12/03/2012 15:36 CEST - ANALYSIS

Is it time for the shot clock?

Novak Djokovic

Related contents

• Ubaldo Scanagatta a Radio Montecarlo
• Ubaldo a Radio Montecarlo - 4 marzo 2012
• La racchetta... magica!
• Tutti vogliono giocare a Londra
• Salgono Starace, Lorenzi e Bolelli

A basketball player knows that he has 24 seconds to shoot. It takes 25 seconds to grind coffee beans for the perfect espresso. Baghdatis managed to smash 4 racquets in 25 seconds. Yet for Nadal and Djokovic, 25 seconds are not enough to chose a ball, bounce it several times and serve.

They aren't the only two players to stretch the 25 seconds limit (20 in ATP tournaments) that players have between points according to the rule book.

Charles Bricker wrote an article on Ubitennis after Nole's historic win at Wimbledon last year on this issue, “almost no one puts the next point into play within 20 seconds and the rule is winked at unless a player starts hitting 30 seconds or more consistently. My stopwatch says Nadal averaged about 27 seconds and Djokovic 25 seconds in the Wimbledon final. So one is seven seconds late and the other five. This is insignificant.”

During the last Australian Open final Nadal's and Djokovic's “time violations” extended the match to 5 hours and 53 seconds making this the longest Grand Slam final ever.

ESPN showed that at the beginning of the final Nadal took an average of 31 seconds to serve between points and Djokovic 35. After the umpire Maria warned both players at the end of the second set, their average fell to 30 and 33 seconds respectively. Using this average, even if it is likely that the intervals became longer as the match went on, we can extrapolate some surprising results, Djokovic served 166 points extending the match by 36 minutes beyond the allowed time intervals, Nadal served 203 points and he extended the match by 34 minutes. So the final was 70 minutes longer than should have been allowed. Had they followed the rules the match would have lasted 4 hours and 43 minutes, less than the Djokovic-Murray semifinal and less than the Wilander-Lendl US Open final (it would still be the longest Grand Slam final) and less than the 2008 Wimbledon final between Rafa and Roger.

In an interview with USA Today Eric Molina, head of officiating for the ITF, which oversees the four Grand Slam tournaments and Davis Cup, said "The reason why this has become an issue is because two or three top players are slower than other players. I'd be lying if I said in every match it is being enforced properly." A few weeks ago Roddick said that "It's the job of the referee to referee, so if guys are getting away with too much time, then it's not their fault." After all it isn't easy for the umpire to see when the ball bounces for the second time, update and announce the score as well as checking that it does not take more than 25 seconds between the end of one point and the beginning of the next (including players protests and Hawk-Eye).

Also the umpires appear to be stricter with some players as Michael Russell and Ryan Harrison have found out (Harrison was warned for “time violation” after a 42 shot rally in the Australian Open first round match against Murray) rather than with the top players. Maybe they are intimidated by the Fab Four.

Roddick and Ginepri have suggested that it was time to put a shot clock on court like in basketball, “you have the radar gun there. why not have it right above that?" Gayle Bradshaw, ATP executive vice president of rules and competition, doesn't agree "sometimes 20 seconds is more than adequate, and sometimes 25 seconds is clearly not long enough, this is why it is very difficult to critique a match solely by looking at a stopwatch." It is true that a stopwatch would be too rigid as it does not take into account the crowd reaction, the ball kids reflexes and the length of the rally.

Federer, the fastest of the top four players between points, does not favour the stop clock solution.

Bradshaw promised that the issue will be discussed to reach an understanding between officials and players and a clearer and more coherent implementation of the rule. According to Molina this process should start by removing the inconsistency between the ATP's 20 seconds and the ITF's 25.

FOLLOW UBALDO ON TWITTER AND FACEBOOK.


twitter.com/#!/UbiTennis

Alessandro Mastroluca