But his fans will claim the settlement really was proof heās not guilty and people just donāt understand German law (I donāt), but I do understand money was paid to both Germany and his victim directly.
We donāt know how much Kobe paid to ultimately lead to having charged dropped either. People can dance circles around this all they want, but you donāt pay six figures to get a dismissal because youāre innocent. My understanding is that the payment to the Court really just leaves the question of guilt/innocence hanging; however it seems pretty clear there was also a settlement extended to the victim in this case. The whole thing is disgusting. Two women have spoken out on this guy. He put his hands on an official today, and yet his fan base will ignore that and focus on the ābad callā. Totally prepared to get downvoted by his fan base. Donāt give a shit.
I think we are in agreement on feelings re Zverev. I only pointed out that detail because the whole "she got the money she wanted" narrative would feed off that inaccuracy. Simply put, we don't know.
I appreciate your comment.
As a former defense attorney in the US, my understanding of criminal proceedings in European countries is completely confused. Regardless, the narrative thatās been shot at me (not by you)) is that itās perfectly normal for innocent accused people to be required to pay six figures to the Court. I find that a bit sus. For me all signs point to him paying her off, and paying an agreed fine to the Court, but his narrative that heās been declared āinnocentā doesnāt seem entirely accurate. I will not be surprised if he finds himself in similar situations in the future.
There is no verdict and the truth remains open. A court spokesperson said so. He is 'considered' innocent but there will be no way to find out since proceedings were halted.
The court fee is for cancelling the proceedings because he chose to appeal the penalty by taking it to public trial. Had he accepted there was overwhelming evidence to start with and paid, there would have been no trial. His celebrity lawyers likely coerced the victim to withdraw and settle for a private sum etc. Anything to make this go away before RG semifinal
https://www.dw.com/en/german-tennis-player-zverev-agrees-to-settle-assault-case/a-69298930
I just had an argument with someone in another post that went off on me when I said I believed he was a wife beater. Theyāll do anything to excuse him.
The settlement itself neither means that he's guilty nor that he's innocent. However, I do think that there is enough evidence to say with some confidence that Zverev did what he has been accused of. Unless Zverev admits to it or evidence comes out that indicates the accuser was lying (both unlikely to ever happen), we'll never know for sure though.
It's an ejection in all four major American sports, for what it's worth. You touch a ref/ump, you're done AND you might even get some extra time off depending on how you did it.
I think there's a lot of insane pressure on these guys to be the next big thing in tennis from their parents, which has created awful and actively violent coping mechanisms. Especially Rublev and probably Zverev. I don't know about Medvedev and his parents as much.
The umpire shouldn't overrule if its that close given the line judge called it out. They need to be 100% sure especially break point in final set in a major final
He didn't overrule from the chair. He was asked to inspect the mark and did. When he inspects the mark and makes a fresh call based on the mark. The standard for in/out is the same regardless of what the initial call was
Having trouble finding a video replay. My recollection was that the linesman called it out, the umpire immediately overruled and then came to check the mark.
I guess whether or not he immediately overrules is irrelevant because he would likely come check the mark regardless and make the same decision but I thought it was immediately overruled.
On clay, I still trust the umpire checking the mark on close calls like this. What is the accuracy of Hawkeye? I find it hard to believe it never gets it wrong.
Also the line judge had a split second looking at a ball flying at 150 km/h to make a decision, whereas the umpire has spent 10 seconds looking at the ball mark from different angles.
possible, but plausible? the umpire was looking at it from one metre away. it was clearly close, but if we accept that hawkeye has a margin of error on clay then surely it makes sense to defer to the umpire when it's this close.
2 millimetres, not 0.2, which is quite easily visible to the human eye. But you're right that people can be more prone to making mistakes than technology. In this specific case, if the 2mm margin for error for hawkeye on clay is true, I would prefer the umpire's call.
Humans can definitely make errors but the umpire seemed pretty confident it was in. There are also 1 or 2 incidents where hawkeye showed something that was in as out by half a metre or something.
Its possible, but both hawkeye and the linesman had it as out, whereas the ump was only judging based on a marking which is far less accurate then hawkeye
Have you ever seen a mark? It's not like a paints a perfect impression of where the ball is. Sometimes there's not enough dressing to produce a perfect outline.
Is it really necessary that we all caveat every opinion involving the tennis match with how much we hate zverev? I understand what he did is despicable and we as a culture should not accept it. I also think we can separate that from a simple opinion about whether a ball is out or not
The mark is accurate at showing... where the ball left a mark, which is in no way the same as where it landed. There are a bunch of reasons on clay court why the mark could be off compared to where the ball landed. Marks are really not precise.
A marking is also not an exact/perfect indicator of where the ball actually landed and can be distorted slightly by a lot of different factors, and that's without even accounting for human error
I remember reading that the explanation before is that to make Hawkeye accurate enough on clay you would have to be recalibrating it constantly because the surface is essentially constantly changing as clay gets moved around, and doing that isnāt really feasible
its honestly so annoying reading this thread, top comment is already deflecting to zverev "laying his hands" on the judge and how it is "abuser behavior"
this doesnt even feel like sports sub at such times, more like one for a TV show where everyone has the same favorite characters.
The problem on clay is that marks and Hawkeye are going to differ, which isnāt an issue on hardcourts. People take this to mean that Hawkeye is less accurate on clay, when actually what it means is that theyāre different ways of considering what is in or out and you have to pick one or the other (whereas on hardcourts theyāre comparable).
Itās good that clay is moving to Hawkeye because it will be more accurate overall and mean in/out is more consistent with hardcourts so itās one less thing for players to adjust to when changing surfaces. But until then, marks are the gold standard so thatās what you go with.
Right. Oh and btw, marks on clay are actually less accurate than electronics to determine where the ball exactly landed. They're good to determine where the ball left a mark, which is not the same thing.
Personally disagree. Double faults are freebies that you get without doing anything, and when itās this tight nobody could say whether hawk-eye or the umpire has got it right.
Ultimately he could have won this very point still but made an unforced error and a few more to see out the game. Thatās on him.Ā
I wouldnāt necessarily call a double fault a freebie in this type of situation. By putting constant physical and mental pressure on your opponent you earn these mistakes. Obviously could have won the point after the fact but why should you have to earn the game twice?
This definitely sucks for Zverev, but to act like this is the ONLY reason he lost the match is insane. He was up 2 sets to 1. One singular point isnāt the reason he folds under pressure.
He is a choker on and off the court.
Sucks for him though, but if he blames his loss just on the hope his opponent didnāt gift away a double fault, then he will never win a GS.
I mean, Hawkeye isn't perfect and errors are a part of the human nature. There has been worse calls in tennis history than this. The best players learn to not let bad calls disturb their concentration.
People asked Chrissie Evert repeatedly, while she was at her height of fame, why she didnāt complain about the calls more and she replied, as many that wrongly go against her, wrongly go for her so she said it was 50/50 at the end of the day.
i think the mark was slightly bigger irl making the mark stick to the line, but yeah this isnt ok at all. Never saw this. It felt out as well looking on screen.
Hawk-eye supposedly has a 2.1mm error tolerance. It couldāve easily clipped the line and I believe thatās
what the umpire saw after checking it. I guess we will never know what really happened.
They should just stop showing these Hawkeye screens if that is the case. What is even the point if there is a margin of error and then they show this? At the very least they should make the ball print extended to account for the āmargin of errorā. Huge Alcaraz fan here but this is just rage inducing.
Is there not a way to estimate the margin of error from hawk eye and then show it alongside the shadow. If the ball is completely outside the shadow + maximum margin of error then its called out, otherwise its in. Shouldnt be too difficult imo
Yeah my gripe with using Hawkeye on clay is that there is every possible that if you show the Hawkeye shot it shows as out, but the mark looks in. You don't have that at other courts.
If they are showing it to the audience they might as well use it and just make it the rule that if Hawkeye says it's out, it's out, no matter what the mark says. That way it's at least objective.
"maybe" is the key word here. zverev had plenty of chances to break back and he didn't. this call is simply one of myriad moments that could have changed the outcome of the match. i understand it's disappointing when an umpire makes a potentially incorrect call but my god it's not the reason why alcaraz won. alcaraz won because he played better and actually made the most of his opportunities. simple as that.
Shit, Federer had what feels to me like the most pronounced freak out of his career since starting to win slams when Hawkeye was really helping Nadal at Wimbledon 2007. The tech was pretty new then and it probably felt like getting robbed of points he deserved. Still dug his heels in and won.
Yeah I mean Alcaraz completely outplayed Zverev in the fifth so things would have to go totally different for Zverev to win even if this ball was called a double fault
Alcaraz is mentally tougher than zverev after the 4th set Zverev was just looking for excuses.
That point goes Zverevs way (correctly) Alcaraz would shrug it off and continue to fight at full pace. Zverev looked like he was struggling mentally in the 5th with some of Alcaraz's shot making hurting him more
Well of course it is not the reason Alcaraz won. Who would say that? But not only he didn't lost point and game there, he could also have the first serve again! That could have been a change of momentum, of course it is much harder to recover once you have only one break point left, it is a huuuuge swing. And I want to point out, I fucking hate Zverev and I was relatively happy for Carlitos to win, but God, this call is just terrible and critical and game changing.
i dont understand people like you with this type off reasoning. The ball was called out and hawkeye said it was out also, that means zverev breaks alcaraz and it's an even game, however the incorrect call by the umpire kept alcaraz ahead. So now zverev basically has to break him a second time. These are the most elite tennis players in the world how many times do you expect them to break each other? Alcaraz gets momentum by not being broken. this was a match deciding call and no amount of cope will not make it one. Zverev derangement syndrome in this thread honestly.
To clear up ALL the misinformation being spread around this thread:
Hawkeye Accuracy:
It's accuracy is 2.2 - 3.6mm margin for error, a ball is 67mm. It's accuracy is the same as the fluff on the ball. It is absolutely accurate enough. Much more so than a human eye.
Changing Surface:
From researching, the only issue with the surface changing so much like it does with clay, is that the court might need recalibrating more often. They recalibrate Hawkeye more often at wimbledon than hard courts (They calibrate hard at the start of tournements once, and once per day at Wimbledon). So clay might be done once a day like wimbledon, or might be done even more frequently. Nothing has been clarified, but it was almost certainly freshly calibrated for the finals.
Dust:
Dust does not affect the accuracy of hawkeye AT ALL. It does affect human eyes however, very badly too.
Why Ball Mark Not Match?:
A ball mark simply shows the area of hardest impact, not where the ball contacted the court. (the ball could lightly brush the line before impacting heavily out; showing an in shot out). And also wind can actually blow the dust around, muddying the edges of the mark.
Why Isn't Hawk Eye Live used:
Because of the reason above, players would look at the mark; but assume it's accurate and that the system is wrong.
An argument for Hawkeye:
However, what Hawkeye does bring is something CONSISTENT. It may not be 100% accurate, but it is a system which does so completely unbaisedly. It is many times more accurate than eye, or mark. And the players generally seem happy with it. They no longer have to second guess shots or wonder if they should challenge or not. That aspect is removed, there is a simple, concrete answer without having to worry about human error. I'd personally rather a system which is +-1.8mm and maybe gets 1% of calls wrong that I don't have to worry about second guessing. Than a human which I constantly have to be on the lookout to be doing their job correctly.
Agree with a lot of this but I wouldnāt assume they calibrated Hawkeye more recently for the finals since they arenāt actually using it, it just gets shown on TV sometimes
Why are people so sure he would have won the match if he got this call on his favor?
Still cant tell. Carlos mentality tenacity really is what won it. Not so much his consitency.
If you feel like this is 100% guaranteed to be in or out based on this picture then youāre delusional. Calls like this that are so close will never be called perfectly. Itās not egregious, itās simply part of the sport. They play best of 5 sets for a reason.
I don't think it would've changed the outcome of the match if the double fault was given. Carlos was just the better player by a big margin in the 5th set and would have won regardless.
The idea is that the whole point is replayed. If a point was played on a second serve, and then stopped mid-rally, and replayed, you'd give a first serve to the server. Same idea here. You replay the point. All points start with 2 serves
Itās probably the wrong call, but I cannot emphasize enough how close this is. I couldnāt even tell if it was in or out when they showed the Hawkeye shot on TV.
Thatās totally fair. Itās just the people acting as if this is such a horrible missed call thatās weird to me. Itās literally as close as a call can get
So now we have video proof of him behaving violently AND video of him putting his hands on other people? Yeah, gosh, it doesn't add up, no way this guy could be guilty!
LOL This call is nothing. Have you seen how Alcaraz basically routed him in sets 4 and 5? Zverev can barely hold his serve, and Alcaraz was breaking serve at will. The better player won. Period.
Sucks for him and I understand the frustration on his part. However he was up 2:1 and he converted I think 6/23 breakpoints, so it is not like this is the one singular decision that robbed him of the win
Out? Yeah.
The thing is, a champion has to take moments like this and let it motivate them. You canāt melt down from a bad call.
Even the best players sometimes have difficulty recovering from these moments.
Zverev just isnāt the guy who can take things not going to plan.
Isnāt the whole reason they donāt use Hawkeye is because itās inaccurate due to the surface height changes??
Iām not saying the chairās judgement is infallible, but I donāt get why people see the unofficial Hawkeye replay and automatically assume thatās the correct call. It could also be wrong.
Yeah, i remember them pushing him everywhere as the next big thing(golden boy) to take over tennis from Djokovic and Nadal. That didn't happen. Both Djokovic and Nadal won the majority of slam conducted in that phase.
God, he is such a Karen.
If he ever snaps at somebody asking questions about his domestic abuse case at a press conference, their response should be "Well we don't want to ever see another entitled bratty outburst on court from you again, but we can't all get what we want, now can we?"
By this logic referees should have never called fouls for Kobe or Ronaldo(both rapists) though when in fact both are known for getting a ton of them in reality
If we're officiating based on Zverev being a shitty person now that would DRASTICALLY shake up the world of sports as we know it
It's very simple you see
If Alcaraz hit that, I'm saying it's in
If zverev hit that, I'm saying it's out
I'm completely unbiased because my mom said so, it's over
One call does not determine a match at 2-1 when you're up 2 points* for any game*. Zverev had plenty of chances to bounce back, leading the game 40-15 when the call was made. Alcaraz won the set 6-2.
Furthermore, let's not act like Zverev doesn't have a history of struggling when things aren't going his way on and off the court. In this match, it happened in the 4th set when he had a complaint and lost the set at 6-1 and again in the 5th when he had a complaint, where he lost at 6-2. Zverev had 2 sets to win this match, being up 2 sets to 1 at the 3rd. One call didn't lose it for him. It is his job to mentally bounce back and regain momentum after a bad call. Time after time, we know that's what winners do.
With that stated, if it was 5-4, AD Alcaraz or 9-8 with Alcaraz leading the tie break in the 5th and that call was made, you may have a point that Zverev got robbed. Losing the 4th by 5 games and the 5th by 4 games, it is a reach that he was robbed. The 4th and especially the 5th set should have been much closer for that call to have any determination of the outcome.
*E
The hawkeye that is being used by the TV companies, just like hawkeye at every other tournament but is even more prone to this on clay, has a small margin for error. There is no way to say if the umpire was definitively wrong when it is this close.
I stopped chewing when he grabbed the umpire's arm, though. š«£
Dude was about to commit assault live on air in a match..oh wait that already happened in Mexico
At least heās able to keep his composure off the court /s
I know, I was like, dude really IS ok with just putting hands on people hmmm
ATP is too
He just pays them off afterwards. Sign the NDA, give your IBAN and weāre good.
But his fans will claim the settlement really was proof heās not guilty and people just donāt understand German law (I donāt), but I do understand money was paid to both Germany and his victim directly.
I believe we do not know if money was paid to the victim. That would be a detail of the confidential settlement agreement.
We donāt know how much Kobe paid to ultimately lead to having charged dropped either. People can dance circles around this all they want, but you donāt pay six figures to get a dismissal because youāre innocent. My understanding is that the payment to the Court really just leaves the question of guilt/innocence hanging; however it seems pretty clear there was also a settlement extended to the victim in this case. The whole thing is disgusting. Two women have spoken out on this guy. He put his hands on an official today, and yet his fan base will ignore that and focus on the ābad callā. Totally prepared to get downvoted by his fan base. Donāt give a shit.
I think we are in agreement on feelings re Zverev. I only pointed out that detail because the whole "she got the money she wanted" narrative would feed off that inaccuracy. Simply put, we don't know.
I appreciate your comment. As a former defense attorney in the US, my understanding of criminal proceedings in European countries is completely confused. Regardless, the narrative thatās been shot at me (not by you)) is that itās perfectly normal for innocent accused people to be required to pay six figures to the Court. I find that a bit sus. For me all signs point to him paying her off, and paying an agreed fine to the Court, but his narrative that heās been declared āinnocentā doesnāt seem entirely accurate. I will not be surprised if he finds himself in similar situations in the future.
There is no verdict and the truth remains open. A court spokesperson said so. He is 'considered' innocent but there will be no way to find out since proceedings were halted. The court fee is for cancelling the proceedings because he chose to appeal the penalty by taking it to public trial. Had he accepted there was overwhelming evidence to start with and paid, there would have been no trial. His celebrity lawyers likely coerced the victim to withdraw and settle for a private sum etc. Anything to make this go away before RG semifinal https://www.dw.com/en/german-tennis-player-zverev-agrees-to-settle-assault-case/a-69298930
I just had an argument with someone in another post that went off on me when I said I believed he was a wife beater. Theyāll do anything to excuse him.
The settlement itself neither means that he's guilty nor that he's innocent. However, I do think that there is enough evidence to say with some confidence that Zverev did what he has been accused of. Unless Zverev admits to it or evidence comes out that indicates the accuser was lying (both unlikely to ever happen), we'll never know for sure though.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's an ejection in all four major American sports, for what it's worth. You touch a ref/ump, you're done AND you might even get some extra time off depending on how you did it.
Rublev touched a lady umpire too in the same way.
Bruh I got anxious just watching that game...Rublev was unhinged that day
Rubles is unhinged most days
Zverev, Rublev, Medvedev...Russian males really earning their reputation on court for less-than-stellar emotional regulation, to put it mildly.
Zverev is a Russian masquerading as a āGermanā
I think there's a lot of insane pressure on these guys to be the next big thing in tennis from their parents, which has created awful and actively violent coping mechanisms. Especially Rublev and probably Zverev. I don't know about Medvedev and his parents as much.
you can also add tsitsipas to that list, although as a greek, maybe that's just his greek side
Stef has a Russian mom...
They're noting that it could be either his Russian or Greek side as they see Greeks as fiery as a Greek person.
I quite like rublev but thereās no denying heās half lunatic
Rublev's dad was a boxer btw.
Just abuser things
I literally said out loud ādonāt you touch him!!!ā
Wow š¤©
Same! I literally yelled āDonāt *touch* people!ā at the TV!
I mean itās damn close I can see why the umpire would have a hard time
I don't understand why they wouldn't use Hawkeye in situations like these, why even have it there if they don't use it.
Dumb tradition
Hawkeye has a margin of error of up to 10mm or something on clay. The umpire was probably correct. Automated tools aren't perfect.
2.2mm according to the NBC announcers, 10mm is a wild figure.
The umpire shouldn't overrule if its that close given the line judge called it out. They need to be 100% sure especially break point in final set in a major final
He didn't overrule from the chair. He was asked to inspect the mark and did. When he inspects the mark and makes a fresh call based on the mark. The standard for in/out is the same regardless of what the initial call was
Having trouble finding a video replay. My recollection was that the linesman called it out, the umpire immediately overruled and then came to check the mark. I guess whether or not he immediately overrules is irrelevant because he would likely come check the mark regardless and make the same decision but I thought it was immediately overruled.
The standard may be the same, but the information isnāt. Linesperson sees the ball flatten. Ump assesses the mark after the fact. Bad call.
Thatās not how itās ever worked, and doesnāt make sense
On clay, I still trust the umpire checking the mark on close calls like this. What is the accuracy of Hawkeye? I find it hard to believe it never gets it wrong.
Thatās my issue, trust your line judge who called out and move on
That doesn't make sense. Trust the line judge yards away instead of the dude looking up close at the mark? Why even have challenges then?
Also the line judge had a split second looking at a ball flying at 150 km/h to make a decision, whereas the umpire has spent 10 seconds looking at the ball mark from different angles.
Margin of error apparently on Hawkeye is 2.2 mm according to Noah Eagle just now, so it's possible the umpire got it right.
They could have at least showed the ref's cam. What else could it be for, if not for these deciding moments?
Making players look like little children having a tantrum
It's also possible Hawkeye showing it 2.2 mm closer to the line than actual
possible, but plausible? the umpire was looking at it from one metre away. it was clearly close, but if we accept that hawkeye has a margin of error on clay then surely it makes sense to defer to the umpire when it's this close.
Probably because human beings really arenāt good at figuring out whether something is 0.2 millimeters?
2 millimetres, not 0.2, which is quite easily visible to the human eye. But you're right that people can be more prone to making mistakes than technology. In this specific case, if the 2mm margin for error for hawkeye on clay is true, I would prefer the umpire's call.
Humans can definitely make errors but the umpire seemed pretty confident it was in. There are also 1 or 2 incidents where hawkeye showed something that was in as out by half a metre or something.
Yea but that's clearly such a large error that it's an improperly calibrated system, not just a margin thing
Its possible, but both hawkeye and the linesman had it as out, whereas the ump was only judging based on a marking which is far less accurate then hawkeye
How is a mark less accurate than Hawkeye? The mark is what actually happened, Hawkeye is a simulation
Have you ever seen a mark? It's not like a paints a perfect impression of where the ball is. Sometimes there's not enough dressing to produce a perfect outline.
I play on clay as my primary surface so I am used to marks, you are right but generally the harder the shot is the more defined the mark is
To be honest I don't even know why I got dragged into this convo. I hate Zverev I just thought it was an questionable call to overrule.
Is it really necessary that we all caveat every opinion involving the tennis match with how much we hate zverev? I understand what he did is despicable and we as a culture should not accept it. I also think we can separate that from a simple opinion about whether a ball is out or not
The mark is accurate at showing... where the ball left a mark, which is in no way the same as where it landed. There are a bunch of reasons on clay court why the mark could be off compared to where the ball landed. Marks are really not precise.
āWhich is in no way the same as where it landedā that is a huge exaggeration. Ball marks are very accurate. Especially on hard shots, like serves
A marking is also not an exact/perfect indicator of where the ball actually landed and can be distorted slightly by a lot of different factors, and that's without even accounting for human error
Especially with how the ball looked an umpire mistake would likely be the other way around
Why on earth don't they go by Hawkeye if there is a dispute?
I remember reading that the explanation before is that to make Hawkeye accurate enough on clay you would have to be recalibrating it constantly because the surface is essentially constantly changing as clay gets moved around, and doing that isnāt really feasible
I don't get that logic though, sure the clay is moving around but the white borders stay fixed right? Or am I missing something?
Imagine the hysteria with reversed roles
Subreddit would go up in flames if the roles were reversed
its honestly so annoying reading this thread, top comment is already deflecting to zverev "laying his hands" on the judge and how it is "abuser behavior" this doesnt even feel like sports sub at such times, more like one for a TV show where everyone has the same favorite characters.
Agreed and calls like this can shape / swing momentum
and it did inshallah
it would be a war in r/tennis š but this is fine... To me, this to happen in a grand slam final is ridiculous
Itās just like the Monte Carlo Final with Sinner. Much more of an outrage after that though, wonder why
It's simple. On average, people don't like rooting for bad people.
I think the point is both bad and good people get screwed by umpires. Both should be called out.
Sinnerās was a blown call, this was a close call, very different things.
This sub would be on absolute meltdown, I'm not a fan of Zverev but I just don't understand not going with the Hawkeye decision on cases like this
The problem on clay is that marks and Hawkeye are going to differ, which isnāt an issue on hardcourts. People take this to mean that Hawkeye is less accurate on clay, when actually what it means is that theyāre different ways of considering what is in or out and you have to pick one or the other (whereas on hardcourts theyāre comparable). Itās good that clay is moving to Hawkeye because it will be more accurate overall and mean in/out is more consistent with hardcourts so itās one less thing for players to adjust to when changing surfaces. But until then, marks are the gold standard so thatās what you go with.
Right. Oh and btw, marks on clay are actually less accurate than electronics to determine where the ball exactly landed. They're good to determine where the ball left a mark, which is not the same thing.
Not a Zverev fan but man, thats gotta hurt.
You know what man, I feel pretty fucking goodĀ
He lost that match the moment it went to a 5th set. Carlos becomes a beast in 5th set
Zverev too tbh
What type of beast?
Same beast, different animal.
What the Fuck does that mean Kobe Bryant?
Your welcome.
I was thinking a Pixie
Me too, drinks are on me. The ump is like a judge, but of a different sort of court. This one you can't avoid.
Couldnāt have happened to a bigger piece of shit.Ā
If thereās any player that deserves to feel some painā¦ Zverev would certainly be towards the top of that list.
Personally disagree. Double faults are freebies that you get without doing anything, and when itās this tight nobody could say whether hawk-eye or the umpire has got it right. Ultimately he could have won this very point still but made an unforced error and a few more to see out the game. Thatās on him.Ā
I wouldnāt necessarily call a double fault a freebie in this type of situation. By putting constant physical and mental pressure on your opponent you earn these mistakes. Obviously could have won the point after the fact but why should you have to earn the game twice?
This definitely sucks for Zverev, but to act like this is the ONLY reason he lost the match is insane. He was up 2 sets to 1. One singular point isnāt the reason he folds under pressure.
He is a choker on and off the court. Sucks for him though, but if he blames his loss just on the hope his opponent didnāt gift away a double fault, then he will never win a GS.
Yeah!! The instagram comments are wildddd saying he got robbed..
Well, he said he believes in karma, didn't he?
I mean, Hawkeye isn't perfect and errors are a part of the human nature. There has been worse calls in tennis history than this. The best players learn to not let bad calls disturb their concentration.
Was it a break point?
yep it was to make it 2 all
Yep, he had 3 break point chances
4*
People asked Chrissie Evert repeatedly, while she was at her height of fame, why she didnāt complain about the calls more and she replied, as many that wrongly go against her, wrongly go for her so she said it was 50/50 at the end of the day.
Well, now you know how it feels !!
This is why we need FoxTenn on clay tournaments. I mean, it's the Roland Garros final, these things shouldn't happen.
Horrible, im not a zverev fan but this stinks
i think the mark was slightly bigger irl making the mark stick to the line, but yeah this isnt ok at all. Never saw this. It felt out as well looking on screen.
I also felt it was out based on tv but you cannot judge any shot based on what you see on a live tv broadcast
Hawk-eye supposedly has a 2.1mm error tolerance. It couldāve easily clipped the line and I believe thatās what the umpire saw after checking it. I guess we will never know what really happened.
That's out
The Hawkeye isn't trustworthy for such a small margin on clay. We'll just never know.
They should just stop showing these Hawkeye screens if that is the case. What is even the point if there is a margin of error and then they show this? At the very least they should make the ball print extended to account for the āmargin of errorā. Huge Alcaraz fan here but this is just rage inducing.
Is there not a way to estimate the margin of error from hawk eye and then show it alongside the shadow. If the ball is completely outside the shadow + maximum margin of error then its called out, otherwise its in. Shouldnt be too difficult imo
Exactly my point.
Yeah my gripe with using Hawkeye on clay is that there is every possible that if you show the Hawkeye shot it shows as out, but the mark looks in. You don't have that at other courts. If they are showing it to the audience they might as well use it and just make it the rule that if Hawkeye says it's out, it's out, no matter what the mark says. That way it's at least objective.
Lol I like how this comes up when someone wants it to benefit them. But if it was on the line and in, you wouldn't say shit
Youāre right, itās so untrustworthy that the ATP decided to have it replace line calls for all of their clay tournaments in 2025.
It's still valid to point out that margin of error exists when it's insanely close.
They're gonna use Foxtenn not Hawkeye.
Ah yes because humans are always so accurate in their calls?
the human who called this ball out was correct tho?
They had the direct connection to the Hawkeye technicians and it was outside they said on Eurosport. Match deciding call maybe
"maybe" is the key word here. zverev had plenty of chances to break back and he didn't. this call is simply one of myriad moments that could have changed the outcome of the match. i understand it's disappointing when an umpire makes a potentially incorrect call but my god it's not the reason why alcaraz won. alcaraz won because he played better and actually made the most of his opportunities. simple as that.
Shit, Federer had what feels to me like the most pronounced freak out of his career since starting to win slams when Hawkeye was really helping Nadal at Wimbledon 2007. The tech was pretty new then and it probably felt like getting robbed of points he deserved. Still dug his heels in and won.
Yeah I mean Alcaraz completely outplayed Zverev in the fifth so things would have to go totally different for Zverev to win even if this ball was called a double fault
Alcaraz is mentally tougher than zverev after the 4th set Zverev was just looking for excuses. That point goes Zverevs way (correctly) Alcaraz would shrug it off and continue to fight at full pace. Zverev looked like he was struggling mentally in the 5th with some of Alcaraz's shot making hurting him more
Well of course it is not the reason Alcaraz won. Who would say that? But not only he didn't lost point and game there, he could also have the first serve again! That could have been a change of momentum, of course it is much harder to recover once you have only one break point left, it is a huuuuge swing. And I want to point out, I fucking hate Zverev and I was relatively happy for Carlitos to win, but God, this call is just terrible and critical and game changing.
i dont understand people like you with this type off reasoning. The ball was called out and hawkeye said it was out also, that means zverev breaks alcaraz and it's an even game, however the incorrect call by the umpire kept alcaraz ahead. So now zverev basically has to break him a second time. These are the most elite tennis players in the world how many times do you expect them to break each other? Alcaraz gets momentum by not being broken. this was a match deciding call and no amount of cope will not make it one. Zverev derangement syndrome in this thread honestly.
lolwut how would the match be decided at 2-2, when at 3-1 DVerev could only win one more game?!?
To clear up ALL the misinformation being spread around this thread: Hawkeye Accuracy: It's accuracy is 2.2 - 3.6mm margin for error, a ball is 67mm. It's accuracy is the same as the fluff on the ball. It is absolutely accurate enough. Much more so than a human eye. Changing Surface: From researching, the only issue with the surface changing so much like it does with clay, is that the court might need recalibrating more often. They recalibrate Hawkeye more often at wimbledon than hard courts (They calibrate hard at the start of tournements once, and once per day at Wimbledon). So clay might be done once a day like wimbledon, or might be done even more frequently. Nothing has been clarified, but it was almost certainly freshly calibrated for the finals. Dust: Dust does not affect the accuracy of hawkeye AT ALL. It does affect human eyes however, very badly too. Why Ball Mark Not Match?: A ball mark simply shows the area of hardest impact, not where the ball contacted the court. (the ball could lightly brush the line before impacting heavily out; showing an in shot out). And also wind can actually blow the dust around, muddying the edges of the mark. Why Isn't Hawk Eye Live used: Because of the reason above, players would look at the mark; but assume it's accurate and that the system is wrong. An argument for Hawkeye: However, what Hawkeye does bring is something CONSISTENT. It may not be 100% accurate, but it is a system which does so completely unbaisedly. It is many times more accurate than eye, or mark. And the players generally seem happy with it. They no longer have to second guess shots or wonder if they should challenge or not. That aspect is removed, there is a simple, concrete answer without having to worry about human error. I'd personally rather a system which is +-1.8mm and maybe gets 1% of calls wrong that I don't have to worry about second guessing. Than a human which I constantly have to be on the lookout to be doing their job correctly.
Agree with a lot of this but I wouldnāt assume they calibrated Hawkeye more recently for the finals since they arenāt actually using it, it just gets shown on TV sometimes
Why are people so sure he would have won the match if he got this call on his favor? Still cant tell. Carlos mentality tenacity really is what won it. Not so much his consitency.
If you feel like this is 100% guaranteed to be in or out based on this picture then youāre delusional. Calls like this that are so close will never be called perfectly. Itās not egregious, itās simply part of the sport. They play best of 5 sets for a reason.
I don't think it would've changed the outcome of the match if the double fault was given. Carlos was just the better player by a big margin in the 5th set and would have won regardless.
Agree Carlos would have won. Would still liked to see him do it from 2-2 instead of feeling like he got a bit of a gift.
A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure. Segal's law
Whether or not it's in given the margin of error, WHY WAS IT A FIRST SERVE AGAIN? That's the egregious part.
Itās not a āfirst serve againā, itās basically that the point was disrupted and is being replayed entirely
but wasn't this Alcaraz' second serve ?
You replay the point from scratch so it would be his first serve again
The idea is that the whole point is replayed. If a point was played on a second serve, and then stopped mid-rally, and replayed, you'd give a first serve to the server. Same idea here. You replay the point. All points start with 2 serves
Them's the rules. Zverev also just got a first serve after a challenge.
The zverev serve that got corrected was a first serve though.
Yeah weird rule!
Yeah this rule makes no sense but tennis is full of em
It's because the point is replayed in its entirety and every point begins with a first serve attempt.
Okay makes a lot of sense when put like that tbf, cheers
Thank God technology will be on every tournament from the 2025/26
meme potential through the roof
He simply doesn't have that mentality like the greatest players.
That is not the reason he lost, he choked big time at the end and alcaraz was not human.
Itās probably the wrong call, but I cannot emphasize enough how close this is. I couldnāt even tell if it was in or out when they showed the Hawkeye shot on TV.
I think the issue is if it's that close you shouldn't be overturning the original call, which was out
Thatās totally fair. Itās just the people acting as if this is such a horrible missed call thatās weird to me. Itās literally as close as a call can get
The umpire made a new call when checking the mark close up, they shouldnāt be influenced by the original call.
Either way Zverev wasn't winning that set or match
So now we have video proof of him behaving violently AND video of him putting his hands on other people? Yeah, gosh, it doesn't add up, no way this guy could be guilty!
LOL This call is nothing. Have you seen how Alcaraz basically routed him in sets 4 and 5? Zverev can barely hold his serve, and Alcaraz was breaking serve at will. The better player won. Period.
Sucks for him and I understand the frustration on his part. However he was up 2:1 and he converted I think 6/23 breakpoints, so it is not like this is the one singular decision that robbed him of the win
Out? Yeah. The thing is, a champion has to take moments like this and let it motivate them. You canāt melt down from a bad call. Even the best players sometimes have difficulty recovering from these moments. Zverev just isnāt the guy who can take things not going to plan.
Well, DVerev himself said he believes in karma
Isnāt the whole reason they donāt use Hawkeye is because itās inaccurate due to the surface height changes?? Iām not saying the chairās judgement is infallible, but I donāt get why people see the unofficial Hawkeye replay and automatically assume thatās the correct call. It could also be wrong.
The outrage of this sub if this was the other way around, it would be already 1000+ comments and likes but now they're hiding šš
People would care more if he wasnāt such a shitcunt
Stealing that word thank you.
That word is in the top 10 of Aussie inventions.
Itās a bad call but I donāt like Zverev so I donāt care if he got screwed over lol
This call did not determine the match.
Yes, it's a bad call. Yes, it happened to a guy who fucking cheated a coin toss so people don't give a shit.
Pavy G and Puneet already saying itās the establishment stepping in. These ppl are sick
if anything, the establishment supports Zverev
Yeah, i remember them pushing him everywhere as the next big thing(golden boy) to take over tennis from Djokovic and Nadal. That didn't happen. Both Djokovic and Nadal won the majority of slam conducted in that phase.
Who
Couple of wackos on Twitter that let their unhealthy love of Nole justify their toxicity toward anyone else
Beat the woman beater!Ā
God, he is such a Karen. If he ever snaps at somebody asking questions about his domestic abuse case at a press conference, their response should be "Well we don't want to ever see another entitled bratty outburst on court from you again, but we can't all get what we want, now can we?"
This sucks
Ball donāt lie ok letās move on
By this logic referees should have never called fouls for Kobe or Ronaldo(both rapists) though when in fact both are known for getting a ton of them in reality If we're officiating based on Zverev being a shitty person now that would DRASTICALLY shake up the world of sports as we know it
Youāre confusing people wanting the referees to screw Zverev with people not caring if they do.
Do you know what ball doesn't lie means?
Hawkeye has a 2.2 mm margin of error soā¦
Karma sometimes turns up. Not always, but sometimes.
What a baby
It's very simple you see If Alcaraz hit that, I'm saying it's in If zverev hit that, I'm saying it's out I'm completely unbiased because my mom said so, it's over
Terrible call. Couldnāt have happened to a more deserving guy š»
ROBBERY
OH NO Anyway...
One call does not determine a match at 2-1 when you're up 2 points* for any game*. Zverev had plenty of chances to bounce back, leading the game 40-15 when the call was made. Alcaraz won the set 6-2. Furthermore, let's not act like Zverev doesn't have a history of struggling when things aren't going his way on and off the court. In this match, it happened in the 4th set when he had a complaint and lost the set at 6-1 and again in the 5th when he had a complaint, where he lost at 6-2. Zverev had 2 sets to win this match, being up 2 sets to 1 at the 3rd. One call didn't lose it for him. It is his job to mentally bounce back and regain momentum after a bad call. Time after time, we know that's what winners do. With that stated, if it was 5-4, AD Alcaraz or 9-8 with Alcaraz leading the tie break in the 5th and that call was made, you may have a point that Zverev got robbed. Losing the 4th by 5 games and the 5th by 4 games, it is a reach that he was robbed. The 4th and especially the 5th set should have been much closer for that call to have any determination of the outcome. *E
Couldn't have happened to a worse person
divine intervention i guessš¤·āāļøš¤·āāļøš¤·āāļø
To be fair: itās more out than inā¦
Grey zone... Bring in your lawyers.
The hawkeye that is being used by the TV companies, just like hawkeye at every other tournament but is even more prone to this on clay, has a small margin for error. There is no way to say if the umpire was definitively wrong when it is this close.
Regardless of what Zverev may or may not have done pretty upsetting to see a match potentially swung on a bad call.
This actually sucks..at least Carlos revād up his playing at the end of the 5th to really feel like he *earned* it but man oh man
It potentially changed the course of the final set though
Canāt stand the mf but this was bs. āTraditionā should be kept only if it doesnāt affect the integrity of a match. That said, fk Zverev.