Opšte diskusije

[Keira]

-J.Murray je po svemu sudeci Kermodeov insajder ,

-U aprilu je Metro preneo deo intw koji je Haase dao na Muratoglu openu

"A criticism levelled at those championing Kermode has been the lack of voice given to the lower-ranked players, but Haase played down the significance of providing them a public platform.

https://metro.co.uk/2019/04/07/support-novak-djokovic-emerges-chris-kermode-row-lower-echelons-mens-tennis-9129991/?ito=article.desktop.share.top.twitter

 

Imacemo na Novakovoj stranci vrv njegov pres , na brzinu sam citala da je izneo problem u strukturi po ko zna koji put, kao i neslaganje sa curenjem informacija medijima pogotovo britanskim, sa sastanka PC koji se po nepisanom kodeksu odrzava kao poverljiv -za medije.

 

Videcemo dalji razvoj situacije i kako ce Weller predstavljati igrace u odnosu na organizatore turnira..

[Boxy]

i Stakhovski 

 

 

[noćna frajla]

Cela Novakova konferencija (ispod Serene) i poslednja 2 odg na srpskom

 

https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/video/index.html

[Keira]

Bas da vidimo, da li ce sada Stakhovsky cija je inace reputacija u teniskim krugovima prilicno losa, od seksizma, anti -gay propagande biti podrzan od istih nakon ove objave. Koliko znam u zadnjem sazivu nije bio clan PC , na neki drugi nacin ucestvovao u koordinaciji izmedju igraca i organizacije .

[Boxy]

"I am therefore resigningfrom my position in the Council."

Pa ocigledno je bio u savetu, cim je dao ostavku.

[Keira]

Na osovu raspolozivih informacija namece se zakljucak da je u tenisu u toku revolucija, a njeni pojavni oblici nisu nepoznati od formiranja toura,  organizacionog haosa koji je vladao u Pre Open eri. Svaka revolucija ima svoje zrtve- pa i causalne.

Ostaje da sacekamo i vidimo efekte na delu.

 

Sto se ND tice , nema sumnje sam je odlucio da se ukljuci i verujem da je svestan posledica po njega samog kao igraca , trenutka u karijeri.. 

[Boxy]

Ono sto je jasno je da su svi koji su protiv Gimelstoba dali ostavke, a da su ostali samo oni koji su za njega.

[Keira]

https://www.atptour.com/en/news/atp-player-council-election-2018

 

 

Protiv Kermodea rekla bih, za sada Gimelstob prica je zavrsena. A ne verujem da su ovi sto su ostali dali podrsku njegovom aktu nasilja, vec kako je pregovarao o pitanjima koja se ticu organizacije i preraspodele zarade, polozaj igraca itd

[Boxy]

Protiv Kermodea=za Gimelstoba

[Keira]

Gimelstob je sam sebe razresio duznosti pod pritiskom javnosti i mozda igraca iz PC ili sopstvene savesti.Dakle Kermode je ostao , do kraja godine  

 

Licno bih volela da vidim da neko pokrene i preispita sukob interesa koji ocigledno postoji i u najvisim krugovima oba vladajuca tela u tenisu, aktivnih igraca koji preko svojih menaderskih agencja ulaze u ATP/koji god da su igraci u pitanju. To se verovatno nece desiti imajuci u vidu da je ogroman novac i moc u pitanju.

[Brian Setzer]

Koliko sam pratio, sve se (kao i uvek), vrti oko para: koliko će da uzme ATP, koliko turniri i koliko igrači. Igrači uzimaju oko 10%.

[wwww]

https://www.tsn.ca/tennis/video/pospisil-lauds-djokovic-s-leadership-in-battle-to-reform-corrupt-tennis-system~1719275

 

[wwww]

Odlican intervju s Pospisilom, objasnjava i mnoge stvari u vezi PC i situacije na ATP.

[wwww]

[wwww]

 

[wwww]

https://www.wimbledon.com/en_GB/news/articles/2019-07-02/2019-07-02_vasek_pospisil_first_round.html

Quote

Q. There has been a lot of talk the past couple days about the ATP politics and what's going on. For those of us not up to speed on all of it, can you delineate what the major issues that are on the table and being contested and talked about are? Doesn't matter what you feel for them, but what are the guys talking about for seven hours?
VASEK POSPISIL: Well, I mean, the last meeting was, you know, about four hours' discussion on who would be our next board representative. I mean, we had two very different candidates with extremely different approaches. And both were very good candidates, but there was just a little bit of a disagreement with the group on what we perceived important that a board representative do. So I think that was the last one. It was just -- we were talking it through.

But in terms of the other issues, what I'm fighting for is to have legal representation for the players, I mean, in general. This is something that's been an issue since the ATP was created, and there is just a lot of people talk and talk and talk. And I know, like, the last 10 years I have been on tour, players and player council always talk about the problems and no one really actually try to solve anything.

What I have my sights on doing, because I think right now the players are in a really tough spot to get anything from the tournaments, be it slams, Masters, any tournament. We're negotiating with no leverage whatsoever. That's just the structure that we have, and so this is the battle.

This is why, I mean, players have been frustrated for years. And it's not so much, you know, a prize money issue as much as it is that we just have no say in anything. It's an illusion. They say we do have a say. They say it's 50% tournament, 50% players, but there is no say because it's just the way the whole structure is.

The votes are always tied. We never want to change them. There is huge conflict of interest. Players have their interest, tournament have theirs, so it always becomes a tie when you're voting on anything.

And then the president never breaks the tie, because if he does, he upsets one of the sides, and then he doesn't get re-elected because he needs a super-majority. It's a horrible system.

Q. If he doesn't break a tie nothing happens?
VASEK POSPISIL: No. If he doesn't break a tie nothing ever happens. And obviously the power and the money is all on the tournament side. Their pockets are extremely deep, and we are doing our thing. We have part-time board representatives and we're running our businesses, but we actually can't, I mean, negotiate, right? That's the issue that we have right now in a nutshell.

But then that becomes a whole other, I mean, that's the broad -- that's the reason why we have so many problems and we are discussing different ones right now, but that's the core of the problem.

 

Quote

Q. Did mass resignation surprise you? And was that a constructive way to handle the debate?
VASEK POSPISIL: Did it surprise me that they resigned? It did. To be honest, it did. Because we couldn't come to an agreement on -- and it was fine. I mean, there was no -- we said, okay, so the protocol at that point is -- what we decided mutually, all of us, was Okay, we will have new candidates come in in a few months, and then we will choose another candidate that we can all agree on, and in the meantime our board representatives that choose anybody they want on an interim basis...

Q. Board representatives?
VASEK POSPISIL: Board representatives.

Q. Not the player council?
VASEK POSPISIL: For the one that was currently chosen, it was the board representatives chose him, but just on a temporary basis until we actually decide who will take the three-year term.

And then the board representatives happen to choose one of the two that -- I mean, they could have chosen anybody, could have chosen me, could have chosen Tom. Anybody from North America could have taken the position, but they happened to choose one of the guys that we were discussing, and maybe some of the players weren't happy about it. But I think it's a broader issue.

I think a lot of those guys have been on the council -- I mean, I spoke to one of them, and he had been on the council for seven years. He said, You know what? I'm drained out. I have been battling for seven years and there is no -- we can't make any change.

Because in order to make a change, you actually need the tournaments to agree to the change. So no one's ever going to agree to give up leverage or power in a system, right? This is business, right? I get it. I mean, I understand, right?

But for us to actually change bylaws or anything in ATP, it needs to come from a super-majority vote from the players' side and tournament side. That's why there have been no significant changes for, I mean, since 1973, since it was actually, you know, established, the ATP.

 

Quote

Q. When you talk about legal representation for the players, what do you mean? And what's stopping you from just going and hiring...
VASEK POSPISIL: Well, we're actually -- we're not given this opportunity. I mean, the ATP bylaws are written in a way there are two lawyers representing both the tournament side and the players' side.

Q. Who are the two?
VASEK POSPISIL: Mark Young. I mean, Mark Young is in you every one of the meetings. There is another one but he's the main one. He's the ATP lawyer. And then whenever we try to kind of press for -- I mean, it's in the bylaws. It's written that the lawyer represents both the tournament and the players. We can't actually legally have our, based on how the bylaws are written, we can't even have legal representation.

Q. On the board?
VASEK POSPISIL: No, not on the board. I mean -- yeah, yeah. So we have board representatives, which that's not -- I'm not concerned about that legal representation. I mean lawyers, being unified.

Q. Represent you for what? Like, I guess my question is why don't you just put some lawyers on the board? You can elect whoever you want.
VASEK POSPISIL: Yeah, well, we do have lawyers on the board. What I'm talking about is unifying the players and actually -- which we are just not allowed to do, right? We are not allowed to have a union, not allowed to act separately. We're not allowed to do anything separately from the ATP, from the tournament side.

It's very complicated. It sounds logical, and that's why you're asking the question. There was a Deloitte report that said they never seen a structure this disastrous in sports. And they have gone through NHL, NFL, all the sports, and their report was this was a complete disaster. That's basically what they said.

I'm speaking out. There were so many scare tactics, we don't want to talk about it because we don't want it to be released, and don't want people to talk about it. But the issue is simple. It's clear. That's what we are battling. We are battling a monopoly of power of the whole tour, tournaments.

 

 

Quote

Q. Have you experienced any blowback because of this?
VASEK POSPISIL: Not yet, but I will (smiling).

Q. What do you expect?
VASEK POSPISIL: Well, I expect -- I guess it depends how far and how, how far and how close we get to achieving what I would like to achieve. We are talking about hundreds of millions of dollars at these events or in general, even just the direction or whatever. It's, like, I mean, we're getting a fraction of the gross revenues compared to all the other sports.

Most guys can't even, you know, can't invest in their business unless you're top 50. I feel like if you're a top 150 player, at least you should be able to reinvest and actually get a coach and a physio.

I mean, for example, I just had back surgery, and, you know, some people say, Yeah, there are physios on the ATP Tour. I literally need a physio with me the whole time for this whole comeback or I will just hurt my back again possibly.

These are risks I can't take, so I have to invest. They look at it, like, yeah, their explanation is, Well, we need to reinvest in our business and we're giving back, and, well, what about our business? We are a business too. Every one of us has our own business. It's not -- I don't think that's the right way to look at it.

 

[wwww]

Evo sta Senjor Direktor kaze:

Quote

Q. Sorry to ask you a question which is not about on-court play, but in most political disputes, struggles, we are at least clear what the issues are. Could you tell us what the issues are with the player council and why there is so much change, please.
FELICIANO LOPEZ: There is many things going on right now in the ATP as an organization. There is probably many changes coming up. I cannot tell you obviously in detail, but everything is falling apart (smiling). I don't know why, but I don't know what's going on.

I think we still have time, so by the end of the year, we will hopefully, you know, have everything sorted out and we will have the player council again and everything's gonna be hopefully in the right direction again.

For the moment, it's kind of a mess. This is all I can tell you.

Q. You have a bit of a unique perspective being on the tournament and the players' side. Has being involved in that tournament side of things given you a better perspective than perhaps some of the players that are blinded by just prize money?
FELICIANO LOPEZ: Of course, of course. Is not only about prize money, no? Many things going on, not only prize money. Many other things that they have been under discussions during the week, with the council, with the board. It's not only about prize money. Prize money-wise I think we cannot complain, to be honest.

If you compare the prize money from when I started playing the slams and now, I think we cannot complain. I was making $10,000 first round. I'm making 50,000 now. So the increase was amazing.

This is because of the players probably, because of we deserve what we get. But there is tournaments and they are struggling economically, and they are doing a lot of efforts to get as many sponsors and to, you know, to be able to pay the prize money that we think we deserve.

But the players, they also, we have to know, because when you work on the other side, you see how difficult it is to get as many sponsors in Madrid, which is the case, I work there, and I know how difficult it is to get all those sponsors every year. Because every year is a huge increase. In the last year it was 1 million per year, and in our case, which is a combined event, it has to be double; 1 million for the men's, 1 million for the girls.

So it's a huge amount of money. There is not many tournaments that they are able to they're increasing the prize money every year.

The issues are, you know, more than prize money-wise. There is many things going on. So hopefully by the end of the year gonna be everything okay.

Interesantno kako su postavljena putanja, kako se sva krivica svaljuje na igrace i sva "ispravnost" je na strani turnira.

[Old 666]

Nešto mi palo na pamet, pokušavam da se setim svih mečeva koje su BIG 3 izgubili u best of five formatu nakon što su vodili 2-0.

 

Novak: Davidenko DC i Melzer RG

Rafa: Ne mogu da se setim nijednog

Fed: Anderson i Tsonga na W, Novak na USO i Nalbandian jedared davno na završnom mastersu. 

 

Jesam li neki zaboravio?

[Boxy]

Fed od Hjuita u DC, 2003.mislim

[Old 666]

Ako bi probali da se setimo svih situacija gde su preokrenuli 0-2 i pobedili 3-2, verovatno bi išlo malo teže, al ajde da probamo.

 

Novak: Sepi RG, GGL Wimbledon, Fed USO

Rafa: Robert Kendrick W

Federer: Falla W, Haas RG

[Boxy]

Fed: Berdih AO, Beneto W

[Boxy]

Fed: Monfa USO, Cilic W

[Malkolm Brogdon]

Nadal je vodio protiv Fonjinija 2-0 na USO pa izgubio 2-3. Secam se jer sam uzeo solidne pare tad na Fabija.

[djordjem]

Nadal je izgubio posto je dobio prva dva seta od Federera u finalu Majamija 2005,.

 

To je bio njihov drugi susret i jedina pobeda Rodzera u prvih 7 meceva sto su igrali. Eto, lako je moglo to rivalstvo da startuje sa 7-0 za Nadala, mada ni tih 1-6 nije izgledalo lepo na oko tada iz Federerovog ugla, pogotovu sto nije to bila samo sljaka u pitanju, 2 od 3 meca na betonu ga je Nadal dobio tada.

Edited July 14, 2019 by djordjem

[Goga64]

On 6/26/2019 at 6:12 PM, kalistenika u rutini said:

Ne znam sta i cije skrabanje je teta Gocu pogodilo pa je digla ruke od pisanja, to sam propustio 

 

Da se objasni ovo boldovano, molila bih 😂😂😂