Jeor Posted September 3, 2020 Author Share Posted September 3, 2020 On 6/25/2020 at 6:17 AM, BigFatCoward said: 500,000 attend Wimbledon. Cheapest ticket 25 quid, 60-200 quid for centre court, show courts not that much less. It's a fair bit of money. They probably also make a couple of billion on the over priced strawberries. This article is a couple of years old but suggests: Quote Wimbledon and the U.S. Open do not break down their revenue, but experts I spoke to say Wimbledon gets roughly $160 million from broadcasting rights, $47 million from ticket sales, $47 million from sponsorships and $35 million from concessions and merchandise sales. The U.S. Open's comparable figures are about $120 million in broadcasting rights, $120 million from tickets, $65 million from sponsorships and $30 million from concessions and merchandise. The U.S. Open's $60 million advantage over Wimbledon, then, is largely due to two revenue sources: sponsors and tickets. So yes, it seems that broadcasting is a fair chunk of the revenue. Wimbledon is known for at least trying to keep tickets reasonably affordable, and also for being very exclusive with sponsorships (trying to keep the ambience of the place very clean and free of advertising; and as someone who's been there in person, this really does make a difference to the experience). Based on those 2017 numbers, it seems ticket revenue is 16% for Wimbledon and 36% for the US Open, with broadcasting rights being the lion's share of revenue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 I wasn't actually watching it but Djokovic has been disqualified from the US Open for hitting a ball at a line judge. Bloody hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 54 minutes ago, ljkeane said: I wasn't actually watching it but Djokovic has been disqualified from the US Open for hitting a ball at a line judge. Bloody hell. Apparently it's within the letter of the law yadda yadda yadda but if the law says they have to disqualify him for that then it's nonsense. Like yeah I guess he's supposed to drop it and just let a ball boy run but while he hit a ball while also being angry he didn't hit it because he was angry- he casually swiped a ball to the back of the court and coz he wasn't paying attention it caught a line judge in the throat. It was irresponsible but a straight DQ for that is extremely harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ljkeane Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 It is a bit harsh because, yeah, he didn’t mean it but I understand why the rule is what it is. If you ask the umpire to adjudicate whether a player really meant to hit someone it’s an absolute nightmare. At the end of the day they’re professional tennis players, if they pay even a little bit of attention they can avoid hitting anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted September 6, 2020 Share Posted September 6, 2020 42 minutes ago, ljkeane said: If you ask the umpire to adjudicate whether a player really meant to hit someone it’s an absolute nightmare. This is fair but I think the thing here is that he wasn't really hitting a ball in anger. The other cases people are calling back to over this- Salolov, Henman- they obviously weren't intending to hit anyone but they randomly lashed a loose ball across the court. Here, he was angry and distracted when he did it, sure, which is why he fucked it up, but he was doing something he would have done anyway (and even if the strictest rules say you should only ever drop it and let the ballboy come get it, he's hardly the only one knocking away unneeded balls after a point). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Shitty way for the top seed to have to go out, but by his own reaction you can tell he knew the ruling was correct, even if it was a bit unfair. You could also tell he felt terrible for unintentionally hitting the line judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 7, 2020 Author Share Posted September 7, 2020 I think a default was the correct decision. I don't actually know why there were long and hard negotiations about it. I don't think intent can really come into it for an unnecessary action like this, being so hard to judge. If a ball is shanked off a racket in the middle of the rally and hits a person, that could be viewed more leniently as that happened during the course of play. But in a case of an unnecessary action being taken once play is over (hitting the ball to dispose of it), I think it's the end result that matters. Even in cases where people have smashed a ball in anger, it would be hard to argue that they actually intended on that ball hitting the person; I think the issue was that they hit a ball when they didn't need to and this endangered the officials. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Well that sucks. Celebrations in the Federer and Nadal households today, no doubt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Selig Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Karma for Djokovic for faking an injury earlier in the match as he is prone to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Oscar winning performance by the line judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baxus Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 Such a stupid way to get knocked out of the GS you are a clear favourite to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mladen Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 As I said two years ago with regard to Serena losing a game, rules are rules. You may not like them, but if you are playing the game, you have to respect them. No, Novak didn't hit the lady on purpose. But the rulebook is not a criminal law. We don't have mens rea here. No, it was not a precedent. We know people have been disqualified in the past for situations like this - Henman, Nalbandian, Shapovalov, Serena (although, the common sense prevailed in 2009 as it was the match point) He will be fined. He will move on. And yes, had the ball hit 10 centimeters away, we would not have this discussion. Alas, it didn't. 6 hours ago, baxus said: Such a stupid way to get knocked out of the GS you are a clear favourite to win. I see a lot of our countrymen arguing he should have hit the ball harder. I assume they think he should have killed her on the spot to teach God knows whom a lesson. It is stupid perhaps, but it is undoubtedly fair. 8 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Oscar winning performance by the line judge. Honestly, I don't think she was faking it. The entire argument of how there is a plot to discredit Djokovic and how this woman participated in it is laughable. I know Djokovic is popular and that this is unfortunate, but let's not make out of this something we know it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 2 hours ago, Mladen said: As I said two years ago with regard to Serena losing a game, rules are rules. You may not like them, but if you are playing the game, you have to respect them. No, Novak didn't hit the lady on purpose. But the rulebook is not a criminal law. We don't have mens rea here. No, it was not a precedent. We know people have been disqualified in the past for situations like this - Henman, Nalbandian, Shapovalov, Serena (although, the common sense prevailed in 2009 as it was the match point) He will be fined. He will move on. And yes, had the ball hit 10 centimeters away, we would not have this discussion. Alas, it didn't. I see a lot of our countrymen arguing he should have hit the ball harder. I assume they think he should have killed her on the spot to teach God knows whom a lesson. It is stupid perhaps, but it is undoubtedly fair. Honestly, I don't think she was faking it. The entire argument of how there is a plot to discredit Djokovic and how this woman participated in it is laughable. I know Djokovic is popular and that this is unfortunate, but let's not make out of this something we know it isn't. Didn’t say anything about a conspiracy. Just that the individual milked it. It’s a stupid rule, anyway. You shouldn’t be on a tennis court if you can’t handle a tennis ball hit. I’m sure most of us have had our doubles partner accidentally blast a misdirected first serve into our back or head at some point while playing tennis. You just shrug it off and continue playing. You don’t drop like a deer hit by a 30-06 caliber hunting round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mladen Posted September 7, 2020 Share Posted September 7, 2020 5 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Didn’t say anything about a conspiracy. Just that the individual milked it. It’s a stupid rule, anyway. You shouldn’t be on a tennis court if you can’t handle a tennis ball hit. I’m sure most of us have had our doubles partner accidentally blast a misdirected first serve into our back or head at some point while playing tennis. You just shrug it off and continue playing. You don’t drop like a deer hit by a 30-06 caliber hunting round. Oh, you wouldn't believe the extent of conspiracy theories in Serbian media around this. So, I conflated all of that. The rule is not stupid. You see, the umpires, line and chair umpires and ball boys and girls all know the risks. You can get hit DURING the game. All their eyes are on the ball DURING the game. As you said, most people on the court have been hit "while playing tennis". This was not during the game. This was after the point. If Djokovic served and hit her, he wouldn't be disqualified. If he hit her while scoring, again no disqualification. But he hit her while he was hitting the ball in anger of losing the point. Was it accident? Sure. Was it intentional? Hell, no. It was one in a million. But that is why he got disqualified. As Carlos Ramos said after the incident with Serena, there is no a-la-carte referring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baxus Posted September 8, 2020 Share Posted September 8, 2020 8 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Didn’t say anything about a conspiracy. Just that the individual milked it. It’s a stupid rule, anyway. You shouldn’t be on a tennis court if you can’t handle a tennis ball hit. I’m sure most of us have had our doubles partner accidentally blast a misdirected first serve into our back or head at some point while playing tennis. You just shrug it off and continue playing. You don’t drop like a deer hit by a 30-06 caliber hunting round. The point is that this was outside of play. There was no point in Djokovic hitting that ball the way he did. What was he trying to do? Pass the ball to ballboy/girl? Send it low to the ground and there will be no problems. Smacking it like that and you can hit someone and there are consequences. Did this lady look like she enjoyed all the attention? She did. But that's AFTER the fact. She didn't do anything to cause being hit and her reaction was irrelevant as far as consequences for Djokovic's action are concerned. That's it. Let's not forget that she wasn't caught flat-footed during the play so one can say it's her job to watch out for balls like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted September 11, 2020 Share Posted September 11, 2020 Well that sucked.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 11, 2020 Author Share Posted September 11, 2020 Serena's out. Must have been very disappointing for her given this was her best chance of getting to 24 with other big names like Halep and Barty out, and the draw proving a relatively gentle run-up to the challenge of Osaka in the final. She did have a few three-setters before the semi, so she wasn't in top form through the tournament but you just got the feeling she'd hit her straps and make a memorable final against Osaka. Well done to Azarenka for the win. Apparently the first time she's beaten Serena in 11 Grand Slam matches, and for all the talk about Serena doing this as a mother, Azarenka also is a mother and had a custody case with her ex, so she's had to fight through a lot in her personal life too. Glad to see her back in the middle of things. Osaka will be heavily favoured in the final, but I think Azarenka still has an outside chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted September 12, 2020 Share Posted September 12, 2020 Osaka is waking up in the second. Azarenka is playing great, looks like we'll get a fun third set. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeor Posted September 13, 2020 Author Share Posted September 13, 2020 That was a good final, Osaka taking it in the end. Very hard-hitting game, it's very small consolation for Serena, but based on this match I find it hard to believe she would have been able to take on Osaka and won. Now for the men's final tomorrow - I want Thiem to win. Poor guy has been a finalist in three Slams so far without winning one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Chatywin et al. Posted September 14, 2020 Share Posted September 14, 2020 This is both a great match and choke city. Neither man wants to win. My money, 6-6 tie breaker in the 5th, is on the German. ETA: Choke ending.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.