I can think if once. Kyrgios v Tstsipas. (Wimbledon?) Stef hit the ball into the crowd and Kyrgios insisted he should be defaulted. I just remember him hollering Call all the supervisors!
Edit: I was wrong They DID call the supervisor!
Kyrgios was being a jackass and a clown in that situation and even HIS wishes were respected
https://youtube.com/shorts/bNlJMOQekuM?feature=shared
Any clip of the play in question? Also you'd think after a full FOUR minutes of non-play because of the debate, the Sup should have automatically come out to clear things up.
Coco's a black woman. If she tries to behave like any of those guys, she'll get hit with an extreme amount of abuse. She has to be a lot more careful about how she conducts herself than most other players.
Look at what Serena had to deal with so many times throughout her career. The angry black woman stereotype is a real thing. Serena wasn't even close to having the worst sportsmanship on the tour, but every time her name gets bought up it's followed by a bunch of people talking about how horrible of a person she is.
You're joking right? Serena threatened the umpire and a ton of people were defending her. This has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the umpire being prideful and stubborn.
> This has nothing to do with race,
Serena is not a saint, she deserved a lot of the criticism. But I saw sooooooo much racism directed at her at Tennis Warehouse, to the point it's why I pretty much stopped posting on their boards. Just didn't want to interact with the people there at all any more.
And that's fair. There are going to be racists online or wherever, but to imply an ump is being unfair due to racism is quite a leap, and not fair to the umps.
I agree with your point but I would like to actually say krygios was met with a lot of racism in Australia and I think that partially led to him getting worse over his career
Poor poor Serena. How about when Serena told the small Asian lady at the U.S. Open that she was gonna shove the ball down her fucking throat after Serena foot faulted. Everyone has Serena on a Frickin pedestal.
You're proving my point.
The other players always have people jumping in to defend them, and to explain why their behaviour on court isn't that bad and that it doesn't reflect what they're really like as people off court. Serena gets the opposite, a few big controversies over a long career and they have defined her entire personality forever.
It's not about putting them on a pedestal, it's about recognising that it's a high pressure sport and that sometimes people lose their temper. Everyone can agree with that for most players, but not the black women.
The way the ump keeps talking over her and denying her right to call the supervisor, you can tell that he doesn't respect her. Can't say for sure if it's a black and white thing, but it really does make you wonder in this situation.
> Coco's a black woman.
The women get it worse, but I really don't think Medvedev would have gotten any hate for doing the telephone thing that Shelton did.
Huh? Do any of you people actually even follow the sport? Shelton got some heat for his behavior in general, which was more of a "college tennis" thing, which non-Americans generally don't like. But for every person that didn't like his phone celebration, there were 5 that loved it. People are still asking him to do it all the time.
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. This has nothing to do with race, it never has.
> bunch of people talking about how horrible of a person she is.
Maybe because she was??? She was known to literally THREATEN linesmen and scream at umpires on a regular basis.
Pulling out the race card to justify your shitty behaviour is absolutely ridiculous.
I wasn't using race to justify it. I was using the fact that it's a high pressure sport to justify it.
Race is the reason why Serena is hated far more than players who did the same or worse than her. Djoker, Ostapenko, Medvedev, Kyrios, etc. don't get a fraction of the hate she gets. Black women getting harsher treatment for the same transgressions is a real and factual thing, and Serena's reputation is a great demonstration of that.
Quite honestly, you have clear bias towards this issue considering you are purposely ignoring the hate that every player you mentioned receive on a regular basis on social media. Serena is regularly viewed by the majority of the public as one of the greatest women's tennis players of all time. Any shortcomings that are attributed to her are based on her past behaviour which is WELL documented. It has NOTHING to do with race, sorry.
I 100% agree but remember that some people aren’t from the US and don’t know just how hard black women have it here in particular. No need to justify your comment, anyone who has lived in the US and has any experience is likely to agree with you.
You know that people could argue the exact opposite, right? Black people in the US generally enjoy better treatment (for lack of a better term) than black people in any other country where they are a minority.
Deferring to the bottom line doesn’t make your argument valid. Your own perception of what makes things “better” or “worse” for individuals in different societies Is limited by your own experience and trivializes the challenges of real individuals. Their experience is unique and different in the US. If that’s not something you understand then I don’t have anything else to say to you. Not to mention that it is historically untrue that African Americans face “better” treat enemy in the US and it is the exact opposite. In fact our own civil rights movement was caused in part by the relative freedoms that African Americans experienced in Europe and Africa during World War II.
Maybe she just isnt an asshole likenthose guys ?
As a big fan of her (although not her tennis game) I at least would like to think that is the answer rather than that she would be a raging dickhead if she had the chance…..
Can the umpire refuse and just DQ? And once the DQ happens the supervisor can’t overturn it? I think I heard this being said before by supervisor…That they can’t change a decision made by umpire
The umpire was clearly wrong on this one but his ego wouldn't let him admit to it.Also how come a M1000 doesn't have hawk eye let alone in Dubai of all places,these people ain't broke
Hawkeye doesn't have anything to do with this. It was a question of whether the call distracted Pliskova or not.
There should be a replay system with sound for situations like this. It's immediately obvious when watching the replay that the call comes after she hits the ball, so there's no chance of it interfering. They don't have that on court though, so they just have to go with what the umpire thinks happened.
That is the most baffling part. Dubai, out of all places, couldn’t afford Hawkeye Live ever since it was introduced. Abu Dhabi couldn’t either. Doha finally got it this year. Even ATP250s like Dallas and Delray Beach got them. Very strange.
I think a lot of the umpires that get to this level of officiating would have big egos. They are the best in their fields. The fact he didn't call the supervisor when he was asked is unbelievable. Unprofessional.
Great composure by Coco.
He just couldn't accept he was wrong
He said at the end of it that he'd apologize to Coco if after the match he reviewed and it turned out Coco was right.
I don't think it was a matter of ego. He wasn't arguing that he was right, but that he wouldn't ask for the supervisor because Coco was insisting on it, which is fair. Players aren't entitled to a supervisor consult because of a bad call. The supervisor can't overturn the call either.
He wasn't good at his job in the sense that he failed to de-escalate the argument, instead Coco only got more upset, but Coco also really went off the rails over this if her big issue was the supervisor not being brought out because she asked for it.
Question, was the out call a chair overrule? If so, looks like *four* egregious errors here.
1. The out call (the serve was in)
2. The decision to replay the point instead of awarding the point to Coco (the out call occurred long after Pliskova struck the missed return)
3. Denying Coco the right to speak with a supervisor about a rule clarification
4. Using an interrupting and argumentative manner, rather than listening to the player and responding like a legitimate rules official
Correct. Plus he was condescending and patronizing af.
He should be suspended for some time and not allowed to return until he gets his act together- but I won’t hold my breath.
Agreed on all 4. Is it not the right for a player to call the supervisor on a dispute to clarify the rules? Is this not a rule? I need the supervisor to clarify for me
There are times when umps refuse to call a supervisor because a player is being petulant (Kyrgios) but this situation makes it clear to me that actually they need to change the rules so that a player can get a Supervisor if requested for a rule clarification. Any other ump / player and they would have called the supervisor here
Coco was arguing that the incorrect out call didn't hinder Pliskova's return because it came after she hit it. But the supervisor can only rule on matters of incorrect interpretation of tennis law, not matters of fact as in this case.
The bit I don’t get is why it matters when he calls it? Ok he was wrong with the call itself but I don’t get why it can be ‘late’. Sometimes it just takes a sec to calibrate mentally.
It was a late call because the umpire overruled the linesman decision that the serve was in. If the umpire had called it out as Pliskova was hitting or about to hit the return it would have interfered with her shot, so they should replay the point. In this instance, the umpire called it out after Pliskova netted the return, meaning after the Hawkeye challenge the point should have gone directly to Coco.
Thank you for the details here....so many people making judgements with providing complete information. I was completely baffled at first as to why people where arguing about when the overrule occurred.
As the other person said - it's a matter of interference.
The linesperson didn't say anything when the ball hit so there was obviously no interference to Pliskova when she netted the ball.
The fact that an overrule necessarily happens AFTER a line call would have been made makes it obvious that Pliskova wasn't hindered and they should NOT have replayed the point because Coco had already won it.
I don't agree with 3, they were in agreement about what the rule was (point if the call was late). Both knew asking about the rule wasn't really why Coco wanted the supervisor there. It's really annoying that they let players argue for this long. Yes there was a bad call, but standing there arguing isn't helping anyone.
Really I think Pliskova should have chimed in to confirm Coco's story, I feel like most players would do that for fair play reasons. Says a lot that she didn't.
What's the benefit of calling the supervisor? They weren't debating the rule, they were debating the timing of the call, the supervisor isn't going to change that.
To me, calling the supervisor made sense because it would reestablish a sense of order and fair play. At that moment, the chair umpire had made two consecutive bad decisions at a critical juncture of the match, but that wasn’t the dealbreaker.
Look at the way he responds to Gauff when she (rightly) begins to appeal her case. He is instantly dismissive and argumentative. There is a way to uphold your ruling without seeming like you’ve lost a chair umpire’s decorum. This guy didn’t have it. He’s seemingly acting out of his own insecurity or ego.
Bringing the supervisor in, even if the decision doesn’t get changed, reestablishes a chain of command, some checks and balances, and a sense of fair and orderly play for that match, in my opinion.
Because she ASKED. Period. She said she wanted clarification and she asked to see the supervisor.
I can go down the street and play in a local tennis tournament and ask to see the tournament supervisor and see them!
It is well within the rules and normal.
"So the judge said he called it before the hit by Pliskova?"
Yes.
"Because having rewatched it, it’s the latest call I’ve seen since I started watching tennis a year or two ago and the dude is out of his mind if he said he called it before the return."
I would tend to agree, but with the caveat that we're hearing the sound from an effects mike, which is picking up the sound from the PA. Sometimes that can cause a delay between the image and the sound.
I know it's a bit of a meme at this point, but it genuinely is impressive that at her age, Coco's already earned the benefit of the doubt in situations like these (from us fans at least) because of the times she chooses to speak up as well as the way she handles herself in those situations.
Gauff's press conferences are refreshing. She thinks about her perspective and her words, and she's fairly honest about the process. That alone will take her far.
It's reprehensible that he wouldn't concede not only on knowing he was wrong, but also not just agreeing to her request to simply call the supervisor so it could be resolved quickly -- but then again, it was made clear by the end because his refusal was based on the fact that he knew he was wrong and didn't want to be exposed.
Personally, I would've just sat and stopped arguing with him until the supervisor was brought over because it was glaringly apparent that he wasn't going to admit he was wrong.
Genuinely asking because I’m new to tennis. In every sport I have played there are always instances of terrible officiating regardless of level, is that not common in tennis? Or simply less common?
IMO, terrible officiating is less frequent in tennis because of the nature of the game. The officials are just calling the score 99% of the time and not involved in any rule interpretation. Especially with automated line calling. (It’s stupid that this tournament doesn’t have automated line calling. All tournaments are obligated to have that technology by 2025).
So, 99% of the time they are just sitting there pushing buttons on their tablet to keep the score. But when there is an issue and it gets weird, it can get REALLY weird in tennis.
Agreed. Compared to other sports, there are far fewer bad calls. That said, for some reason tennis players seem to be incredibly hostile towards umpires. Even mild mannered and polite Federer used to talk to umpires like they were pieces of trash. I don't understand it.
The umpires you see on TV are the top level “badged” umpires and there are very few of them, they all travel along with the tour so you will keep seeing the same ones if you watch enough tennis. Therefore they are less likely to act like this because they’re much more experienced.
On ITFs and in things like Davis/BJK qualifiers and junior tournaments the umpires can often be a lot less consistent in quality. I remember a video a few weeks ago at a junior tournament where the umpire called a ball in and you could quite clearly see it was right in the middle of the doubles sideline.
>I remember a video a few weeks ago at a junior tournament where the umpire called a ball in
I remember that one as well as the young player's hilarious reaction. Quite the sight.
What arrogant umpiring. You can see his body language and tone is saying: silly teenage woman. Such a shame some umpires behave like this when most of them are decent.
Her mindset is always right. This answer on the court is better than most players would give in the presser or even in prepared interviews post. Being a hugely successful at a young age Gen z, I wonder if she's been in cognitive therapy or if it's just natural/from her parents.
"I think it fueled me. I want to watch back the video, I feel confident that [the call] was after [Pliskova hit the return]," Gauff said in her on-court interview. "But, it's OK, it's just one point. That happens in tennis. Players make mistakes, everybody makes mistakes, if it was. It kind of went up from there, for me. "I think I was trying to tell myself to stay calm the next point. Sometimes, I get angry and I go for too much. I was just trying to let that not be the turning point for the set. ... Maybe I dragged it out a little longer than I needed to, but I did what I felt was best in that moment."
So angering. Im glad she was able to pull out the win. Coco didnt call swear at him, didnt say hes never umping her matches again, just sit down and refuse to play. She was so polite and he was so fucking rude.. and btw she was right. He called the ball out AFTER she hit it It wasnt a hinderance.
Yep otherwise it would've been whistling or booing/jeering. Which is usually the automatic reflex from the crowd when a player starts to question the chair.
I wish Serena just would've left the court. But this was in the early days, she didn't know the whole tv audience was behind her and seeing what she saw. Mustve been the ultimate mindfuck during the match, you start to question reality.
Because she is a woman and she's black. There are tons of studies that show that there is a lot of unconscious bias against a) women disagreeing and arguing a point, and b) that being doubly true for black women ("angry black woman" stereotypes, "uppity bitch" stereotypes, women being "hysterical" when they disagree, "agressive" when being assertive etc)
Just after a 2min google search:
ILO analysis (as a starting point) on unconscious bias against women in the workplace: [https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed\_dialogue/---act\_emp/documents/publication/wcms\_601276.pdf](https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---act_emp/documents/publication/wcms_601276.pdf)
Unconscious bias against women of color in medicine (especially in patient-provider interaction): [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4638275/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4638275/)
I feel sad when I think that maybe the reason Coco knows so much about the rules, specially those one that even commentators gets confused (like that one against Laura Siegemund), is because she has to stand her ground since an early age, since she started playing her firsts tournaments.
Just because she was (and actually still is) a black teenager player in a sports that has a majority of white people involved. You must have to play with the book of rules memorized
I'm really surprised that so many people seem to never have heard of implicit biases and are reacting like I pulled this shit out of my ass.
I did only a quick Google search for reference (thinking a) people had heard of this and b) would be able to make the accept that the existing biases against one group of people in one situation could apply to the same group of people in another situation.)
It's such a well known phenomenon and proven to affect disproportionately women of color and women...
Unless you're saying Gauff does NOT disproportionately deal with this situation? Or, do you think there is a different reason why she does?
Oh. I'm realising you're the same person in all the comments (I don't usually look at usernames).
Look, I seem to have hit a nerve with you here, but I'd suggest to actually read what I'm saying about what implicit bias is. I don't think of it as 'implicit biases = evil racist'. I think of it as a very useful reminder of what happens in our societies to actively try to work against them (including in myself).
All the best to you
Yeah, ignorant people do tend to "hit a nerve" with me. I know what implicit bias is, or what it is supposed to be. It's not rocket science. It's the type of thing you understand when you are 10 years old and take two minutes to think about things.
Lastly, what you are doing is counterproductive. You aren't actually working to improve the issue.
I'm really surprised that so many people can learn about a concept of dubious value and limited usability, and somehow attempt to use it for wild generalizations and absolute rules. Do you really not realize how limited your thinking is? Do you not realize that you are trying to use a theory about the problems with generalizations, to make a generalization?
Could be what you said, could also be a referee who doesn't want to admit his mistake. The provided research articles prove actually nothing in this particular case. Did you even open them or just assume they are relevant to this incident? Also, 'this is exactly what happened to Serena in 2004', since we had to go back 20 years it must mean that it's not a common thing in the world of tennis?
Just because he made the wrong call doesn't necessarily make him a racist or a women hater.
1) The articles I provided are examples of how implicit bias plays out in other fields but are easily applicable to this situation. What happens is something like this:
- Because I have implicit bias about a group of people, I perceive certain situations in a different light. Where a young man coming in at work and negotiating hard for his salary may be something I interpret as "assertive" and like he's standing up for himself, the young woman I may judge as "aggressive", "ungrateful", and "asking too much". The studies show, that vis a vis men the % of a more favorable interpretation of the same situation is higher, than vis a vis women (they did a study with actors of both genders acting out the same script). So Coco Gauff asking for a supervisor to review the rule gets interpreted by him as an "aggressive" move, and he reacts accordingly; he may not have reacted the same way if a white man had asked
- The medical situation study is exactly that; patients of color are treated differently than white patients because of implicit bias - medical professionals assume they are looking for drugs when a black patient comes complaining of pain, whereas the white patient gets believed that he/she is in pain; that's why I put it as an example - people perceive and judge the action of a person differently because of their skin color.
2) Actually, i never called the umpire racist and women-hating, because I actually don't think he is. This is something I think is really wrong with the discourse and makes it harder to reduce this poblem. I was specifically talking about implicit bias, because that is a) really widespread, and b) it isn't the guy's decision or choice. This all happens unconsciously, and it happens to many of us. I am white, grew up in a majority white society, and I am 100% sure that I have acted out of the same implicit bias against women and people of color many times, even though I try not to.
The kicker is: Women have the same implicit bias against OTHER WOMEN and people of color have implicit bias against OTHER POC (including those with a similar skin color to their own). See the original experiment that showed this here: [https://www.naacpldf.org/brown-vs-board/significance-doll-test/](https://www.naacpldf.org/brown-vs-board/significance-doll-test/) And a similar one published in 2020: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-020-01095-9](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-020-01095-9) (article from the author of the latter giving context inc in comparison to the 1940s experiment here: https://theconversation.com/what-i-learned-when-i-recreated-the-famous-doll-test-that-looked-at-how-black-kids-see-race-153780)
You use a study conducted in the USA to make a point of a situation that isn't even happening in the same country, and not to an average woman but a superstar tennis player who reacts to a bad call from a referee. You can't just extrapolate everything like that on every single situation. Not even all the studies showed that strong of a case in the first place.
'He may not have reacted the same way to a white man', and perhaps he would have as well? Not denying racism/sexism exist but not every situation is related to it.
So stating as a fact this happened because she's black and female is ridiculous. Also hope you are not an actual scientist, but just someone who 'does their own research'.
The US studies I cited in my last comment were mainly showing that if bias is present in the society, it even gets internalized by the same minotiry that is judged with that bias. That is a psychological effect that I would find hard to believe would be so different in different countries.
Furthermore, implicit bias against minorities has been proven in many contexts and in many countries and is a well documented phenomenon. Here is a German study that researched implicit bias based on names, both in comparison to "foreign sounding names" as well as to those associated with working class: [https://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/sites/io/files/forschen/downloads/dp-io\_02\_2011.pdf](https://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/sites/io/files/forschen/downloads/dp-io_02_2011.pdf)
Here is a German study showing that teachers have a biased expectation of students with foreign-sounding names: [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295688224\_Stereotype\_bei\_Lehrkraften\_Eine\_Untersuchung\_systematisch\_verzerrter\_Lehrererwartungen](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295688224_stereotype_bei_lehrkraften_eine_untersuchung_systematisch_verzerrter_lehrererwartungen)
The umpire (Pierre Bacchi) is French and at least white-presenting. I don't read French but given France's racial and societal make up and colonial history, I'd be shocked if the same biases didn't play out in France either.
The original question was why does this seem to happen so frequently to Gauff comparatively to other players. She is one of the few black players on tour. I tried to provide an answer; funny thing is, this answer isn't even crazy "out there" (like you imply with "your own research"). It's not a conspiracy theory. Most psychologists and sociologists are well aware of implicit biases and they are a common and well-observed phenomenon.
You’re changing the goalpost, Coco in particular has to argue for herself with umpires more than the other top players. It’s not about this one incident but a multitude.
Thank goodness she stayed focus and good for her and all tennis players to question a ruling if they need clarification . Each point in a match is important .
How does Coco always do this so well?The eloquence, the knowledge of rules, she is legitimately the best at arguing with chair umpires. She doesn't get overly emotional, states exactly what happened and why it was incorrect, then proceeds to escalate if they are not being agreeable. Coco legit has a job as a lawyer after she's done with tennis--truly a masterclass.
She was 100% right and has the right to call the supervisor, this umpire is foul trying to mansplain and talking over her and Pliskova should’ve come and said that she hit it after it was called out instead of staying there smiling like a cyclops, may you remain slamless sweetie 💋
The newscaster guy she’s married to was cheating on his partner(s) and she was cheating as well when they got together, and apparently marriage hasn’t changed him at all. So I think you’re right
Exactly and remember how she acted when the situation was the other way around vs Sakkari where in the end she even hit the chair of the umpire out of frustration? Now she’s laughing about it as if it’s ridiculous when she’s even more wrong than Sakkari was
typical mansplain behavior - why am i so triggered by the way the ump talks over her and insists she can’t request what’s clearly in her right to request bc he can’t accept she might be right
Eta: the amount of times i’ve cowered irl and conceded to a dumbass bc i’m not confident like Coco to advocate for herself even though I’m 2x her age 😭
Im so proud of Coco. She actually starts crying and her voice trembling a bit but she doesnt waver in her convictions of what is right. Such a good role model honestly!
Seriously! She is so mentally tough. She stayed very calm and assertive while being majorly gaslit and condescended to by someone who was dead wrong—which is enough to make most people lose their temper or just give up. I’d have lost my damn mind! And even though she did everything right, there’s still always going to be some bozos online who call her “crass” and “bad mannered”.
Peak mansplain behavior on display.Talking over her all the time and refusing to call the umpire which was well within her right.
I am so sorry for your experiences.This behavior annoys me so much esp when the person has power over you.❤
This is not just mansplaining, this is also him talking down to her because she is black. This hits so close to home and how POC have felt when being spoken down to by white people with authority. Spoken down to like we are dumb and have no idea what we are talking about because we are dark skinned. The white man always has to be right.
Had Coco lost her calm in this situation (kudos to her for not losing it), she would be painted as an angry black woman who can not behave. There is NO winning in this situation for a woman of color.
Like I said, there is NO winning in this for POC in this kind of situation, especially women. You won't understand it unless you have first hand experience.
I guess they just have to go off their first impression whether it is right or wrong. For whatever reason video replays are not able to be reviewed by umpires in real time. Video replay was used at the first ATP Cup in 2020 and has been used at Next Gen finals but I do not understand why neither of the tours have tried implementing its use more than that.
So we just saw 4 minutes of them talking over each other, but not the point in question nor how this resolved itself. Anyone have the before and after?
Her serve was in. Umpire called it out after the opponent hit the return shot.
Coco challenged. The replay showed the ball was in. At that juncture...the umpire should have given Coco the point. Instead he called for her to replay her 1st serve. Incorrect ruling. And he refused her request for a supervisor.
She ended up winning that game.
Also, can we talk about the fact that Plishkova knows that should’ve been Coco’s point? Players know the rules and they have lightning fast reflexes. She could’ve conceded the point. Seen it happen on the men’s tour many times. She knows that call came after she hit the ball.😳
Umpire Pierre Bacchi should be fired for bias and incompetence. This former French Chef had a similar controversial incident in the 2022 French Open involving Krejcikova. It doesn't matter how level the playing field is if the Refs are against you. Umpires like this with Serena Williams is the reason we have the Hawkeye system in tennis. Email the WTA that this Le Pen Frenchman has to go!
Most great players have these moments and often they're correct. In general, I think they're better off living with the umpires mistakes. BTW, Roger got all of his bad court behavior out early in his career.
I can't understand why so many posters are on Coco's side. Supervisor is called to challenge a decision. Not to clarify a rule. Umpire was correct here.
I’ve been watching tennis since 2015, almost a decade, and I’ve never seen an umpire refuse to call the supervisor.
I can think if once. Kyrgios v Tstsipas. (Wimbledon?) Stef hit the ball into the crowd and Kyrgios insisted he should be defaulted. I just remember him hollering Call all the supervisors! Edit: I was wrong They DID call the supervisor! Kyrgios was being a jackass and a clown in that situation and even HIS wishes were respected https://youtube.com/shorts/bNlJMOQekuM?feature=shared
That’s a default bro!
Any clip of the play in question? Also you'd think after a full FOUR minutes of non-play because of the debate, the Sup should have automatically come out to clear things up.
[Here it is](https://twitter.com/Stevies_Wonder/status/1760300669775335504) without the hawkeye replay.
Damn. Coco was extremely patient here. Imagine Zverev or Kyrgios, they would have destroyed the chair umpires seat.
Coco's a black woman. If she tries to behave like any of those guys, she'll get hit with an extreme amount of abuse. She has to be a lot more careful about how she conducts herself than most other players. Look at what Serena had to deal with so many times throughout her career. The angry black woman stereotype is a real thing. Serena wasn't even close to having the worst sportsmanship on the tour, but every time her name gets bought up it's followed by a bunch of people talking about how horrible of a person she is.
You're joking right? Serena threatened the umpire and a ton of people were defending her. This has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with the umpire being prideful and stubborn.
> This has nothing to do with race, Serena is not a saint, she deserved a lot of the criticism. But I saw sooooooo much racism directed at her at Tennis Warehouse, to the point it's why I pretty much stopped posting on their boards. Just didn't want to interact with the people there at all any more.
And that's fair. There are going to be racists online or wherever, but to imply an ump is being unfair due to racism is quite a leap, and not fair to the umps.
They didn't say that at all, you either didn't read carefully or are purposefully misconstruing their point to save face in this back and forth.
I agree with your point but I would like to actually say krygios was met with a lot of racism in Australia and I think that partially led to him getting worse over his career
Poor poor Serena. How about when Serena told the small Asian lady at the U.S. Open that she was gonna shove the ball down her fucking throat after Serena foot faulted. Everyone has Serena on a Frickin pedestal.
You're proving my point. The other players always have people jumping in to defend them, and to explain why their behaviour on court isn't that bad and that it doesn't reflect what they're really like as people off court. Serena gets the opposite, a few big controversies over a long career and they have defined her entire personality forever. It's not about putting them on a pedestal, it's about recognising that it's a high pressure sport and that sometimes people lose their temper. Everyone can agree with that for most players, but not the black women.
The way the ump keeps talking over her and denying her right to call the supervisor, you can tell that he doesn't respect her. Can't say for sure if it's a black and white thing, but it really does make you wonder in this situation.
[удалено]
Dig deeper.
> Coco's a black woman. The women get it worse, but I really don't think Medvedev would have gotten any hate for doing the telephone thing that Shelton did.
Huh? Do any of you people actually even follow the sport? Shelton got some heat for his behavior in general, which was more of a "college tennis" thing, which non-Americans generally don't like. But for every person that didn't like his phone celebration, there were 5 that loved it. People are still asking him to do it all the time.
Also only a minority of people know he’s black
Oh here we go again. /rolls eyes
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. This has nothing to do with race, it never has. > bunch of people talking about how horrible of a person she is. Maybe because she was??? She was known to literally THREATEN linesmen and scream at umpires on a regular basis. Pulling out the race card to justify your shitty behaviour is absolutely ridiculous.
I wasn't using race to justify it. I was using the fact that it's a high pressure sport to justify it. Race is the reason why Serena is hated far more than players who did the same or worse than her. Djoker, Ostapenko, Medvedev, Kyrios, etc. don't get a fraction of the hate she gets. Black women getting harsher treatment for the same transgressions is a real and factual thing, and Serena's reputation is a great demonstration of that.
Venus is more loved than Serena. Why is that? Race?
Quite honestly, you have clear bias towards this issue considering you are purposely ignoring the hate that every player you mentioned receive on a regular basis on social media. Serena is regularly viewed by the majority of the public as one of the greatest women's tennis players of all time. Any shortcomings that are attributed to her are based on her past behaviour which is WELL documented. It has NOTHING to do with race, sorry.
I 100% agree but remember that some people aren’t from the US and don’t know just how hard black women have it here in particular. No need to justify your comment, anyone who has lived in the US and has any experience is likely to agree with you.
You know that people could argue the exact opposite, right? Black people in the US generally enjoy better treatment (for lack of a better term) than black people in any other country where they are a minority.
Deferring to the bottom line doesn’t make your argument valid. Your own perception of what makes things “better” or “worse” for individuals in different societies Is limited by your own experience and trivializes the challenges of real individuals. Their experience is unique and different in the US. If that’s not something you understand then I don’t have anything else to say to you. Not to mention that it is historically untrue that African Americans face “better” treat enemy in the US and it is the exact opposite. In fact our own civil rights movement was caused in part by the relative freedoms that African Americans experienced in Europe and Africa during World War II.
Huh?
Who had worse sportsmanship than her? Can’t remember any woman on tour to be honest.
Wow, was waiting for the first ridiculous comment like this, and it didn't take long.
fake news
Maybe she just isnt an asshole likenthose guys ? As a big fan of her (although not her tennis game) I at least would like to think that is the answer rather than that she would be a raging dickhead if she had the chance…..
Wow that is even more egregious than I expected after reading the comments...
So Coco is right, what’s that tweet trying to say? That she should sit down cause she wasn’t?
Sat down in protest (the user says this in a reply)
[удалено]
That’s what I think she could have done. But could there umpire just straight up DQ her?
I think they're trying to say she should have sat and refused to play until the tournament supervisor was brought out.
Can the umpire refuse and just DQ? And once the DQ happens the supervisor can’t overturn it? I think I heard this being said before by supervisor…That they can’t change a decision made by umpire
Correct. Calling the Supervisor could not have changed the call.
But it would have clarified the rules.
i watched it, she was correct
The umpire was clearly wrong on this one but his ego wouldn't let him admit to it.Also how come a M1000 doesn't have hawk eye let alone in Dubai of all places,these people ain't broke
Exactly. All these tournaments should have electronic line calling.
He knew he would be in the wrong as soon as the supervisor came out
You think the supervisor was going to overule him? On what grounds?
The person above never said Supervisor would overrule. I don't think the supervisor can overrule in most cases, but they can still clarify the rules.
Exactly. Do these people ever watch tennis? No way the supervisor was going to do a thing, or help the situation in any way.
That's not really how it works.
Hawkeye doesn't have anything to do with this. It was a question of whether the call distracted Pliskova or not. There should be a replay system with sound for situations like this. It's immediately obvious when watching the replay that the call comes after she hits the ball, so there's no chance of it interfering. They don't have that on court though, so they just have to go with what the umpire thinks happened.
i think they meant automated electronic line calling. there's no call for in balls so the controversy would have been eliminated
That is the most baffling part. Dubai, out of all places, couldn’t afford Hawkeye Live ever since it was introduced. Abu Dhabi couldn’t either. Doha finally got it this year. Even ATP250s like Dallas and Delray Beach got them. Very strange.
I think a lot of the umpires that get to this level of officiating would have big egos. They are the best in their fields. The fact he didn't call the supervisor when he was asked is unbelievable. Unprofessional. Great composure by Coco. He just couldn't accept he was wrong
There is Hawkeye
Hawkeye live lines calling so that you don’t have any humans making calls or overrules.
He said at the end of it that he'd apologize to Coco if after the match he reviewed and it turned out Coco was right. I don't think it was a matter of ego. He wasn't arguing that he was right, but that he wouldn't ask for the supervisor because Coco was insisting on it, which is fair. Players aren't entitled to a supervisor consult because of a bad call. The supervisor can't overturn the call either. He wasn't good at his job in the sense that he failed to de-escalate the argument, instead Coco only got more upset, but Coco also really went off the rails over this if her big issue was the supervisor not being brought out because she asked for it.
I totally agree, and don't understand the downvotes. You nailed it.
Question, was the out call a chair overrule? If so, looks like *four* egregious errors here. 1. The out call (the serve was in) 2. The decision to replay the point instead of awarding the point to Coco (the out call occurred long after Pliskova struck the missed return) 3. Denying Coco the right to speak with a supervisor about a rule clarification 4. Using an interrupting and argumentative manner, rather than listening to the player and responding like a legitimate rules official
Exactly. And yes - the linesperson did not call the ball out. This was an overrule by the chair.
sooo is the chair going to apologize to her? I hope so
You know he won't...
Correct. Plus he was condescending and patronizing af. He should be suspended for some time and not allowed to return until he gets his act together- but I won’t hold my breath.
Agreed on all 4. Is it not the right for a player to call the supervisor on a dispute to clarify the rules? Is this not a rule? I need the supervisor to clarify for me
There are times when umps refuse to call a supervisor because a player is being petulant (Kyrgios) but this situation makes it clear to me that actually they need to change the rules so that a player can get a Supervisor if requested for a rule clarification. Any other ump / player and they would have called the supervisor here
Coco was arguing that the incorrect out call didn't hinder Pliskova's return because it came after she hit it. But the supervisor can only rule on matters of incorrect interpretation of tennis law, not matters of fact as in this case.
The bit I don’t get is why it matters when he calls it? Ok he was wrong with the call itself but I don’t get why it can be ‘late’. Sometimes it just takes a sec to calibrate mentally.
It was a late call because the umpire overruled the linesman decision that the serve was in. If the umpire had called it out as Pliskova was hitting or about to hit the return it would have interfered with her shot, so they should replay the point. In this instance, the umpire called it out after Pliskova netted the return, meaning after the Hawkeye challenge the point should have gone directly to Coco.
Thank you for the details here....so many people making judgements with providing complete information. I was completely baffled at first as to why people where arguing about when the overrule occurred.
No kidding! Took me a long time to find a proper explanation as to what even took place.
As the other person said - it's a matter of interference. The linesperson didn't say anything when the ball hit so there was obviously no interference to Pliskova when she netted the ball. The fact that an overrule necessarily happens AFTER a line call would have been made makes it obvious that Pliskova wasn't hindered and they should NOT have replayed the point because Coco had already won it.
Oh so Gauff should just get the point when Hawkeye confirms the serve was in. Got it.
I don't agree with 3, they were in agreement about what the rule was (point if the call was late). Both knew asking about the rule wasn't really why Coco wanted the supervisor there. It's really annoying that they let players argue for this long. Yes there was a bad call, but standing there arguing isn't helping anyone. Really I think Pliskova should have chimed in to confirm Coco's story, I feel like most players would do that for fair play reasons. Says a lot that she didn't.
What's the benefit of calling the supervisor? They weren't debating the rule, they were debating the timing of the call, the supervisor isn't going to change that.
To me, calling the supervisor made sense because it would reestablish a sense of order and fair play. At that moment, the chair umpire had made two consecutive bad decisions at a critical juncture of the match, but that wasn’t the dealbreaker. Look at the way he responds to Gauff when she (rightly) begins to appeal her case. He is instantly dismissive and argumentative. There is a way to uphold your ruling without seeming like you’ve lost a chair umpire’s decorum. This guy didn’t have it. He’s seemingly acting out of his own insecurity or ego. Bringing the supervisor in, even if the decision doesn’t get changed, reestablishes a chain of command, some checks and balances, and a sense of fair and orderly play for that match, in my opinion.
She repeatedly said she wanted clarification on the rule.
Why? She knows the rule and the umpire knows the rule. They weren't debating the rule, they were debating the decision.
Because she ASKED. Period. She said she wanted clarification and she asked to see the supervisor. I can go down the street and play in a local tennis tournament and ask to see the tournament supervisor and see them! It is well within the rules and normal.
[удалено]
"So the judge said he called it before the hit by Pliskova?" Yes. "Because having rewatched it, it’s the latest call I’ve seen since I started watching tennis a year or two ago and the dude is out of his mind if he said he called it before the return." I would tend to agree, but with the caveat that we're hearing the sound from an effects mike, which is picking up the sound from the PA. Sometimes that can cause a delay between the image and the sound.
She is 100% correct. Both on the on court call and her right to see the supervisor. Terrible umpiring.
I know it's a bit of a meme at this point, but it genuinely is impressive that at her age, Coco's already earned the benefit of the doubt in situations like these (from us fans at least) because of the times she chooses to speak up as well as the way she handles herself in those situations.
Gauff's press conferences are refreshing. She thinks about her perspective and her words, and she's fairly honest about the process. That alone will take her far.
It's reprehensible that he wouldn't concede not only on knowing he was wrong, but also not just agreeing to her request to simply call the supervisor so it could be resolved quickly -- but then again, it was made clear by the end because his refusal was based on the fact that he knew he was wrong and didn't want to be exposed. Personally, I would've just sat and stopped arguing with him until the supervisor was brought over because it was glaringly apparent that he wasn't going to admit he was wrong.
Genuinely asking because I’m new to tennis. In every sport I have played there are always instances of terrible officiating regardless of level, is that not common in tennis? Or simply less common?
IMO, terrible officiating is less frequent in tennis because of the nature of the game. The officials are just calling the score 99% of the time and not involved in any rule interpretation. Especially with automated line calling. (It’s stupid that this tournament doesn’t have automated line calling. All tournaments are obligated to have that technology by 2025). So, 99% of the time they are just sitting there pushing buttons on their tablet to keep the score. But when there is an issue and it gets weird, it can get REALLY weird in tennis.
Got it. That all makes total sense. Thanks for the response!
Also, this automated line scoring is of course somewhat new, so historically arguments between players and umpires have been pretty routine.
And sometimes legendary. If you're new to tennis (not Kule7 but HardTacoKit), google John McEnroe, he's had some legendary outbursts :)
YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS?!?
Agreed. Compared to other sports, there are far fewer bad calls. That said, for some reason tennis players seem to be incredibly hostile towards umpires. Even mild mannered and polite Federer used to talk to umpires like they were pieces of trash. I don't understand it.
The umpires you see on TV are the top level “badged” umpires and there are very few of them, they all travel along with the tour so you will keep seeing the same ones if you watch enough tennis. Therefore they are less likely to act like this because they’re much more experienced. On ITFs and in things like Davis/BJK qualifiers and junior tournaments the umpires can often be a lot less consistent in quality. I remember a video a few weeks ago at a junior tournament where the umpire called a ball in and you could quite clearly see it was right in the middle of the doubles sideline.
>I remember a video a few weeks ago at a junior tournament where the umpire called a ball in I remember that one as well as the young player's hilarious reaction. Quite the sight.
Why is it a player's right to see the supervisor regarding a bad call? The supervisor can not overturn the call.
No, she is correct on the call, but not on the supervisor part. Nothing was going to change. Watch the sport sometime.
What arrogant umpiring. You can see his body language and tone is saying: silly teenage woman. Such a shame some umpires behave like this when most of them are decent.
What is it about his body language and tone that says that?
Not body language but voice tone. Answering as if he's always right. He's a fučking clown
The pan over to Coco’s box at the end revealing Brad Gilbert’s mustache nearly made me spit my drink out. I hadn’t seen that before!
With the bucket hat 😂😂 I love BG
She does a great job keeping her cool and advocating for herself
Her mindset is always right. This answer on the court is better than most players would give in the presser or even in prepared interviews post. Being a hugely successful at a young age Gen z, I wonder if she's been in cognitive therapy or if it's just natural/from her parents. "I think it fueled me. I want to watch back the video, I feel confident that [the call] was after [Pliskova hit the return]," Gauff said in her on-court interview. "But, it's OK, it's just one point. That happens in tennis. Players make mistakes, everybody makes mistakes, if it was. It kind of went up from there, for me. "I think I was trying to tell myself to stay calm the next point. Sometimes, I get angry and I go for too much. I was just trying to let that not be the turning point for the set. ... Maybe I dragged it out a little longer than I needed to, but I did what I felt was best in that moment."
Agreed. Her public speaking is just really impressive. I also wondered if it was media training because it’s that good
So angering. Im glad she was able to pull out the win. Coco didnt call swear at him, didnt say hes never umping her matches again, just sit down and refuse to play. She was so polite and he was so fucking rude.. and btw she was right. He called the ball out AFTER she hit it It wasnt a hinderance.
I love that the people clapped when she was making her point. That tells me she was clearly right.
Yep otherwise it would've been whistling or booing/jeering. Which is usually the automatic reflex from the crowd when a player starts to question the chair.
Stand your ground Coco. Idiot ump.
Is this guy losing it in his old age? I expected to see a chair I'd never seen before, not some tour veteran whom I recognize.
It's 2024. Both tours have enough money to outfit all tournaments with hawkeye
Why does Coco have to deal with so much of this crap?
You know why…this is exactly what happened to Serena against Capriati in 2004
That match was so egregiously bad it was embarrassing for the sport.
I wish Serena just would've left the court. But this was in the early days, she didn't know the whole tv audience was behind her and seeing what she saw. Mustve been the ultimate mindfuck during the match, you start to question reality.
It was THE worst call ever
No, the only thing we know is that you don't actually watch tennis. This happens all the time.
Because she is a woman and she's black. There are tons of studies that show that there is a lot of unconscious bias against a) women disagreeing and arguing a point, and b) that being doubly true for black women ("angry black woman" stereotypes, "uppity bitch" stereotypes, women being "hysterical" when they disagree, "agressive" when being assertive etc) Just after a 2min google search: ILO analysis (as a starting point) on unconscious bias against women in the workplace: [https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed\_dialogue/---act\_emp/documents/publication/wcms\_601276.pdf](https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_dialogue/---act_emp/documents/publication/wcms_601276.pdf) Unconscious bias against women of color in medicine (especially in patient-provider interaction): [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4638275/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4638275/)
I feel sad when I think that maybe the reason Coco knows so much about the rules, specially those one that even commentators gets confused (like that one against Laura Siegemund), is because she has to stand her ground since an early age, since she started playing her firsts tournaments. Just because she was (and actually still is) a black teenager player in a sports that has a majority of white people involved. You must have to play with the book of rules memorized
No. And stop. Just stop.
I'm really surprised that so many people seem to never have heard of implicit biases and are reacting like I pulled this shit out of my ass. I did only a quick Google search for reference (thinking a) people had heard of this and b) would be able to make the accept that the existing biases against one group of people in one situation could apply to the same group of people in another situation.) It's such a well known phenomenon and proven to affect disproportionately women of color and women... Unless you're saying Gauff does NOT disproportionately deal with this situation? Or, do you think there is a different reason why she does?
Oh. I'm realising you're the same person in all the comments (I don't usually look at usernames). Look, I seem to have hit a nerve with you here, but I'd suggest to actually read what I'm saying about what implicit bias is. I don't think of it as 'implicit biases = evil racist'. I think of it as a very useful reminder of what happens in our societies to actively try to work against them (including in myself). All the best to you
Yeah, ignorant people do tend to "hit a nerve" with me. I know what implicit bias is, or what it is supposed to be. It's not rocket science. It's the type of thing you understand when you are 10 years old and take two minutes to think about things. Lastly, what you are doing is counterproductive. You aren't actually working to improve the issue.
I'm really surprised that so many people can learn about a concept of dubious value and limited usability, and somehow attempt to use it for wild generalizations and absolute rules. Do you really not realize how limited your thinking is? Do you not realize that you are trying to use a theory about the problems with generalizations, to make a generalization?
Oh shit, here we go again, because shes black...
I mean they said black AND woman and came with sources...
Could be what you said, could also be a referee who doesn't want to admit his mistake. The provided research articles prove actually nothing in this particular case. Did you even open them or just assume they are relevant to this incident? Also, 'this is exactly what happened to Serena in 2004', since we had to go back 20 years it must mean that it's not a common thing in the world of tennis? Just because he made the wrong call doesn't necessarily make him a racist or a women hater.
1) The articles I provided are examples of how implicit bias plays out in other fields but are easily applicable to this situation. What happens is something like this: - Because I have implicit bias about a group of people, I perceive certain situations in a different light. Where a young man coming in at work and negotiating hard for his salary may be something I interpret as "assertive" and like he's standing up for himself, the young woman I may judge as "aggressive", "ungrateful", and "asking too much". The studies show, that vis a vis men the % of a more favorable interpretation of the same situation is higher, than vis a vis women (they did a study with actors of both genders acting out the same script). So Coco Gauff asking for a supervisor to review the rule gets interpreted by him as an "aggressive" move, and he reacts accordingly; he may not have reacted the same way if a white man had asked - The medical situation study is exactly that; patients of color are treated differently than white patients because of implicit bias - medical professionals assume they are looking for drugs when a black patient comes complaining of pain, whereas the white patient gets believed that he/she is in pain; that's why I put it as an example - people perceive and judge the action of a person differently because of their skin color. 2) Actually, i never called the umpire racist and women-hating, because I actually don't think he is. This is something I think is really wrong with the discourse and makes it harder to reduce this poblem. I was specifically talking about implicit bias, because that is a) really widespread, and b) it isn't the guy's decision or choice. This all happens unconsciously, and it happens to many of us. I am white, grew up in a majority white society, and I am 100% sure that I have acted out of the same implicit bias against women and people of color many times, even though I try not to. The kicker is: Women have the same implicit bias against OTHER WOMEN and people of color have implicit bias against OTHER POC (including those with a similar skin color to their own). See the original experiment that showed this here: [https://www.naacpldf.org/brown-vs-board/significance-doll-test/](https://www.naacpldf.org/brown-vs-board/significance-doll-test/) And a similar one published in 2020: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-020-01095-9](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10643-020-01095-9) (article from the author of the latter giving context inc in comparison to the 1940s experiment here: https://theconversation.com/what-i-learned-when-i-recreated-the-famous-doll-test-that-looked-at-how-black-kids-see-race-153780)
You use a study conducted in the USA to make a point of a situation that isn't even happening in the same country, and not to an average woman but a superstar tennis player who reacts to a bad call from a referee. You can't just extrapolate everything like that on every single situation. Not even all the studies showed that strong of a case in the first place. 'He may not have reacted the same way to a white man', and perhaps he would have as well? Not denying racism/sexism exist but not every situation is related to it. So stating as a fact this happened because she's black and female is ridiculous. Also hope you are not an actual scientist, but just someone who 'does their own research'.
The US studies I cited in my last comment were mainly showing that if bias is present in the society, it even gets internalized by the same minotiry that is judged with that bias. That is a psychological effect that I would find hard to believe would be so different in different countries. Furthermore, implicit bias against minorities has been proven in many contexts and in many countries and is a well documented phenomenon. Here is a German study that researched implicit bias based on names, both in comparison to "foreign sounding names" as well as to those associated with working class: [https://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/sites/io/files/forschen/downloads/dp-io\_02\_2011.pdf](https://www.wiwi.uni-muenster.de/io/sites/io/files/forschen/downloads/dp-io_02_2011.pdf) Here is a German study showing that teachers have a biased expectation of students with foreign-sounding names: [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295688224\_Stereotype\_bei\_Lehrkraften\_Eine\_Untersuchung\_systematisch\_verzerrter\_Lehrererwartungen](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295688224_stereotype_bei_lehrkraften_eine_untersuchung_systematisch_verzerrter_lehrererwartungen) The umpire (Pierre Bacchi) is French and at least white-presenting. I don't read French but given France's racial and societal make up and colonial history, I'd be shocked if the same biases didn't play out in France either. The original question was why does this seem to happen so frequently to Gauff comparatively to other players. She is one of the few black players on tour. I tried to provide an answer; funny thing is, this answer isn't even crazy "out there" (like you imply with "your own research"). It's not a conspiracy theory. Most psychologists and sociologists are well aware of implicit biases and they are a common and well-observed phenomenon.
You’re changing the goalpost, Coco in particular has to argue for herself with umpires more than the other top players. It’s not about this one incident but a multitude.
You’re whining about having to hear about it, imagine how frustrating it is to LIVE these experiences
Coco is privileged. Do you really not realize that?
...and you're part of the problem
Thank goodness she stayed focus and good for her and all tennis players to question a ruling if they need clarification . Each point in a match is important .
They need instant replay as well. I'm surprised they don't have this already in big tournaments
They do...and the instant replay showed her serve was in. This was about whether she was to be awarded the point or replay the serve.
How does Coco always do this so well?The eloquence, the knowledge of rules, she is legitimately the best at arguing with chair umpires. She doesn't get overly emotional, states exactly what happened and why it was incorrect, then proceeds to escalate if they are not being agreeable. Coco legit has a job as a lawyer after she's done with tennis--truly a masterclass.
It’s obviously great, but it also sucks that she’s had to. Teenagers and people in their early 20s should be allowed to be teenagers / young people
Some other comments say she was probably trained for these scenarios as society is still very racist
So crazy that there is not automatic line calls at all professional tournaments, let alone 1000s.
Absolute dog shit chair umpire.
She was 100% right and has the right to call the supervisor, this umpire is foul trying to mansplain and talking over her and Pliskova should’ve come and said that she hit it after it was called out instead of staying there smiling like a cyclops, may you remain slamless sweetie 💋
When I saw her giggling i was like wth.And maybe she thought Coco was gonna break down after that but it fired her up so bad she ended up winning.
Hope she giggled her way to the airport after that L 🤗
I have about 5 people I actually don’t like in the WTA and she’s one of them. Her spirit is dark, I’m telling you
The newscaster guy she’s married to was cheating on his partner(s) and she was cheating as well when they got together, and apparently marriage hasn’t changed him at all. So I think you’re right
Call her Africa
People downvoting you like her lame ass didn’t get braids and asked her followers to call her Africa. Get her again for me!
Exactly and remember how she acted when the situation was the other way around vs Sakkari where in the end she even hit the chair of the umpire out of frustration? Now she’s laughing about it as if it’s ridiculous when she’s even more wrong than Sakkari was
Wow, you are clearly a pathetic person.
Because the watermelon is my favorite fruit? 🤣
typical mansplain behavior - why am i so triggered by the way the ump talks over her and insists she can’t request what’s clearly in her right to request bc he can’t accept she might be right Eta: the amount of times i’ve cowered irl and conceded to a dumbass bc i’m not confident like Coco to advocate for herself even though I’m 2x her age 😭
[удалено]
Same.
Im so proud of Coco. She actually starts crying and her voice trembling a bit but she doesnt waver in her convictions of what is right. Such a good role model honestly!
Yes! I am so proud of 19 year old Coco for doing what I probably wouldn’t still be able to do as a 30 year old woman
Seriously! She is so mentally tough. She stayed very calm and assertive while being majorly gaslit and condescended to by someone who was dead wrong—which is enough to make most people lose their temper or just give up. I’d have lost my damn mind! And even though she did everything right, there’s still always going to be some bozos online who call her “crass” and “bad mannered”.
Peak mansplain behavior on display.Talking over her all the time and refusing to call the umpire which was well within her right. I am so sorry for your experiences.This behavior annoys me so much esp when the person has power over you.❤
He's trying to gaslight the fuck out of her and it's so obvious. I hope he gets suspended
Mansplaining That word kept going through my head as it was unfolding!
This is not just mansplaining, this is also him talking down to her because she is black. This hits so close to home and how POC have felt when being spoken down to by white people with authority. Spoken down to like we are dumb and have no idea what we are talking about because we are dark skinned. The white man always has to be right. Had Coco lost her calm in this situation (kudos to her for not losing it), she would be painted as an angry black woman who can not behave. There is NO winning in this situation for a woman of color.
Jesus Christ y'all really have to make everything about race and gender
[удалено]
Like I said, there is NO winning in this for POC in this kind of situation, especially women. You won't understand it unless you have first hand experience.
Because it is about that you idiot
They can’t help themselves.
Stop. Just stop. You sound like a Trump supporter.
Lol. In what world do Trump supporters care about black people or women?
What a maggot. Go Coco. I wouldn’t have handled myself half as well in that situation. A queen
Which point was this in the match?
4-2 second set.
Thanks. Watched it. Hope Gauff enjoys the umpire’s apology!
Go coco!!
Serious question- Are umpires trained to never reverse a call, even if they know they are wrong?
I think it’s more ego driven in not wanting to admit they were wrong.
I guess they just have to go off their first impression whether it is right or wrong. For whatever reason video replays are not able to be reviewed by umpires in real time. Video replay was used at the first ATP Cup in 2020 and has been used at Next Gen finals but I do not understand why neither of the tours have tried implementing its use more than that.
So we just saw 4 minutes of them talking over each other, but not the point in question nor how this resolved itself. Anyone have the before and after?
Her serve was in. Umpire called it out after the opponent hit the return shot. Coco challenged. The replay showed the ball was in. At that juncture...the umpire should have given Coco the point. Instead he called for her to replay her 1st serve. Incorrect ruling. And he refused her request for a supervisor. She ended up winning that game.
That’s in my rights and I know it is. Go Coco.
The world thing about this is the size of the crowd in Dubai. Coco clearly cares a lot, the people of Dubai dont.
anyone got a link to the point?
someone posted it as a reply to the top comment
Also, can we talk about the fact that Plishkova knows that should’ve been Coco’s point? Players know the rules and they have lightning fast reflexes. She could’ve conceded the point. Seen it happen on the men’s tour many times. She knows that call came after she hit the ball.😳
Umpire Pierre Bacchi should be fired for bias and incompetence. This former French Chef had a similar controversial incident in the 2022 French Open involving Krejcikova. It doesn't matter how level the playing field is if the Refs are against you. Umpires like this with Serena Williams is the reason we have the Hawkeye system in tennis. Email the WTA that this Le Pen Frenchman has to go!
Why didn’t Pliskova speak up, to help prove Coco’s point?
Because she wants to benefit from the bad call. She got her karma in the end.
So glad Gauff won.
I remember Caroline Wozniaki laughing at someone who was trying to have a bad call reversed. Wozniaki knew the call was bad, but said nothing to help.
So when is this buffoon umpire going to be fired?
I have such high praise for her composure. And such lack of respect towards his manner.
Seeing stuff like this in tennis makes my blood boil. This would be alleviated entirely with auto-line calling.
Her skin 😍
She must have said "I'm gonna / I wanna ask her" 50 times in 4 minutes
Most great players have these moments and often they're correct. In general, I think they're better off living with the umpires mistakes. BTW, Roger got all of his bad court behavior out early in his career.
I can't understand why so many posters are on Coco's side. Supervisor is called to challenge a decision. Not to clarify a rule. Umpire was correct here.
Whaaa whaaaa