what Nadal saw? So just stop with your bs. If you are unhappy, no skin off my nose. It is your problem.

Miles Says:

There’s no way, taking into account the foreshortening perspective, that Nadal will have known for sure that he hit the ball long.

It was the umpire who got it badly wrong! I don’t see why clay courts don’t use hawkeye – I’ve always thought it dubious when an umpire points at a mark and insists that was the one made by the last shot – what if 2 or 3 marks are close together? Can an umpire be 100% sure in making the correct decision?

It WAS the turning point of the match, as Goffin lost his cool and his focus, because it was such a significant point.

It pretty much summed up what has been a very poor tournament and it often is – it should lose its 1000 masters status, imo. It should be a 500 series event.

Danica Says:

I have just seen this as the Tennis Channel reruns the match. Rafa could absolutely see that the ball was long. It was THAT long. No mistaking it from a seasoned player, the King of Clay at that. When the linesmen called it out, he didn’t complain, didn’t questioned it. He knew the ball was out. And then, in his presser, he said that one point couldn’t change the match. Oh yes, it could. Very disappointing.

Miles Says:

Danica – ah, well that changes matters. Nadal should have given it to Goffin. There’s a reason why Nadal has only ever won the Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award once (9 years ago).

He’s not as sporting as his fans like to make out and his peers know it (his request for Hawkeye at the end of the AO Final was truculent, too, imo, as he could see the ball was in).

Pity – he probably would’ve won yesterday’s match anyway, but that leaves a sour taste.

Giles Says:

The ball was on the opposite side to Nadal. There was just no way he could see the ball mark from where he was standing. He doesn’t have X-ray eyes. So Danica stfu!!

Giles Says:

Just to add, I cannot recall a player ever conceding a point on any call made on the other side (much less far baseline) and they never should. They are in the worst position of almost anyone on the court to make that call. Umpire blew it . Leave Rafa out of it.

Michael Says:

What would have happened if the ball was called out rightly ? We never know. But that is how Tennis is played at the highest level with the thinnest of margins and such umpiring errors are bound to majorly impact the game and even the rest of the match if the player is not psychologically strong and allows himself to be distracted and influenced by it. There are erstwhile players like Jimmy and John who by their aggression and fighting spirit turns even such bad calls to their advantage by exhibiting animal spirit, motivation and drive on Court to produce ferocious display. But not everybody can emulate them.

Nevertheless, you need some luck in Tennis to play to your advantage and it was Rafa’s day. It has also placed him in the finals and in with a chance to produce a PERFECT TEN and what a feat that would be in any form of tournament.

Michael Says:

Rafa’s sportsmanship has been called into question. Ofcourse he could have been generous in overruling the umpire’s decision and awarded the point to Goffin as the ball was way long for all to see except the umpire’s and that would have earned him accolades. But for all his stupendous achievements, he was petty, mean and stingy and that was disappointing.

Wilander by the way went against the umpiring decision and awarded the point to his opponent at match point to lose the match. He lost statistically but conquered the hearts of sports enthusiasts, that it is quoted even today for he made history by his generosity.

George Says:

OMG!!! I get the feeling some peeps just crave the slightest opening to take a swipe on Rafa. For crying out loud, Rafa was on the other side of the net and not a few inches away from d mark and he plays with lots of topspin. yes the ball was out but it was solely the umpires fault n not Rafa’s. Rafa did absolutely nothing wrong.

skeezer Says:

Not going to watch the final out of protest.
Horrible display of umpiring. The linesmen was right there, made the correct call. The umpire, from his chair who supposedly had the better view runs on the court to over rule pointing to the wrong mark 6 inches away! What a dufas.
I agree Rafa shoulda woulda coulda won anyway. But so shoulda woulda coulda Goffin. Would have put him up 4-2( he WAS up 4-2 ) and was showing the same mentality he had against Novak.
At this level small things can make a big difference, this was a classic example of that.

skeezer Says:

Het giles,
“The whole controversy in the Goffin-Rafa match would not have made a difference in the outcome. End of Story.”
Sure It could have.
There was no controversy, the ball was clearly out!

Anto Says:

As expected a fairly easy win for Nadal for his La Decima in Monte Carlo.

jatin Says:

Congrts Rafa for the 1st masters win of the year. King of clay is back.

Giles Says:

Well done Rafa! What a feat! Vamos Champ!!!!!!

Miles Says:

I see Rafa has won – kudos to him for that and for winning number 10.

It’s a pity is was such a disappointing tournament.

Daniel Says:

If you have ever played tennis you know the monent the ball leaves your racquet if you hit it long? Too long or maybe in shot.

So this Nadal couldn’t possibly know is BS.
Danica is right, he himself thoghthe hit it long, because qhen you play it you know yiu over hit it. He had a hoice to give the point but he difn’t. Is not his fault. If the umpire overrule a call he mau thought it was a clsoe call.

Also, Goffin was leading 40-0 that game and Nadal wanted to break and worked hard for it. That point was game point.

Maybe Nadal could have lost the next gane point Goffin had (i bleieve he had 2 or 3 more game points before Nadal breaking. But Nadal knew that if he broke at that point match will be over he choose to win the ugliest and undair way.

Could have gave the game away and fight back “fair” after. He has all the tools to win that match fair and square and even save that set, would have only be 4-2 Goffin. On clay multiple breaks happens all the time.

So, don’t come with this Nadal is saint and has nothing to do with him because ot did, there were several ways he could have chosen to play that game if dee in his mijd he tought Goffin was robbed.

But guess what, it is in his nature winning that way: talking with his coach, MTO Breaks, delaying between points as much as posisble and hawkeyein on MP.

On court it is just how he was told to play: win at every cost

Van orten Says:

Wow nadal again facing zero competition. But roger is coming to Paris . Let him win till then .

lakie Says:

Well I have played tennis my dear Daniel and what you write about knowing for sure whether the ball is long the moment it leaves your racket is a load of bs!

Giles Says:

Hey Daniel. As usual talking BS!!! Not talking about joker any,ore and how many more slams and Masters he will win? Oops! Now you’re on the fed bandwagon! Lol

Giles Says:

Daniel. You seem very upset that Rafa won his TENTH Monte Carlo title. Calm down, have a shot of Scotch to help you. Lol
I’m happy, you’re not. Oh dear!!

madmax Says:

Childs, you are so pathetic to call out anyone other than looking at yourself in he mirror. You and Lakie are the height of ignorance and bitterness.

This congratulatory hand is to J-Kath and to Willow, and Okie, as they are the only three genuine rafa fans here.

You most certainly are NOT.

madmax Says:

Congrats to Okie, J-Kath and Willow. Proud to be a rafa fan right now, right? The only true and genuine rafa fans here.

skeezer Says:

“Well I have played tennis my dear Daniel and what you write about knowing for sure whether the ball is long the moment it leaves your racket is a load of bs!”
So you don’t know when the ball goes 6 inches out that you hit it there? Lol….

madmax Says:

Miles, certainly yes a disappointment tournament, but a win is a win – and 10, is pretty amazing, though the competition was not at a slam standard. It does not matter.

Let J-Kath, Okie and Willow celebrate. It has been a while for Rafa. I don’t really think anyone expected anything different. He is the best on this surface. So now, his confidence will be riding high, as it should.

It was a shame about the match and the Line Judge’s call yesterday, but I still believe that Rafa would have won the match – don’t you?

skeezer Says:

These guys are not at your level. These guys aim for lines and can hit them regularly. Sure if the ball is close near a line they may question the shot, but not when it is 6 inches off!!! Trust me, they know.

Giles Says:

madmax. You really crack me up and you know why.

Willow Says:

I Didnt see the match yesterday, but going by everyones reactions i can get on board with Goffin getting a raw deal, even though i am a Rafa fan, as for the lack of competition, well all his biggest threats lost early on so hardly Nadals fault ….

Daniel Says:


Thanks, but that comment didn’t even required a response. He/she probable must spread balls all over court and think the double lines apply for single.


I congratulated Nadal yesterday already.

He can keep winning 1 maybe 2 clay masters a year. that won’t make any difference. Speciallt that 10 of his Masters total comes in MC, a tourney that deep down is a fancy 500 (not even mandadory Masters anymore) since 2009 I think.

Nadal’s knows what matters for him is RG. Yiu should know better also.

Willow Says:

Madmax im happy, but not jumping through hoops, im just not that obsessed by tennis anymore these days ….

Giles Says:

Daniel. It’s a real shame that fed never conquered Monte Carlo , don’t you think? He attempted it several times and each time eliminated by Rafa. Fancy 500 or not doesn’t matter. The players love playing in this beautiful venue and dream of winning. How many attempts did joker make before he finally won?

lakie Says:

skeezer, I do not want to debate this issue because obviously you and Daniel have no idea what it is like to be at the top level. So be unhappy dears, may there be more such cases for you guys to be unhappy about!

skeezer Says:

“…no idea what it is like to be at the top level.”
How do you know that? Careful…
You don’t want to debate because you have no justifiable experience but yet you demand that is the answer.

You mean like Rafa and WTF? Lol.
Congrats to Rafans on another Clay title. Long overdue…

Okiegal Says:

@madmax…..Thanks for the congrats! Willow stated she’s not into tennis that much anymore but Okiegal is still as radical about Rafa as ever! Yes it has been a long dry spell for him, so this was good to see! J-Kath a Rafa fan?? Didn’t you mean JS?? But if JK wants to change horses in the middle of the stream I’d be honored!! Lol on to Barcelona…….

madmax Says:

Oki! Yeah…but having spoken to JK, she likes rafa, and that is good enough, but yes. JS as well.

Feel sorry that you have a cry baby on your team who seems to be a closet Federer fan. Have a good day Oki.

Willow, I hear you. Don’t stay away for too long. :-)

Willow Says:

Okie /Madmax i believe J-Kath is a Murray fan, but also likes Rafa too, although she will for herself ….

About me well lately ive made contact with some old friends and relatives on FB, and i also had something happen to me a few weeks ago which was quite amazing, and if id followed my heart i wouldnt have been here anymore, so tennis has taken a back seat lately, so i spend most of my time lately on there, but thanks for the heads up ;-) ….

Okiegal Says:

@MADMAX…..JK a definite Andy fan…..he’s my second fave and went out early so had Rafa gotten beat early on I doubt if I would have even watched at all.

@Willow…..and to think I had to beg you to get on FB! I love FB …….I have reconnected with some old classmates I hadn’t seen or talked to in years! There can be lots of drama there for sure……but no more drama than what’s here on TX!!! Lol But don’t stay away too long from TX. You’re missed when away!

Okiegal Says:

I will bet after the red dirt settled Goffin is beating himself up after being up 40-love…..yes, we can all agree it was a bad call and unfortunate for him. Inexperience in that situation caused him too go off the rails and lose focus. He’s gonna have to learn to shake it off…..there’s always gonna be questionable calls… have to learn to deal with it. He can make something positive out of this unfortunate incident. I mean he’s gotta push it out of his mind and press on ……as the commentators say all of the time…..hit the re-set button!!

Okiegal Says:


SG1 Says:

Sport is chalk full of bad breaks. If this had happened in the 3rd set tie-break I’d say that Goffin got badly jobbed. But, this happened in the relatively early stages of the match. Even if he loses the first set, he’s got to be able to re-group and dig in in the 2nd set. The guy just collapsed altogether. This just tells me he wasn’t ready to beat Rafa on clay yet. With all this being said, the ref made a horrible call and he should be held accountable for it.

J.S. Says:

Great day in Monte Carlo – My first tournament to see Rafa bite the trophy!
Packed house, the only murmers from my section were “This isn’t going to be a great final” sort of comments…..Clearly Rafa was winning this match and it was very one sided!

Wish I was going to Barcelona, poor scheduling on my part!!

Thank you all for letting me share my experience this week…..Ya’ll ROCK!!!

lakie Says:

Thanks JS for great reporting! You probably brought luck to Nadal. You might consider going to Roland Garros?

rognadfan Says:

Wow, so many hypocrits who are barking nonstop that they they have seen, in person, Fed doping are now shouting that nadal didn’t know that ball was out.
Of course there is no way to tell. he may have seen that was out or he may not. You can never judge a ball from another baseline to be sure.
But hey you guys can clearly see Fed doping don’t ya!

J.S. Says:

TY lakie checking off my bucket list, so fun!
Love me some tennis

Willow Says:

LOL I Dont know if the ball was out, and i dont know if Federer is doping, as i didnt see either, so i will give both the benefit of the doubt ….

J.S. Says:

I told everyone you couldnt see if ball was in or out….but I go back to shame on crowd for both players!

Today made up for yesterdays ugliness!

skeezer Says:

J.S. & Willow. The point here is it didn’t matter what the fans saw or didn’t see, it is what it is. The linesmen ( his job is to call the ball in or out ) clearly yelled “out”. The ump then came chug a lugging out of his almighty chair and pointed out the wrong mark, calling it cgood. (replays of the ball showed it 6 inches out…..I mean there is NO splitting hairs there, it was waaaay out.)

For those of us who watched the Goffin/Djoko match and then watched this match, it was clear Goffin was a force to be reckoned here and he looked like the same man early on that beat Djoko, now he was taking it to Rafa early on.
That particular call determined a huge momentum swing in the match. He was up 4-2 if the call stood. It should have.
That service game wound up being one of the longest if not the longest in the match, of which Goffin eventually succumbed. He shouldn’t of had to.

This would have all been moot if Hawkeye was implemented on Clay and all the talk about Rafa would won anyway, or Goffin would continue streaking with is play like he did against Djoko, would have been answered. It’s long overdue. Bring on the Hawk!

That said I think this subject has been beaten down enough, and don’t think it should in any way take away Rafa’s achievement and recognition. But any Tennis fan watching that match on the Tele saw how that all went down probably felt their entertainment was cheated and left a tainted mark on the Game.

J-Kath Says:


I like a lot of players which very much includes Rafa…also Stan, Nole, Jo and Gael. But Okie and Willow are correct – Andy Murray is my favourite (not just because he is Scottish) – and certainly not because he is a pain in the derriere when he grumps and groans and self inflicts – but because he is a genune good guiy….and I think he is the most struggling to be a fair and honest player in every tournament. He can be naughty too: when Seppi pretended to be injured/needed a break and came back and took a second set; Andy decided to do the same —can anyone forget the guilty bu mischievous grins at the end of the tournament?

I realise Roger is missing from my list – why? Firstly he is fantastic but I believe he receives every advantage re. scheduling and preferential treatment re. the Courts he plays on whether he is No 36 or no. 1 in a tournament.

Okiegal Says:

If Goffin was all that great in the moment he would have never lost the game…..40-love……remember??? But there again Nadal was across the net…….therein lies the difference…….

Danica Says:

Why would I stfu? Because the truth hurts?

Sure Rafa could have seen where the ball landed. Have you ever walked on a tennis court at least? Come on! It is not that big and the other baseline is not that far away. You do see the ball landing half a foot behind the baseline. Having said that, the mistake is purely and only the umpire’s. He robbed Goffin of that game.

It doesn’t matter Okie that it was 40-love. What matters is that it was AD Goffin and that he won the next point fair and square and that the umpire failed to acknowledge it de facto affecting him. There is no proof the outcome of the match would have been the same.

Giles Says:

Danica. Lol. What ” truth”? Your truth or the real truth. Ask Brad Gilbert. I have posted his tweet.

Willow Says:

Skeezer fair enough, i do believe as i say that Goffin got a raw deal ….

Giles Says:

^^^ Did you see the match???

skeezer Says:

Brad Gilbert the Real Truth? LMAO.

Giles Says:

Hey skeezer at this rate you’ll have no @rse left. LMAO

Okiegal Says:

@Danica…I think it matters that he was up 40-love…..he should have never lost that game…..he was riding high, having beaten the former number one the day before. My point, when your facing the King of Clay……things aren’t gonna be easy. Having seen the replay ball clearly out….but in no way is Rafa to be blamed for that….like some posters are claiming. The umpire saw the wrong mark….he’s human after all….but Goffin is gonna have to put his big girl panties on and put it behind him. This happens often…..YES CLAY NEEDS HAWKEYE!! I also don’t think there was something sinister going between the official and Rafa???? Some have even spouted this scenario out loud….ridiculous! I wonder if this had happened and Roger had been in Rafa’s place if we would have heard how unsportsmanlike he was from his faithful fans…..I seriously doubt it. My two cents!
(Danica, not all of this comment is directed to you, just the first five lines….stopping at “having seen the replay”) I just interjected those thoughts from what I had read from other posters)……I hope we can still chat civilly to each other… I always enjoy reading what you have to say…..Have a great day! Okie. 🎾🎾🎾 rocks!!!

Truth Says:

Of course Fed has media support to intimidate the top legends. It pissed him off that the majority of the media supported Djoker, Murray & Nadal. It’s not Djoker that was a cry baby. The fake sportsmanship award winner was the one weeping hysterically and trying to anger Djoker, Djoker family and Murray when they beat his ass in many matches.

I usually am bored by Fedal but the reality is Fed’s a puppet for the media to fawn over. it’s so dull because the lies hurt the other players’ effort level, especially his muppet Roddick and former nemesis like Nalbandian.
His fanatics pretend he was the poor, pitiful old god and try to avoid mistakes he made to elevate his status in history. Insecure Fed fans hoped no one mentioned the “old suffering victim”.
As if everyone should ignore Fed’s weaknesses and fake that the other guys are far inferior people and players.
Fed viewed Nadal as a one dimensional limited player that didn’t deserve special treatment that Fed received regarding “reputation”, scheduling and resting time between matches.
Obviously, Fed said he loved Nadal so much to keep his enemy “unaware” of his fake actions & agendas.
If the 2003 trash opponents didn’t waste space on court with crap tennis, Fed and his insulting fanatics wouldn’t be such insufferable phonies.

Fed cursed at Murray, who didn’t even win another Slam in 2013. LMAO

sinha71 Says:

yes this is moot point. I have seen players overturn a call when the ball is on their side but now Rafa is expected to do what no other player ever did when ball is 20 metres away?

The exact same thing happened to Nadal in his 2005 Miami final vs Federer when federer hit the ball the same distance long (according to hawkeye that was available in the broadcast booth at the time).

Nadal was up 2 sets and Fed serving at 3-4 Love-30. Fed hit long which would have given Rafa triple break point and if converted a chance to serve for the title. However the ball was called in, and Fed came back to win in five sets. Rafa looks dismayed but immediately put it behind him.

Was Roger supposed to give him the point from 20 m away??? No. Of course not. Do not be silly.

It is part of the game.

See the point here at the 27:30 mark.

sinha71 Says:

And no. Clay does not need hawkeye because the mark on clay is more accurate. Anyone who understands general measurement principles is aware that every measurement has an accuracy to some measurement error. Hawkeye is accurate to plus or minus 3.6 mm. Better than nothing on a hard court or grass, but not as good as the mark on clay.

The number of times an umpire refers to the wrong mark is very small and does not justify the cost of hawkeye system for clay.

sinha71 Says:

One more comment as I am coming to the party late is that the hawkeye replay that Mourier botched was at most 3 inches out (slightly more than one ball diameter), not 6 inches being exaggerated here which is a big difference in terms of Nadal being so confident that the ball was definitely out.

It was the same distance with the ball that Federer hit long in 2005 that was called good. Federer might think it is possible that it was long but nobody in their right mind would expect him to overturn the call.

skeezer Says:

^That is just plain wrong. “Hawkeye is accurate to plus or minus 3.6 mm. Better than nothing on a hard court or grass, but not as good as the mark on clay.”
Hawkeye is better than the human eye by far. Yes, Clay leaves a mark, and in this case left the correct undisputable right mark, but a human(dufas ump) came over and pointed to the wrong mark. The linesmen made the correct call, he was right there, that line is his job, and HAWKEYE would of, ( it did ) confirm it.
As far as you digging back to 2005 to prove a point( the year after Hawkeye became the standard ) is futile. This just proves the point that Hawkeye is needed. If it was implemented during that match ( it was for the commentators ) Rafa would of had his triple break point( BTW for Goffin, it was GAME, not just a point and further play needed to decide a game ).

skeezer Says:

^BTW that ball was closer to 6 inches than 3, totally disagree there.

sinha71 Says:

^That is just plain wrong. “^BTW that ball was closer to 6 inches than 3, totally disagree there.”

And you are basing this on…. what exactly.

No, I just looked on TennisTV and the distance from the edge of the baseline to the beginning of the mark is just slightly greater at most than the ball diameter.

It proves that HE is needed on hard court and grass which is why it is there.

It is NOT needed on clay where like I already said if you took the time to not misinterpret, the right mark is referenced by the umpire.

It is an extremely rare case when the umpire has the wrong mark.

And bringing up the final is futile in your opinion but goes to show that this is part of tennis, those accusing Nadal of being in the wrong hold Nadal to a different standard than Federer for obvious reasons, and that Goffin should not be such a snowflake which could apply to many complainers.

So not futile at all.

Goffin needs to be mentally stronger next time.

Okiegal Says:

@sinha71……good digs!! There’s always something out there that has happened before……ain’t the internet grand……just like love!

sinha71 Says:

Thank you okie.

(Remember, the ball diameter is 2.7 inches which is the same width as the distance from the edge of the line to the edge of the ball so it was 3 inches out.)

This is how fan bias can turn 3 inches into 6.

Nadal is CHAMP10N. Like Federer in 2005.

Get over it. Like Rafa did in 2005 as the good sportsman he is.

Okiegal Says:

@sinha71…..The commentator on that clip said that the Sportsmanship winner just threw his racquet on the court…..I have never seen this before…..indeedy a good dig…….A BIG THUMBS UP for your efforts. Florida heat must bring the worst out in Roger the Artful Dodger…..It was also in Florida where he admitted going to the restroom so the sun would be at a better advantage for him……but Florida has been good to him too, how many has he won there??

skeezer Says:

This is not about Rafa, though his fanatics want to make so. Its about Goffin, whose game won got suspiciously taken away. Rafa is a great champ, to me it has nothing to do with that. That is you talking. I will bet they bring Hawkeye to Clay, there is no reason too, for the intregity of the game. All the upside, no downside.

sinha71 Says:

Did not say it was about rafa. But, besides an incompetent umpire (who I still don’t know why he left his chair when he didn’t even overrule to begin with) is all about hypocrisy.

The only fanatics are those fanatics like Bodo and Carillo (plus some fanatics here) that say he should have donated the point on a call 20 m away, when no other player has ever done this (including the all time sportsmanship GOAT in Miami 2005 final down two sets 3-4 0-30).

No downside? The downside is taking a system with less accuracy as perfect and removing a better system which is the mark except for extremely rare instances where the wrong mark is chosen. Goffin should learn to clean his lines on clay. And stop being a WLB.

Three inches exaggerated to six? Where have I heard this before. That is just plain wrong.

Okiegal Says:

What I have a hard time understanding is that Rafa fans are fanatics and Federer fans are not…..duh what up wid dat??? Lol. Having worked in the judicial system for over 30 years, I rest my case……..I’m throwing down the gavel!! Lol. 🎾🎾🎾🎾🎾

skeezer Says:

One golden rule on Umpiring. You never ever say ” I think it was out, or in. That is just validating your not sure. You just say it was or it wasn’t. This guy had really no idea, Hawkeye would have.

“The downside is taking a system with less accuracy as perfect and removing a better system which is the mark except for extremely rare instances where the wrong mark is chosen.”
Something happened to Rafa on Clay to him. Clay needs Hawkeye.

Okiegal Says:

Some are making this all about Rafa because he didn’t give him the point when he clearly didn’t know if it was long or short…….especially after the umpire was so adamant about it being in……..end of story…..

shamboozie Says:

Judicial system in Tahiti?

sinha71 Says:

“Something happened to Rafa on Clay to him.” Whaaaa??? What does that even mean?

Nadal and the players know the difference….

Nadal, a nine-time French Open champion, is not convinced of Hawkeye’s accuracy and doesn’t want it on clay.
“If we made that happen, then Hawkeye will be in trouble,” he said.

Yes, in trouble because the mark will prove how often it is wrong due to measurement error. A simple concept.

Daily mail LOL. Read yes, but also know your source.

Someone who doesn’t understand the concept of measurement error and probability of picking the wrong mark.

Or wants us to believe three inches is six.

One to “grow” on.

Willow Says:

Okie i have to share this with you if your reading, had a friend request on FB from guess who OMG ? ….

Okiegal Says:

@Willow……Who??? Hugh Jackman??? Lol Do tell…….I’m dying to know!!!

Willow Says:

Okie hell yeah my friend, he sent a private message saying hello Alison thankyou for liking my movies, i hope you never stop, be still my beating heart, i think im about to pass out ;-) ….

Okiegal Says:

@Willow….. WOWZER……now aren’t you just tickled pink you listened to me and got on FB??…..I was really kind of teasing about it being Mr.Jackman…..and BOOM BABY it was!! Alison…..pick yourself up off of the floor… more swooning…you will hurt Clive’s feelings!!! Hey…..this is awesome!!

Willow Says:

Okie it was only a brief chat before he blocked me though sadly, but well worth it lol, saying i was a beautiful lady, and thanks for likng his films OMG ;-) ….

Sivaji Says:

Nadal does not know where the was landed. So its fair. They have replayed that point. right?..

Okiegal Says:

@Willow…..I’m surprised he blocked you ….obviously if you friended him and he accepted??? Oh I know… jealous wife…! It’s a cool event just the same!!

Willow Says:

Okie hes friended me again though yesterday ;-) ….

Klaas Says:

Re Nadal-Goffin:
An easy solution for determining point on clay: The mark should be the deciding factor, but if there is disagreement on the mark and only then, the player should have the right to call in a Hawkeye decision.

skeezer Says:


RZ Says:

@Klaas – sounds like a good policy.
I wish the tours would institute a rule that anytime a chair ump overrules a line call, there would be immediate confirmation via Hawkeye without either player losing a challenge. In the case of clay, the rule could be that the chair ump would have to come down and show the mark, and then players could challenge.

J-Kath Says:

RZ: Andy got it done – it was my crystal power during the tie-break that did it…….do you think he’s give me past of his winnings if I ask nicely????

J-Kath Says:

“part” of his winnings…..ahem!

RZ Says:

@J-Kath – he’s a generous guy and I’m sure he’s grateful for your help today. Why not? :-)

Okiegal Says:

@Willow……Yipperdy skipperdy!! Cool……..

J-Kath Says:

Willow: This is getting serious – I shall need to watch you carefully from now on…..!!!

RZ: I’ll let you know when he pays – better be before he meets Thiem – OR…..???

Willow Says:

Okie /J-Kath we had a private conversation, he said i was a very beautiful woman ( i kid you not), asked me which of his films i liked, where i lived, what i did for a living, good job he couldnt see me face to face to know how red i was in the face lol ….

J-Kath Says:

Willow: I’m sure you are a beautiful woman externally and internally. PS: Just noticed Hugh Jackman on tonight 9.00pm in “Swordfish”…you’ve probably seen it – but I haven’t been watching much TV for many years so catching up whenever I can now i.e. living alone it is great in the evenings.

Willow Says:

J-Kath i suppose some might say in a certain light lol, funnily enough ive never seen that film, but will keep my eyes peeled for it, anyhow Andy made it through by the skin of his teeth, and Rafa had a tight opening set, that Cheung has alot of talent, im hoping for a Nadal /Murray final ,fingers crossed ….

jalep Says:

Lol, alison. Is this the end of mr.alison and Mrs.jackman? Reminds me of puppy love days.


I wonder…

What an amazing exchange. Closest I’ve ever come to an idol was 1991 …I got to ride a chairlift and make some runs with the Swiss men’s ski team. My head was so big for months that I couldn’t get my racing helmet on.

Willow Says:

Jalep :-) ….

Willow Says:

He has roots in my area Jalep, so next time hes this way he can pop round for a coffee :-) ….

jalep Says:

For coffee. Oh I hope so! You’ve got to snap a picture with him for me!!!

Willow Says:

Jalep chance would be a fine thing, but ill certainly invite him lol ;-) ….

J-Kath Says:

Willow/Jalep: Closest I got was a middle-agd Michael Caine who stayed at our hotel (in a revamped chicken coop that we up-graded to make an en-suite) – he was naughty – after the younger girls.

Willow Says:

J-Kath ,MC was a good looking guy in his younger years, he really fitted the Alfie character perfectly, as yet ive never heard any infidelity rumours about HJ, i always believed him to be a one woman man, still i suppose you just never know ….

Top story: Djokovic, Nadal Resume Grand Slam Chase At Wimbledon; Berrettini In Nadal Half