Regardless of whether she challenged, regardless of whether the ball was in - the linesman's initial call of ''OUT !'' was what had CAUSED Radwanska to cease play in the first place. There was thus NO WAY that she had lost the point. This guy did it again two days ago, when he DIRECTLY caused Simona Halep to lose the 2014 French Open championsip.
Radwanska is 100% right, and it should've been a let. Even though she challenged and got it wrong, the initial out call interfered with her shot and she should automatically get a replay point regardless of the challenge. It would be different had there been no call and she thought it was long and stopped play during the rally.
It was a replay until she challenged. Since there was a correction, for all intents and purposes the ball is assumed ‘in’ and she’s gambling that it’s out. I can see the confusion but she’s actually wrong here.
As far as I know this should be a let and replay of the point. If the lines person called out and corrected themselves automatic let and replay of the point. If Radwanska challenged an correction by a linesman it should still be a replay. Much like a serve, where if a lines person called a serve out and corrected themselves, even if the player challenged and it was still good it would be a first serve replay. I can understand where it is confusing because Radwanska basically is challenging a ball that is good. But however she didn't stop play to do so. So should be a replay.
@bhoy029 Radwanska was wrong.Had she not asked for challenge ball would have been replayed. Radwanska asked for a challenge and she lost challenge and this is the end of story.
@silentflight1 There is no "you cannot have two chances to win the point" rule. And yes, you can have two chances, as WTA has admitted in their apology to miss Radwanska.
The players keep on asking to see the tournament referee or supervisor but honestly I have even less confidence in them. They tend to look clueless and tend to side with the umpire anyway. In this case, I feel like point should have been replayed. Aga didn't stop the point/play to challenge so I don't see how she could lose the point even though her challenge was wrong. And this whole idea of having two opportunities to win the point is dumb.
+jonaloin the LU said OUT and then CORRECTION. if RAD wouldn't say anything it would be "replay the point". Since she challenged the call she cannot replay the point
I 100% agree with you. What is the point in the referee/supervisor? They never seem to be watching what's going on (I assume because they are needed to be in charge of all matches simultaneously), but they could at least be sat watching centre court!?
Radwanska is right here, the linesman called out and corrected which is a point replayed anyway since Aga hit the ball and got the ball back. Aga should only lose the point if she were the one to stop the play, but the linesman stopped the play not Aga.
Jacob Haas I understood the situation and the umpire is right. She challenged a ball that was corrected, in this case the ball was in and she loses the point. If she didn't challenge it, the point is replayed. When you challenge a correction, it's either you win or lose
@vandboeffel do you understand the "you cannot have two chances to win the point" rule? You have a chance to win the point when you challenge, and if that doesn't work, you want another chance when the point is replayed.
I totally agree with Radwanska. She probably wouldn't have stopped play and challenged if the line judge didn't call it out in the first place. After she had corrected herself Radwanska challenged the call because of the unsecurity of the line judge. She didn't stop play, it was the line judge. So they should have replayed the point.
Radwanska only loses this point if she stopped it, which she did not. She's not asking for the point, therefore there's no reason for Nouni to say "you cannot have two chances to win the point". 100% REPLAY.
"WTA again looked at the decision of the referee and, according to WTA rules section should be repeated. WTA already apologized to Ms. Radwanska. Though leading arbiter that match the best in the world, in any sport, in which there is a human evaluation, can lead to such mistakes "
For me it s very simple.. The challenge was made to see if the point should be replayed (in) or given to Radwanska (out).. It was finally in.. So, it should be replayed..
You can't lose the point if you didn't even lose it. You lost a challenge, but not the point. You can't lose the point if you didn't lose it in the first place. Challenge to see the ball is in or out. Then if it is out, then the ball is out and Radwanska wins the point. If the ball is in, the point is lost if Radwanska was the one who stopped it. But she didn't stop it. Therefore, she didn't lose the point. A challenge is different than stopping the ball. Those are not the same thing. Stopping the ball means ending the point but she didn't end the point. The linesman did. She used a challenge but she didn't lose the point in the first place. She just lost a challenge, not the point. People, you can't assume a player challenging means stopping the ball. Radwanska didn't stop the ball. Therefore, she didn't even lose the point in the first place.
She didnt avoid anything. She was just checking. And as I said earlier, challenging isnt the same as stopping the ball. What, you have to stop the ball to challenge? Like she has to stop the ball all the time to challenge? Or she could use the challenge to check, which was initially is for. To check to ball if its in or out.
Okay, assume ahead then. Assume that she did stop it. Assume that she isn't just checking if the ball was in or out. Assume ahead. Assume so much could only make your argument convincing. She didn't stop the ball. The linesman called out, how do you not stop when called out? And she challenged, she wasn't the one who stopped. She only challenged. I would end his because I think that your assumptions are unnecessary.
@jjmaze The thing is, if she didn't Challenge after he said correction then they would've played a let. But she did say "Challenge" so the challenge was challenging the Correction thus saying the Ball was out. Also, the Isner match. Man....
the commentator was absolutely right @ 4:28 nouni shouldn't have let her challenge the point... his argument was right while talking to aga..but he was responsible for the mess.. aga had every reason to get pissed off..
Continue; she thought the ball was out but she corrected herself, and Agni challenged the correction (obviously!) Conclusion; you can't have two ways of winning the point!
Either way. The point is over once the linesperson says out. So Aga is challenging to either win the point or have it replayed. It's not two ways to win the point. It's replay the point at the worst for her. I'm not sure what you're smoking
Polish tennis player was hurt. This fatal decision of the judge went to the history of tennis. The passive attitude of the supervisor to fulfill the rest of the embarrassing 'court and correction of the car. "Tears Agnes said it all.
@apkrakow The rules are very fair, if you understand them. The point would have been replayed normally, but when a player challenges, the shot becomes a point-ending shot and you either lose or win the point. To give an extreme example, if a player hits a shot that gives him a big advantage in the point, you can just challenge, even if the ball was in the middle of the court and the point will be replayed because I was near the ball, no?
he's actually right, she didn't have to challenge the lineswoman corrected herself and the point was going to be replayed, but aga challenged because she thought the ball was out, her wrong challenge should cost her the point since she stopped play and tried to win the point by challenging
aga is right the lines judge called it out then corrected it and so regardless of the replay which did say its in should be a replayed point because if there was no replay that is what would have happen
so effectively the lineswoman interrupted the point...baiting Aga to challenge....and screwed her when she lost the challenge, even though she was right there ready to hit the ball back
Umpire was right. What makes Radwanska think the point will be replayed if the ball was in since she already challenge it??? Then if the ball was out, the point will be hers too??? That's ridiculous. Well done Mr. Umpire
Radwanka's challenge means her request to stop the point from being replayed for her certainty of the out ball, this is considered the same actually as if a player stops the play in the middle of the point, she didn't stop the point before the call, but she is stopping it now as the point is still to be replayed, which means definitely that she has to bear the risk in the case of the good ball and she has to lose the point..the other issue is that yes she cannot have two chances to win the point this is a very logical point of the challenge rule for not to be misused by players, and so the chair umpire is totally right in his decision against Radwanska.
No the umpire was totally right, Radwanska did stop the point from being replayed by making her challenge for her certainty of the wrong call, so she had to take the risk of losing the point as a result of her challenge. If you read again my comment you will find that the umpire's decision was logical, regardless any apology that might mistakenly have happened.
@@TarekPianoMan wta doesn't care about your opinion. Rules are rules and they apologized. She didn't challenge the ball, she challenged the in call. Under no circumstance she could lose the point. The umpire shouldn't have let her challenge. That's HIS mistake, not hers 🤭
@@Foudroyant20 whatever you say the umpire was totally right and it is your problem and other people's problem that you cannot understand his logical point of view.
@TheHenMen You posted weeks ago so maybe you already figured it out, but if not the Linesperson called it out so play was stopped. Radwanska wants the point to be replayed because she was there to hit the ball. The chair was wrong. They should have replayed the point.
@bensterk everyone knows that if you challenge and you're wrong you lose the point. That's why the rules say that you can only challenge on a POINT-ENDING SHOT.
all points in tennis should be decided by computers (hawk eye), not people standing 10m away from the point where a small 5cm ball hits court in speed of 180km/h... makes no sense.
+Jerry Murphy Because a player cannot have two chances of winning a point. the LU said OUT and then CORRECTION. if RAD wouldn't say anything it would be "replay the point". Since she challenged the call she cannot replay the point. If the ball was out she would have won the point. she was wrong and therefore lost the point.
@@jerrymurphy5834 where is this letter? I'd love to read it. All I've ever been able to find is someone's interpretation of Aga's interpretation of an alleged letter.
this is soooo tough ... really it shuda been a replay bcoz the challenge came afta the "out-correction" was made and radwanska returned the ball bak afta tat so really shud be replayd even if she made a challenge she can make a challenge on this without repercussions of losing the point but evry tough to try to officiate it wen ur in the chair making the decision in real time
The principle of the rule might be understable but in this instance she did not stop playing, she stopped because the linesman called it out. Hence, the fact that the linesman subsequently corrected his call should not harm her... The principle makes sense but shouldn't be applied when the linesman corrects himself.
The umpire is definitely right. The ball was called out and then corrected. So the final call of this ball is IN. Because Radwanska hit the ball back so there should be a replay. But Aga turned to challenge a ball that was called IN and is IN, so she lost the point. In short, there are three situations here. 1.Replay the point:If Aga didn't challenge, they have to replay the point. 2.Aga lose the point:If Aga challenged and failed, Aga lose the point. 3.Lucie lose the point:If Aga challenged and won, Lucie lose the point.
@silentflight1 Not correct. If you challenge and you´re wrong, the original situation stands. And the original situation was that the linesman made a mistake, thus creating a replay of the point.
First I thought the umpire's decision was absurd, but coming to think of it, it seems fair. the point would have been replayed if Agnieszka hadn't called a challenge. But she did, and then there were two options: (1) she wins the challenge (the ball was out) and she wins the point without replaying it; (2) she loses the challenge (the ball was in) and she loses the point. A successful challenge would have given her a point, so it seems fair that the lost challenge made her lose the point.
No, you are not right because the point was stopped not in the moment when she challenged the ball but when line judge called OUT (then corrected but doesn't matter). So yeah she wins the point when the ball is out but when it turned out it was IN it was replay the point ANYWAY!
If Radwanska hadn't said anything it would be a replay. If she says "challenge" there is only one logical choice: Ball is out -> Her point, ball is in -> she loses the point. For me it doesn't make sense - when it's in - there will be a replay anyhow. That would not be fair.
@mizerathom I do see both sides to it, however officials that are in charge of making correct calls are confused about their calls. I think to challenge because they made a mistake at one point. Why should she be penalized because someone couldn't do their job correctly. I'm not sure what the exact rules are but according to the commentators he should have indicated to her that the challenge would cancel out the opportunity to replay the point.
I can't belive how many people think that the referee was wrong1 Kader was right. First the line judge said out followed by a correction. At that moment the poind would have been replayed. But Agneska decided to challange to win the point. As the ball was in she lost it. Is not that complicated. sorry for my bad english.
Initial call was in, as the out call was corrected. Because of the interruption by the mistake, it would have been a let. But Aga believed the ball was out and challenged. Now when you challenge a ball called in, the point is over and the outcome of the point is decided solely on the outcome of the challenge. The linesman’s mistake has no effect on that rule. I think that’s about right. It’s confusing as hell but the right thing happened, Aga unfortunately had to lose the point.
This doesn't happen very often, but the umpire was right. The linesman called out then corrected himself, which meant the point was going to be replayed. Aga decided to challenge, so it is as if she had stopped the point from being replayed. When you stop the point and challenge, you either win it or lose it.
You didn't understand my point. When she asked for a challenge, she stopped the point. Because the point was already going to be replayed when the linesman corrected the call, she stopped the point and her challenge was wrong, so she lost the point.
David Saturnino sorry but you need watch the video again. Cause radwanska didnt stop the point, the line umpire did. So the point was stopped whether she challenged or not.
well explained, I finally understood the logic of the umpire. Perhaps he shouldn't had let Aga to take challenge and explain her, that the point is going to be replayed anyway (because the linesman corrected himself). But once she challenged, it means as if she disagrees with the replay... Weird situation anyway.
You need to understand its a Big diference to challenge and to stop the point. If Radwanska stop the point, then she losses it as she was wrong but here the point have to be replay as is a correction of the umpire and ir wasnt a winner. Only thing she losses is a challenge. Its not that difficult...
Nouni is EXACTLY right; Radwanska cannot have two chances to win the point. Radwanska challenged the corrected "out" call, which made her lose the right to have the point replayed. Her chance to win the point would have been if the point was replayed, because if the ball had actually gone out, the point would have been Radwanska's. Nouni probably let her challenge because he didn't know whether the ball was in or out himself, as he HAS to be 100% sure to ask if she really wants to challenge.
You guys are acting like the corrected call makes the point live. It's dead and the umpire has ended the point. So Aga is challenging to have the point if it's out or replayed if it's in
@Tom Edmond there hasn't been a single verified source that anyone has presented, in the history of this video being posted, that shows an official WTA apology. There's only been some link to an online tennis forum that quotes some alleged Polish interview. That said, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Kader Nouni was wrong. WTA had to apologize for this disgrace Aga judge. I am surprised that continues to be allowed to judge the most important tournaments. But apparently this is one of the best judges: P
'' Who is the worst tennis umpire ? '' '' From complaints I remember on here, Asderaki and Nouni. '' '' The honour definitely goes to this man. '' tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=463451
Btw the blame on Kader Nouni was not announcing the OVERRULE and verifying if she STILL WANTS A CHALLENGE??? I think Radwanska would have been FULLY informed by then (no way out!) These kind of calls are always tough since you challenge a correction; meaning the ball is out, thus Radwanska loses! However perhaps she didn't have noticed the ball was corrected, it happened so fast. Both umpire and Radwanska made a mistake but the rule of Tennis remained so Radwanska lost the game.
omg that was the worst ruling ever. WTF are these umpires and supervisors thinking? That obviously should have been a replay, this kind of stuff pisses me off when watching sports. U have players out there fighting and playing so hard, and yet u have officials making mistake like that. against...WTF!
Such a bizarre situation, but the umpire was wrong here, since there's no justification in the rules for his decision. Nowhere does it say that a player risks losing a point by challenging an overrule; the purpose of Hawkeye is merely to confirm/reject a line call. Having said that, I'm amazed this STILL hasn't been clarified in the rules after some three years.
The lineman called an out and then corrected his call, which means that Radwanska challenge the correction, which means that she challenged a good ball, thats why she lost 1 of her 3 possible challenges and the reason why she lost a point. Think about this... if they have replayed the point it would mean that Radwanska would have challenged a call and still get to replay the point, in other words, it would be the perfect situation: "Ball was good, ok, I'll challenge that and doesnt matter if I lose the challenge, because we'll replay the point anyway". If she hadnt challenged the call (correction - good ball), then they would have replayed the point. But she thought the ball was out which means that she would challenge that ball anyway... which means that she would lost the challenge and, because of that, the point. I can see why she thought that, its hard to think when your body is on the limit.
"if they have replayed the point it would mean that Radwanska would have challenged a call and still get to replay the point," LOL, NOPE. Radwanska wouldn't've challenged the call if she had to stop the point herself cause she would automatically lose the point if she was wrong. In this case she was taking no risk, that's what all the confusion was about. The umpire's an idiot, anyway, I saw him make some horrible calls a lot of the times previously.
89Pleasek She didnt stop for herself. She stopped cause the lineman called an out then corrected the call. So she thought it was an out, but she didnt stop for herself. LOL is on you bro! =P
rather not, let me prove that you know nothing about tennis since youve been following it for 3 days What does Radwanska care that the linesman corrected the call? The point was stopped BY THE LINESMAN, not by THE PLAYER. See the difference? The only way Radwanska would lose the point was if she stopped play herself, challenged and the ball was good. Other than that, if the UMPIRE/LINESMAN stopped the call and the ball was good it's nothing else than hindrance and the point should be replayed. So the joke is on you and bigtime sine you don't even know the basics.
89Pleasek Ah... the basics. In that case she challenged the correction, so doesnt matter if she stopped by herself or because the linesman. What matter is that she challenged a good ball. I hope you dont use your "logic" on your club... cause you'd be a joke.
Actually he did that against the rules. Agnieszka was officially apologised by WTA for this decision after the match, but who cares about that after the match?
for me we should reply the point because she was hindered by the line call what do you think guys ??? but I think if the ball was out she wont say anything well in that case she loses the point BEFFFFFF????????????? who can tell me what is the right decison to take here??????
He didn't let her challenge "her" good ball; he let her challenge the corrected out call. Had the lineswoman not corrected her call, Radwanska wins the point. Radwanska challenged because the lineswoman corrected the "out" call, which would, in essence, make the point replayed. However, because Radwanska challenged the corrected call, she lost her right to have the point replayed.
Yeah and he didn't do anything wrong here I have to add; the point should have been replayed but Agnieszka decided to challenge, wtf??? As if the correction was not correct, which in this case the linesman WAS correct! And to those who say; she shouldn't have received challange, WRONG she had the right to challenge anyways just stupid stupid stupid to do so.
The rules are a bit confusing, but I think the umpire is absolutely correct. If the ball hadn't been called out and Radwanska had challenged, she would have lost the point because she was wrong. That shouldn't change just beacuse the linesperson corrected themselves.
How can you challenge a ball that is dismissed and is to be replayed? Radwanska's challenge would overrule the decision to replay it. But since the ball wasn't finished playing but was interrupted by the linesman, it shouldn't be possible to be decided by a challenge.
So Radwanska challenged the call in a bid to correct the call that is against her opponent, which she was proved right and yet she lost the point doing so even when she made a return on that ball. She wasn't the one that stop the play, and neither did her opponent hit a winner, the point should be replayed instead! So much for sportsmanship, this is depressing.
Omg this umpire has lost his damn mind. 2 chances to win the point. Lol. No if it's out, it's Aga's point, if it's in it's replay. That's only one definite chance. Goodness me
You are dumb. What he means is that, if aga won the challenge, she would have won the point. If she loses the challenge and the point is replayed, she still has another chance at winning the same point. You can't have two chances of winning the same point, that would be unfair for safarova. Look at it this way in the two scenarios based on the outcome of radwanska's challenge: Aga wins the challenge, aga wins the point and safarova loses the point. In this scenario, safarova has no chance of winning the point and radwanska would be winning the point definitely. Aga loses the challenge, the same point is being replayed. Aga still has chance to win the point just like safarova in this scenario. Regardless of the outcome of the challenge, radwanska would have 2 chances to win the point while safarova only has a chance to win it in one scenario which is when aga loses the challenge. That's not fair. That's what nouni is saying.
nouni is actually right, radwanska could have just replayed the point and not challenged that's what they we're gonna do, she doesn't get to challenge and replay the point, either she thinks the ball is out, and is wrong or she agrees with the correction and doesnt challenge
Regardless of whether he was right or wrong here, I think it would've been courteous of Kader to ask Aga if she was sure she wanted to challenge. Maybe she didn't hear the correction, or momentarily forgot that there was going to be an automatic replay. Had Kader reminded her that the point was going to be replayed, maybe this whole situation could've been avoided.
Ok, how was it then? The linesman called out, then Aga played, so the game should be stopped if there was a correction called AFTER the ball was played. It's completely illogical for a "correcion" command if there is a hawkeye system on the court, cause it can verify (therefore correct) the decision. Correction is only confusing players.
Sorry I meant fool in a cool way not fool=stupid? Just wanted to stress that your reasoning made sense although I don't know the exact provision in the WTA rules (if you do please share). As a matter of logic though, she shouldn't have lost that point and the fact that the WTA apologized afterwards suggests to me that the rule is maybe not what you said it was...
@prezes79 Chyba nie zrozumiałeś sędziego, ale nie dziwi mnie to, bo jego angielski był ubogi. Zresztą Agi też, więc cała ich rozmowa była mało czytelna :) Akcja zostałaby powtórzona, gdyby Aga nie zażądała challenge. Wg sędziego straciła punkt, bo przegrała challenge. Zdaje mi się, że sędzia popełnił w tej sytuacji błąd, ale nie jestem ekspertem.
umpire is right. ball is called good and radwanska chose to challenge. its irrelevant that the ball was called good via a correction. what happens when a player challenges a ball thats in? the player loses the point...which is what happened here.
You might be right for the sake of the rule but the point is that she DID NOT stop the point, the linesman did and she shouldn't be blamed for someone else's fault. Plus the WTA apologized to Radwanska which makes you look a lil bit like a fool.
Let's assume that the umpire is corect. Than by this assumption if a player serves out the first serve, and the serve is called out, and he challenges that call, than offcourse losses the challenge... . Is he entiteld to a second serve?? Well by Kader Nouni's judgement he's not.
This is apples and oranges. By your scenario, he would get a second serve if he loses the challenge. He would not get a second serve if the linesman corrected the call and then he challenged incorrectly. He would lose the point. That's what's happening here. Had Radwanska not challenged the call, the point would be replayed.
Ball was called out and then corrected to in, as it stands the point will be replayed. But Radwanska challenges the corrected call - almost like stopping a rally in progress - and is proved wrong. Therefore she has to lose the point. The umpire is right but does a very poor job of explaining why he is right.
This clown and his ego keeps ruining games. What happened with Nalbandian at 8-8 in the 5th is also a disgrace. How they kept him at work is beyond me.
@prezes79 troszkę nie do końca jest tak jak mówisz. radwańska odbija piłkę, sędzia krzyczy out, ale poprawia się i krzyczy corection zanim safarowa nawet odbiła piłkę. radwańska miała mnóstwo czsu żeby odbić tą piłkę. jedyne co ją moze tłumaczyć to że nie słyszała poprawki, ale to że tak powiem sprawa radwańskiej i jej laryngologa.
THE UMPIRE WASN'T RIGHT i play tennis and i now that when someone challenge and the ball is in, but a line judge call it ´´out´´ they play the point AGAIN. RADWANSKA WAS RIGHT
![Kader Nouni - The Master Himself At Work @ PTGP '17 [25/4/17] -720p](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m_iyIAei27A/mqdefault.jpg)
She must have felt so crazy at the moment because everyone was telling she was wrong when clearly she was so right
Aga cuteness factor is off the charts
Regardless of whether she challenged, regardless of whether the ball was in - the linesman's initial call of ''OUT !'' was what had CAUSED Radwanska to cease play in the first place.
There was thus NO WAY that she had lost the point.
This guy did it again two days ago, when he DIRECTLY caused
Simona Halep to lose the 2014 French Open championsip.
This guy is CRAZY, he's INSANE!!!
Radwanska is 100% right, and it should've been a let. Even though she challenged and got it wrong, the initial out call interfered with her shot and she should automatically get a replay point regardless of the challenge. It would be different had there been no call and she thought it was long and stopped play during the rally.
Though, one could easily argue (which I assume Nouni also thought) that the out call didn't affect Aga's shot.
@@JamaalABivens She still made her shot though.
It was a replay until she challenged. Since there was a correction, for all intents and purposes the ball is assumed ‘in’ and she’s gambling that it’s out. I can see the confusion but she’s actually wrong here.
As far as I know this should be a let and replay of the point. If the lines person called out and corrected themselves automatic let and replay of the point. If Radwanska challenged an correction by a linesman it should still be a replay. Much like a serve, where if a lines person called a serve out and corrected themselves, even if the player challenged and it was still good it would be a first serve replay. I can understand where it is confusing because Radwanska basically is challenging a ball that is good. But however she didn't stop play to do so. So should be a replay.
Nouni: "You cannot have two chances to win the point."
Aga should have said: "I was not even asking for one!"
I am totally with her on this one.
@bhoy029 Radwanska was wrong.Had she not asked for challenge ball would have been replayed.
Radwanska asked for a challenge and she lost challenge and this is the end of story.
@silentflight1 There is no "you cannot have two chances to win the point" rule. And yes, you can have two chances, as WTA has admitted in their apology to miss Radwanska.
Aga trying to explained so cute.
Her face, her voice..
Missed her so much
The players keep on asking to see the tournament referee or supervisor but honestly I have even less confidence in them. They tend to look clueless and tend to side with the umpire anyway. In this case, I feel like point should have been replayed. Aga didn't stop the point/play to challenge so I don't see how she could lose the point even though her challenge was wrong. And this whole idea of having two opportunities to win the point is dumb.
+jonaloin
the LU said OUT and then CORRECTION. if RAD wouldn't say anything it would be "replay the point".
Since she challenged the call she cannot replay the point
I 100% agree with you. What is the point in the referee/supervisor? They never seem to be watching what's going on (I assume because they are needed to be in charge of all matches simultaneously), but they could at least be sat watching centre court!?
Radwanska is right here, the linesman called out and corrected which is a point replayed anyway since Aga hit the ball and got the ball back. Aga should only lose the point if she were the one to stop the play, but the linesman stopped the play not Aga.
Jacob Haas I understood the situation and the umpire is right. She challenged a ball that was corrected, in this case the ball was in and she loses the point. If she didn't challenge it, the point is replayed. When you challenge a correction, it's either you win or lose
@@Diana-yp3mq Exactly. I'm not sure why people aren't understanding that she is challenging a corrected call, an umpire's decision.
Spot on. I'm not sure what these other knuckle heads are on. It makes complete sense what you said Jacob
@vandboeffel do you understand the "you cannot have two chances to win the point" rule? You have a chance to win the point when you challenge, and if that doesn't work, you want another chance when the point is replayed.
I totally agree with Radwanska. She probably wouldn't have stopped play and challenged if the line judge didn't call it out in the first place. After she had corrected herself Radwanska challenged the call because of the unsecurity of the line judge. She didn't stop play, it was the line judge. So they should have replayed the point.
Radwanska only loses this point if she stopped it, which she did not. She's not asking for the point, therefore there's no reason for Nouni to say "you cannot have two chances to win the point". 100% REPLAY.
"WTA again looked at the decision of the referee and, according to WTA rules section should be repeated. WTA already apologized to Ms. Radwanska. Though leading arbiter that match the best in the world, in any sport, in which there is a human evaluation, can lead to such mistakes "
For me it s very simple.. The challenge was made to see if the point should be replayed (in) or given to Radwanska (out).. It was finally in.. So, it should be replayed..
You can't lose the point if you didn't even lose it. You lost a challenge, but not the point. You can't lose the point if you didn't lose it in the first place. Challenge to see the ball is in or out. Then if it is out, then the ball is out and Radwanska wins the point. If the ball is in, the point is lost if Radwanska was the one who stopped it. But she didn't stop it. Therefore, she didn't lose the point. A challenge is different than stopping the ball. Those are not the same thing. Stopping the ball means ending the point but she didn't end the point. The linesman did. She used a challenge but she didn't lose the point in the first place. She just lost a challenge, not the point. People, you can't assume a player challenging means stopping the ball. Radwanska didn't stop the ball. Therefore, she didn't even lose the point in the first place.
Bob smith I had to repeat myself because people don't get that challenging the ball doesn't mean stopping the ball.
She didnt avoid anything. She was just checking. And as I said earlier, challenging isnt the same as stopping the ball. What, you have to stop the ball to challenge? Like she has to stop the ball all the time to challenge? Or she could use the challenge to check, which was initially is for. To check to ball if its in or out.
Okay, assume ahead then. Assume that she did stop it. Assume that she isn't just checking if the ball was in or out. Assume ahead. Assume so much could only make your argument convincing. She didn't stop the ball. The linesman called out, how do you not stop when called out? And she challenged, she wasn't the one who stopped. She only challenged. I would end his because I think that your assumptions are unnecessary.
+Fábio Coelho The WTA apologized to her after this. The Umpire made the wrong call. The point should have been replayed.
+Sisella Lamp Where's the link? Don't post that link from Tennis Forums. It is not the official link.
@jjmaze The thing is, if she didn't Challenge after he said correction then they would've played a let. But she did say "Challenge" so the challenge was challenging the Correction thus saying the Ball was out.
Also, the Isner match. Man....
the commentator was absolutely right @ 4:28
nouni shouldn't have let her challenge the point...
his argument was right while talking to aga..but he was responsible for the mess..
aga had every reason to get pissed off..
Continue; she thought the ball was out but she corrected herself, and Agni challenged the correction (obviously!)
Conclusion; you can't have two ways of winning the point!
Either way. The point is over once the linesperson says out. So Aga is challenging to either win the point or have it replayed. It's not two ways to win the point. It's replay the point at the worst for her. I'm not sure what you're smoking
@@cameronbedeau8542 agree with you!!
Polish tennis player was hurt. This fatal decision of the judge went to the history of tennis. The passive attitude of the supervisor to fulfill the rest of the embarrassing 'court and correction of the car. "Tears Agnes said it all.
@apkrakow The rules are very fair, if you understand them. The point would have been replayed normally, but when a player challenges, the shot becomes a point-ending shot and you either lose or win the point.
To give an extreme example, if a player hits a shot that gives him a big advantage in the point, you can just challenge, even if the ball was in the middle of the court and the point will be replayed because I was near the ball, no?
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
he's actually right, she didn't have to challenge the lineswoman corrected herself and the point was going to be replayed, but aga challenged because she thought the ball was out, her wrong challenge should cost her the point since she stopped play and tried to win the point by challenging
She didn't stop PLAY. Wta apologized to Radwanska. She was right.
aga is right the lines judge called it out then corrected it and so regardless of the replay which did say its in should be a replayed point because if there was no replay that is what would have happen
so effectively the lineswoman interrupted the point...baiting Aga to challenge....and screwed her when she lost the challenge, even though she was right there ready to hit the ball back
even though she hit the ball back in play
Umpire was right. What makes Radwanska think the point will be replayed if the ball was in since she already challenge it??? Then if the ball was out, the point will be hers too??? That's ridiculous. Well done Mr. Umpire
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
Radwanka's challenge means her request to stop the point from being replayed for her certainty of the out ball, this is considered the same actually as if a player stops the play in the middle of the point, she didn't stop the point before the call, but she is stopping it now as the point is still to be replayed, which means definitely that she has to bear the risk in the case of the good ball and she has to lose the point..the other issue is that yes she cannot have two chances to win the point this is a very logical point of the challenge rule for not to be misused by players, and so the chair umpire is totally right in his decision against Radwanska.
Lmao the wta made an official statement apologizing for the error. Radwanska didn'y stop play. It should have been a replay. You're wrong. End.
No the umpire was totally right, Radwanska did stop the point from being replayed by making her challenge for her certainty of the wrong call, so she had to take the risk of losing the point as a result of her challenge. If you read again my comment you will find that the umpire's decision was logical, regardless any apology that might mistakenly have happened.
@@TarekPianoMan wta doesn't care about your opinion. Rules are rules and they apologized. She didn't challenge the ball, she challenged the in call. Under no circumstance she could lose the point. The umpire shouldn't have let her challenge. That's HIS mistake, not hers 🤭
Whatever you say, the Umpire was totally right, and it's your problem that you cannot understand his logical point of view.
@@Foudroyant20 whatever you say the umpire was totally right and it is your problem and other people's problem that you cannot understand his logical point of view.
The case is solved long ago. WTA Agnieszka apologized for the mistake judge.
+Waldemar Huttner can u give me the news source?
+Potro Yeung Clearly he doesn't have it
@TheHenMen You posted weeks ago so maybe you already figured it out, but if not the Linesperson called it out so play was stopped. Radwanska wants the point to be replayed because she was there to hit the ball. The chair was wrong. They should have replayed the point.
@bensterk everyone knows that if you challenge and you're wrong you lose the point. That's why the rules say that you can only challenge on a POINT-ENDING SHOT.
all points in tennis should be decided by computers (hawk eye), not people standing 10m away from the point where a small 5cm ball hits court in speed of 180km/h... makes no sense.
+erelRa yeah but then the average 3 sets match will last 7 hours
That's not true at all - it's been used to great success in World Team Tennis and REDUCES time of the match, not increases.
Yeah but then there would be no d4ma anymore and no one would watch tennis Even for hotties
Aga was so cute back in the day.
@bhoy029 Yeah he should have informed her before the Challenge stating that there was a correction on the call and if she still wanted to challenge.
The lineswoman called out so the point stopped. Why would it not be replayed?
ughhh , he was so condescending to her, even though she was 100% correct, how is he still an umpire???
+Jerry Murphy
Because a player cannot have two chances of winning a point.
the LU said OUT and then CORRECTION. if RAD wouldn't say anything it would be "replay the point".
Since she challenged the call she cannot replay the point.
If the ball was out she would have won the point. she was wrong and therefore lost the point.
+RonkoDDR
no, she was correct. she got a letter from the wta apoligizing for the incident. check your facts before posting lies.
@@jerrymurphy5834 where is this letter? I'd love to read it. All I've ever been able to find is someone's interpretation of Aga's interpretation of an alleged letter.
@Brandovski1 IT's time for him to find a new line of work
this is soooo tough ... really it shuda been a replay bcoz the challenge came afta the "out-correction" was made and radwanska returned the ball bak afta tat so really shud be replayd even if she made a challenge she can make a challenge on this without repercussions of losing the point but evry tough to try to officiate it wen ur in the chair making the decision in real time
The principle of the rule might be understable but in this instance she did not stop playing, she stopped because the linesman called it out. Hence, the fact that the linesman subsequently corrected his call should not harm her... The principle makes sense but shouldn't be applied when the linesman corrects himself.
The umpire is definitely right. The ball was called out and then corrected. So the final call of this ball is IN. Because Radwanska hit the ball back so there should be a replay. But Aga turned to challenge a ball that was called IN and is IN, so she lost the point. In short, there are three situations here. 1.Replay the point:If Aga didn't challenge, they have to replay the point. 2.Aga lose the point:If Aga challenged and failed, Aga lose the point. 3.Lucie lose the point:If Aga challenged and won, Lucie lose the point.
@silentflight1 Not correct. If you challenge and you´re wrong, the original situation stands. And the original situation was that the linesman made a mistake, thus creating a replay of the point.
Holy Shit, she won the point
He's right!
Well... He's right. The ball was called out and for some reason Radwanska challenged. The ball was proven to be in. Therefore, point Safarova.
First I thought the umpire's decision was absurd, but coming to think of it, it seems fair. the point would have been replayed if Agnieszka hadn't called a challenge.
But she did, and then there were two options: (1) she wins the challenge (the ball was out) and she wins the point without replaying it; (2) she loses the challenge (the ball was in) and she loses the point. A successful challenge would have given her a point, so it seems fair that the lost challenge made her lose the point.
No, you are not right because the point was stopped not in the moment when she challenged the ball but when line judge called OUT (then corrected but doesn't matter). So yeah she wins the point when the ball is out but when it turned out it was IN it was replay the point ANYWAY!
What's more shocking to me is the comment section where a lot of people think the umpire made the correct call.
This was a schoolboy error.
@jjmaze True, if only he was smart....
If Radwanska hadn't said anything it would be a replay. If she says "challenge" there is only one logical choice: Ball is out -> Her point, ball is in -> she loses the point.
For me it doesn't make sense - when it's in - there will be a replay anyhow. That would not be fair.
@mizerathom I do see both sides to it, however officials that are in charge of making correct calls are confused about their calls. I think to challenge because they made a mistake at one point. Why should she be penalized because someone couldn't do their job correctly. I'm not sure what the exact rules are but according to the commentators he should have indicated to her that the challenge would cancel out the opportunity to replay the point.
@silentflight1 everyone knows that? then why did the WTA issue official apologies?
It would have been a replay had Radwanska not challenged the correction.
I can't belive how many people think that the referee was wrong1
Kader was right. First the line judge said out followed by a correction. At that moment the poind would have been replayed. But Agneska decided to challange to win the point. As the ball was in she lost it. Is not that complicated. sorry for my bad english.
Initial call was in, as the out call was corrected. Because of the interruption by the mistake, it would have been a let. But Aga believed the ball was out and challenged. Now when you challenge a ball called in, the point is over and the outcome of the point is decided solely on the outcome of the challenge. The linesman’s mistake has no effect on that rule. I think that’s about right. It’s confusing as hell but the right thing happened, Aga unfortunately had to lose the point.
Bingo!
Kader was 100% wrong... that made Agnieszka lose
This doesn't happen very often, but the umpire was right. The linesman called out then corrected himself, which meant the point was going to be replayed. Aga decided to challenge, so it is as if she had stopped the point from being replayed. When you stop the point and challenge, you either win it or lose it.
David Saturnino no that is not correct. Haha that is why there are replays.
You didn't understand my point. When she asked for a challenge, she stopped the point. Because the point was already going to be replayed when the linesman corrected the call, she stopped the point and her challenge was wrong, so she lost the point.
David Saturnino sorry but you need watch the video again. Cause radwanska didnt stop the point, the line umpire did. So the point was stopped whether she challenged or not.
well explained, I finally understood the logic of the umpire. Perhaps he shouldn't had let Aga to take challenge and explain her, that the point is going to be replayed anyway (because the linesman corrected himself). But once she challenged, it means as if she disagrees with the replay... Weird situation anyway.
You need to understand its a Big diference to challenge and to stop the point. If Radwanska stop the point, then she losses it as she was wrong but here the point have to be replay as is a correction of the umpire and ir wasnt a winner. Only thing she losses is a challenge. Its not that difficult...
Nouni is EXACTLY right; Radwanska cannot have two chances to win the point. Radwanska challenged the corrected "out" call, which made her lose the right to have the point replayed. Her chance to win the point would have been if the point was replayed, because if the ball had actually gone out, the point would have been Radwanska's. Nouni probably let her challenge because he didn't know whether the ball was in or out himself, as he HAS to be 100% sure to ask if she really wants to challenge.
You guys are acting like the corrected call makes the point live. It's dead and the umpire has ended the point. So Aga is challenging to have the point if it's out or replayed if it's in
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
@Tom Edmond there hasn't been a single verified source that anyone has presented, in the history of this video being posted, that shows an official WTA apology. There's only been some link to an online tennis forum that quotes some alleged Polish interview.
That said, we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Kader Nouni was wrong. WTA had to apologize for this disgrace Aga judge. I am surprised that continues to be allowed to judge the most important tournaments.
But apparently this is one of the best judges: P
'' Who is the worst tennis umpire ? ''
'' From complaints I remember on here, Asderaki and Nouni. ''
'' The honour definitely goes to this man. ''
tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=463451
Btw the blame on Kader Nouni was not announcing the OVERRULE and verifying if she STILL WANTS A CHALLENGE??? I think Radwanska would have been FULLY informed by then (no way out!) These kind of calls are always tough since you challenge a correction; meaning the ball is out, thus Radwanska loses! However perhaps she didn't have noticed the ball was corrected, it happened so fast. Both umpire and Radwanska made a mistake but the rule of Tennis remained so Radwanska lost the game.
She was sooo right, the point was stopped, it should have been replayed.
All this drama over a point in the first set, and it's (15-15)
@silentflight1 Then how do you explain this: watch?v=1TE0wp9XXok ?
omg that was the worst ruling ever. WTF are these umpires and supervisors thinking? That obviously should have been a replay, this kind of stuff pisses me off when watching sports. U have players out there fighting and playing so hard, and yet u have officials making mistake like that. against...WTF!
Such a bizarre situation, but the umpire was wrong here, since there's no justification in the rules for his decision. Nowhere does it say that a player risks losing a point by challenging an overrule; the purpose of Hawkeye is merely to confirm/reject a line call. Having said that, I'm amazed this STILL hasn't been clarified in the rules after some three years.
The lineman called an out and then corrected his call, which means that Radwanska challenge the correction, which means that she challenged a good ball, thats why she lost 1 of her 3 possible challenges and the reason why she lost a point. Think about this... if they have replayed the point it would mean that Radwanska would have challenged a call and still get to replay the point, in other words, it would be the perfect situation: "Ball was good, ok, I'll challenge that and doesnt matter if I lose the challenge, because we'll replay the point anyway".
If she hadnt challenged the call (correction - good ball), then they would have replayed the point. But she thought the ball was out which means that she would challenge that ball anyway... which means that she would lost the challenge and, because of that, the point.
I can see why she thought that, its hard to think when your body is on the limit.
"if they have replayed the point it would mean that Radwanska would have challenged a call and still get to replay the point,"
LOL, NOPE. Radwanska wouldn't've challenged the call if she had to stop the point herself cause she would automatically lose the point if she was wrong. In this case she was taking no risk, that's what all the confusion was about. The umpire's an idiot, anyway, I saw him make some horrible calls a lot of the times previously.
89Pleasek She didnt stop for herself. She stopped cause the lineman called an out then corrected the call. So she thought it was an out, but she didnt stop for herself. LOL is on you bro! =P
rather not, let me prove that you know nothing about tennis since youve been following it for 3 days
What does Radwanska care that the linesman corrected the call? The point was stopped BY THE LINESMAN, not by THE PLAYER. See the difference?
The only way Radwanska would lose the point was if she stopped play herself, challenged and the ball was good. Other than that, if the UMPIRE/LINESMAN stopped the call and the ball was good it's nothing else than hindrance and the point should be replayed. So the joke is on you and bigtime sine you don't even know the basics.
89Pleasek Ah... the basics. In that case she challenged the correction, so doesnt matter if she stopped by herself or because the linesman. What matter is that she challenged a good ball. I hope you dont use your "logic" on your club... cause you'd be a joke.
Actually he did that against the rules. Agnieszka was officially apologised by WTA for this decision after the match, but who cares about that after the match?
for me we should reply the point because she was hindered by the line call what do you think guys ??? but I think if the ball was out she wont say anything well in that case she loses the point BEFFFFFF????????????? who can tell me what is the right decison to take here??????
Radwanska just challenged because the ball was already called out. She wouldn't have challenged the ball if the lineswoman hadnt call the ball out.
What an ridiculous situation! It´s unbelivieble how bad Kader Nouni is...or maybe it was a blackout. Replay the point, no discussion!
I don't understand this... so Radwanksa wants the point to be replayed because it was in and she stopped play? What?
He didn't let her challenge "her" good ball; he let her challenge the corrected out call. Had the lineswoman not corrected her call, Radwanska wins the point. Radwanska challenged because the lineswoman corrected the "out" call, which would, in essence, make the point replayed. However, because Radwanska challenged the corrected call, she lost her right to have the point replayed.
Yeah and he didn't do anything wrong here I have to add; the point should have been replayed but Agnieszka decided to challenge, wtf??? As if the correction was not correct, which in this case the linesman WAS correct! And to those who say; she shouldn't have received challange, WRONG she had the right to challenge anyways just stupid stupid stupid to do so.
The rules are a bit confusing, but I think the umpire is absolutely correct. If the ball hadn't been called out and Radwanska had challenged, she would have lost the point because she was wrong. That shouldn't change just beacuse the linesperson corrected themselves.
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
How can you challenge a ball that is dismissed and is to be replayed? Radwanska's challenge would overrule the decision to replay it. But since the ball wasn't finished playing but was interrupted by the linesman, it shouldn't be possible to be decided by a challenge.
@lionpole77 Ty też chyba nie do końca zrozumiałeś. Przeczytaj moją odpowiedź do prezesa, bo nie chce mi powtarzać. Pzdr.
Kader Nouni did again a mistake this week, refusing a challenge to the poor nalbadian at a very important point
So Radwanska challenged the call in a bid to correct the call that is against her opponent, which she was proved right and yet she lost the point doing so even when she made a return on that ball. She wasn't the one that stop the play, and neither did her opponent hit a winner, the point should be replayed instead! So much for sportsmanship, this is depressing.
Doesn't matter what the linesman said, if you challenge and you are wrong you lose the point, it's that simple.
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
hej może mi ktoś napisać co Agnieszka mówiła
antytalent z niej
Omg this umpire has lost his damn mind. 2 chances to win the point. Lol. No if it's out, it's Aga's point, if it's in it's replay. That's only one definite chance. Goodness me
You are dumb. What he means is that, if aga won the challenge, she would have won the point. If she loses the challenge and the point is replayed, she still has another chance at winning the same point. You can't have two chances of winning the same point, that would be unfair for safarova.
Look at it this way in the two scenarios based on the outcome of radwanska's challenge:
Aga wins the challenge, aga wins the point and safarova loses the point. In this scenario, safarova has no chance of winning the point and radwanska would be winning the point definitely.
Aga loses the challenge, the same point is being replayed. Aga still has chance to win the point just like safarova in this scenario. Regardless of the outcome of the challenge, radwanska would have 2 chances to win the point while safarova only has a chance to win it in one scenario which is when aga loses the challenge. That's not fair. That's what nouni is saying.
because it is a rule that you cannot have two chances to win the point. rules are rules.
Why this referee is still in the circuit.
nouni is actually right, radwanska could have just replayed the point and not challenged that's what they we're gonna do, she doesn't get to challenge and replay the point, either she thinks the ball is out, and is wrong or she agrees with the correction and doesnt challenge
Wta apologized to Radwanska. She didn't stop the point, the linesperson did. It was either her point or a replay.
Regardless of whether he was right or wrong here, I think it would've been courteous of Kader to ask Aga if she was sure she wanted to challenge. Maybe she didn't hear the correction, or momentarily forgot that there was going to be an automatic replay. Had Kader reminded her that the point was going to be replayed, maybe this whole situation could've been avoided.
i saw out.
Ok, how was it then? The linesman called out, then Aga played, so the game should be stopped if there was a correction called AFTER the ball was played. It's completely illogical for a "correcion" command if there is a hawkeye system on the court, cause it can verify (therefore correct) the decision. Correction is only confusing players.
Sorry I meant fool in a cool way not fool=stupid? Just wanted to stress that your reasoning made sense although I don't know the exact provision in the WTA rules (if you do please share). As a matter of logic though, she shouldn't have lost that point and the fact that the WTA apologized afterwards suggests to me that the rule is maybe not what you said it was...
@prezes79 Chyba nie zrozumiałeś sędziego, ale nie dziwi mnie to, bo jego angielski był ubogi. Zresztą Agi też, więc cała ich rozmowa była mało czytelna :) Akcja zostałaby powtórzona, gdyby Aga nie zażądała challenge. Wg sędziego straciła punkt, bo przegrała challenge. Zdaje mi się, że sędzia popełnił w tej sytuacji błąd, ale nie jestem ekspertem.
Correction + Challenge = Confusion
That ump have marbles in his mouth?
umpire is right. ball is called good and radwanska chose to challenge. its irrelevant that the ball was called good via a correction. what happens when a player challenges a ball thats in? the player loses the point...which is what happened here.
You might be right for the sake of the rule but the point is that she DID NOT stop the point, the linesman did and she shouldn't be blamed for someone else's fault. Plus the WTA apologized to Radwanska which makes you look a lil bit like a fool.
Let's assume that the umpire is corect.
Than by this assumption if a player serves out the first serve, and the serve is called out, and he challenges that call, than offcourse losses the challenge... . Is he entiteld to a second serve?? Well by Kader Nouni's judgement he's not.
This is apples and oranges. By your scenario, he would get a second serve if he loses the challenge. He would not get a second serve if the linesman corrected the call and then he challenged incorrectly. He would lose the point. That's what's happening here. Had Radwanska not challenged the call, the point would be replayed.
This Umpire is crap... even now....2017!!!
Ball was called out and then corrected to in, as it stands the point will be replayed. But Radwanska challenges the corrected call - almost like stopping a rally in progress - and is proved wrong. Therefore she has to lose the point. The umpire is right but does a very poor job of explaining why he is right.
James Gunn nope, the rally was already stopped by the call.
He has a big EGO!!!!
This clown and his ego keeps ruining games. What happened with Nalbandian at 8-8 in the 5th is also a disgrace. How they kept him at work is beyond me.
@prezes79 troszkę nie do końca jest tak jak mówisz. radwańska odbija piłkę, sędzia krzyczy out, ale poprawia się i krzyczy corection zanim safarowa nawet odbiła piłkę. radwańska miała mnóstwo czsu żeby odbić tą piłkę. jedyne co ją moze tłumaczyć to że nie słyszała poprawki, ale to że tak powiem sprawa radwańskiej i jej laryngologa.
THE UMPIRE WASN'T RIGHT i play tennis and i now that when someone challenge and the ball is in, but a line judge call it ´´out´´ they play the point AGAIN.
RADWANSKA WAS RIGHT
They should have replayed the point.. how hard is it to follow simple logic?