01-30-2017, 07:05 AM
Paul, not sure I'd call Federer holier-than-thou. I'd call him a traditionalist, often to his disadvantage. A good comparison would be Adam Gilchrist who honoured a long-lost tradition of walking even in the case of feathered edges which were imperceptible to umpires.
In Federer's case, he clung to his small-headed raquet, didn't like the Hawkeye system, and didn't like injury time-outs. His coaches begged him to move to a larger raquet for years but he only made the change recently. He seemed to make ridiculous challenges as if to underline his dislike of Hawkeye, but now he uses it wisely like every other player (and to good effect last night). And he has come to terms with the fact that the rules allow injury timeouts rather than players being forced to play despite injuries. He now uses them like other players do.
If he'd railed against other players' using large-headed raquets or injury timeouts in the past (rather than criticising the rules that allow them to do so), I'd agree he's now being hypocritical. But if not, then he's just going with the flow after some idiosyncratic resistance.
As for the injury timeouts, no one can prove Federer had no injury. He's a 35 year old and it's unlikely he was playing without any niggle or strain. Getting a massage and a retape makes sense if it's allowed, just as it makes sense for footy players to get a massage late in games before returning late in the game.
It used to be that niggles and cramps were bad luck. Players were expected to work on their conditioning to avoid such problems in gruelling matches. Remember when Pat Rafter sweated so much that he lost electrolytes and collapsed on the court in convulsions? He was well ahead of Agassi in their AO match at the time. Rafter was forced to withdraw as there were no injury timeouts allowed back then for a loss of conditioning. When Agassi was asked whether he felt that the victory was undeserved, he responded angrily that the game was as much about making sure you could last for 5 sets as it was about winning the first 2 sets.
The tennis authorities blinked later on for fear of being sued by a player who was required to play on with cramps or strains. Now, the rules allow treatment for niggles or loss of conditioning. No doubt players from Cash's era hate the change and Federer would prefer a return to the more unforgiving rules of the past. But if you can't beat them, you might as well join them.
In Federer's case, he clung to his small-headed raquet, didn't like the Hawkeye system, and didn't like injury time-outs. His coaches begged him to move to a larger raquet for years but he only made the change recently. He seemed to make ridiculous challenges as if to underline his dislike of Hawkeye, but now he uses it wisely like every other player (and to good effect last night). And he has come to terms with the fact that the rules allow injury timeouts rather than players being forced to play despite injuries. He now uses them like other players do.
If he'd railed against other players' using large-headed raquets or injury timeouts in the past (rather than criticising the rules that allow them to do so), I'd agree he's now being hypocritical. But if not, then he's just going with the flow after some idiosyncratic resistance.
As for the injury timeouts, no one can prove Federer had no injury. He's a 35 year old and it's unlikely he was playing without any niggle or strain. Getting a massage and a retape makes sense if it's allowed, just as it makes sense for footy players to get a massage late in games before returning late in the game.
It used to be that niggles and cramps were bad luck. Players were expected to work on their conditioning to avoid such problems in gruelling matches. Remember when Pat Rafter sweated so much that he lost electrolytes and collapsed on the court in convulsions? He was well ahead of Agassi in their AO match at the time. Rafter was forced to withdraw as there were no injury timeouts allowed back then for a loss of conditioning. When Agassi was asked whether he felt that the victory was undeserved, he responded angrily that the game was as much about making sure you could last for 5 sets as it was about winning the first 2 sets.
The tennis authorities blinked later on for fear of being sued by a player who was required to play on with cramps or strains. Now, the rules allow treatment for niggles or loss of conditioning. No doubt players from Cash's era hate the change and Federer would prefer a return to the more unforgiving rules of the past. But if you can't beat them, you might as well join them.