Comments on: Serena Williams gets $175,000 fine and two-year probation

By: marine

marine — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 08:48:25 +0000

Oh my god, fyoto, race card again?! You're right Marija,this really is "no comment" kind of BS.

By: Marija

Marija — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 13:02:45 +0000

Flyto, I can't even comment on what you're accusing me of.

By: fyoto

fyoto — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 22:17:02 +0000

Marija you come across as a racist,I think you were hoping for an outright ban but Serena has never done this to the linejudges but has been a victim at Roland Garros and many times at the USA OPEN.Kim was gifted that slam and next year will not bring her what she is hoping for.
Serena will triumph many times next year and will distance herself from her peers.

By: Marija

Marija — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:20:35 +0000

Thank you for coming back, Zuleika. I'm glad you will stay around.

For a start, just have fun and try your luck at the contest.

By: Zuleika

Zuleika — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 21:16:01 +0000

I still love your site Marija, so I will still participate but I hope only when I don't get spammed by insults, perhaps I'll try to be more politically correct.

By: marine

marine — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:46:28 +0000

By the way sorry for the typos in my comments. Had a loong day today :0)

By: marine

marine — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:44:36 +0000

I think the effectiveness of the punishment is the key factor when putting them in place. When you think about it, why a punishments are given? In order to make a player stop and think and prevent the bad conduct in the future.
Therefore if a player commits an offence their punishment should be harsh enough to make them change their ways. If the punishments are too light and symbolic then there's no real point putting any in place. Because once a player earns enough not to be hurt by them they're just going to carry on behaving badly. John McEnroe is a shining example, sadly enough he built his marketing strategy on his awful approach of the on court official. And he was the reason why authorities had to re-think the harshness of the punishment. Serena, Yanina and others who can't handle their aggression at times show the tennis authorities they need to think again.

By: marine

marine — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 00:32:05 +0000

Ella, under the rules of ITF she could have been legitimately stripped of all of the price money or suspended. Back in the day John McEnroe also earned ban from Australian Open and also 2 months suspension for verbal assaults against the judges. So this type of punishment actually does fit the crime and it is no precedent,I was used before.

By: Ella

Ella — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:53:55 +0000

Also Marine, you might find this excerpt useful, from the Associated Press:

"Williams' outburst drew a $10,000 fine from the U.S. Tennis Association in September — the maximum onsite penalty a tennis player can face. But because it happened at a Grand Slam tournament, Babcock was charged with investigating whether further punishment was merited.

He concluded that Williams violated the "major offense" rule for "aggravated behavior." The Grand Slam committee — with one representative from each of the sport's four major championships, including USTA president Lucy Garvin — approved his decision Saturday.

"As a voting member of the Grand Slam committee, the USTA agrees with the additional penalties levied against Serena Williams for her on-court behavior during her semifinal match at the 2009 U.S. Open," the USTA said in a statement released to the AP. "The USTA looks forward to Ms. Williams competing in the 2010 US Open."

Babcock said a "major offense" under Grand Slam rules is "any conduct that is determined to be the 'major offense' of 'aggravated behavior' or 'conduct detrimental to the game."' There is no specific definition of what sort of actions constitute a "major offense."

He said the highest possible fine that Williams could face — $175,000, if she violates her Grand Slam probation — was chosen because it is the difference in winnings between reaching the quarterfinals and semifinals at the U.S. Open. The $10,000 Williams already was docked by the USTA will be counted toward that total; that's why she is paying half of $165,000 now."

By: Ella

Ella — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 23:52:07 +0000

Marine, you are comparing effectiveness of punishments but not the actual crimes committed? How is what Yanina did less severe than what Serena did? Yanina swore her head off, smashed her raquet and balls several times over the fence, received several code violations and was finally defaulted early in the second set when she struck a ball so hard it injured a lineswoman, when Serena only yelled and cursed at one. Is it because Serena is #1 and at a slam that it matters? and Yanina was at a smaller tourny so it can be swept under the rug? Also, Yanina was not fined for attacking a linesperson, her punishment was taking away prize money according to ITF rules already in place, that's not the definition of a fine. Serena was already fined the maximum by the USTA for the match default, and she was FURTHER INVESTIGATED for a heavier fine by the Grand Slam committee, not the ITF. The ITF took away Yanina's earnings with no fine for a stronger offense-how is that equal? The fact that Wickmayer earns less is already the reason why the rule is to take away prize money for DEFAULTS, and not actual behaviour-she was not fined for injuring the woman, only lost prize money because she was defaulted for being a brat, that's her fault, not the ITF's (she was not "further investigated" by ITF like Serena was with the Grand Slam committee).
Also, the Flemish anti-doping committee banned Yanina, not the ITF, so if you are only comparing her doping ban with Serena's outburst, that is a completely off comparison because they were dealt with by different committees.