They're not allowed to. Once you make a call you have to stick to it. They're told back their own calls. You can't have umpires changing their minds because of the players. It sets a dangerous precedent. I admit that this is far from perfect but I understand why it is the way it is.
Right, once you go back on your own call, it opens you up to doubt, and your credibility comes into question. Not to mention "fairness" might come into play in which one player could say "but you went back on your decision for this person/occasion, why not now"
I thought atrocious was an understatement for this decision actually the worst decision in the history of tennis. Then someone who watched it live pointed out that there is a Huge audio delay (I thought there was only a slight audio delay) Watch at .25 for proof if you are not good at audio. Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
its no different to when we say "she was miles away", we dont really mean miles its overexaggeration to prove the point. she did the exact same thing just in her own broken english way
I don't understand what you mean by "even if she didn't correctly explain it", she did correctly explain it. Look at your own comment, it's not the most "correct" either dumbass.
Yes, it's crazy how often players mis-argue challenges. She didn't really have a play on it, but if Wozniack gave 100% effort, there'd be no debate, it's too close a call and you replay even if Na gets kind of screwed. But in this case, Wozniack clearly gives up on the ball, either assuming it's out or just being a quitter. Na decided to argue that it was a clean winner..she may have been right but it's a losing argument.
This video had me so mad until I noticed the audio had a huge delay. Watch and listen at 1/4 speed. I don't think she could have got the ball back in but she held up as he was calling OUT.
Not just that, she didn't even attempt to play the ball. With all the technology around these days, can't umpires get a quick little replay on a screen in their chair so they can be certain of whether a call came before or after the player hit the return shot (or if they attempted a shot at all) - how hard can that be?
I've said this in other replies, but agreed 100% jeanroucas19. I think the players should have to at least touch the ball with their racket to prove the "out" call made them distracted or give up on it. In my opinion, just touch the ball in any way and you can have a re-play if their shot was in fact in. Merciful Zeus, yeah agreed, and touching the ball should be considered the test for whether they attempted to return the shot.
What I especially didn't like was that her request for a supervisor was simply shut down and I'm really upset Li didn't pursue that and demand one. It's an extremely important point and she has the right to call a referee
Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
How nicely she was complaining. Imagine Azarenka or Williams at this situation. Although, I feel like why do they even argue, I have never seen any umpire correcting him/herself. They are very arrogant many times, except some.
KoivuTheHab yes I do know. But here's my question for you. Do you play tennis? Well I do, and I sure as hell know if I feel like I'm being robbing of a point from a bad call I'm pissed A), and B) I mumble a ton of threats out my mouth. And I'm not black. So you don't have to be black in order to get heated over a point.
+KoivuTheHab "Name a tennis player of any other race that has issued death threats during a game." Well, that sentence alone speaks volumes about your intelligence (or lack thereof). Racists go to such great lengths to justify their hatred, it's almost amusing.
+KoivuTheHab Sorry, I should have used shorter sentences... It must be hard for you to follow! Sorry :s (But it's okay, keep trying and you'll get there! Without falling asleep.)
Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
@@andycouncil5470 You are dead wrong. The call was made when the ball was passing the player. She could have not play that ball. "The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit" - are you serious ?
lifeinhex ... You are correct. Wozniak stops at the same time the ball hits the lines. The out call was later. If there is a sound delay, why does the sound of the rackets hitting the ball come instantly prior to the call? Played at .25 speed it is very clear that there is no sound delay and Wozniak stopped play before the call. The only thing that might be in play here is since the play was on the far side of the court from the chair umpire, she couldn't see the distance of the player from the ball and called for the replay on that basis.
cleanplasticchild Just before this video, I saw a video with similar situation occur involving Djokovic where his opponent hits the ball, everyone including Djokovic thinks it's going out into the tram line on the left side but he runs over to it just in case, he is right by the ball, he lets it bounce, it looks out, Djokovic lets it go past him, the linesman calls "OUT", the opponent challenges and it was just in but the Umpire doesn't replay the point and gives the point to the opponent. Djokovic cannot believe this because the Umpire acted as though Djokovic wouldn't have been able to return it. This however has the Umpire acting as though Wozniak COULD have returned it when clearly it was a winner. No consistency.
Was I the only one that noticed that Wozniak actually stopped because it was far for her to get And then 2 secs later the call came out Stupid umpire Li na deserved that point
I think you were the only one in the whole world brah, I bet even the person who posted this video didn't notice that. Heck, I bet even Li Na herself did not notice that.
Yep, Wozniak slows down and even has time to turn her head to the line judge because she thought it was out. Wozniak wanted the call. Unless there's a delay between the audio and video it's pretty obvious that the call didn't stop Wozniak.
Voted Straw Do you actually think someone would even give the opponent a point when they were 2 point away from losing, i mean it's not like they were tied in the first set...
I keep rewatching the second half of this clip, it's really compelling. I guess the right thing to do is to bring in video evidence for this type of decision, however then we wouldn't have amazing clips like this.
Joshua Harrell if she had a chance to play it, but didn't because it was called "out" the point should be replayed, if she couldn't play it anyways the point should go to Li
No, she said that it _is_ a question of fact, meaning the dispute is over the facts of what happened rather than a dispute over the rules or how a rule is interpreted. This was in response to the request to get the tournament referee, because both Li and the umpire know that in a fact dispute ("she saw X and I saw Y") they will always side with the umpire, which is also why Li didn't push that issue.
Umpire was dead wrong here - the "out" didn't hinder Wozniak's ability to play the ball, and thus the point should have been awarded to Li Na. Just one clarification - how close Wozniak was to the ball is not NECESSARILY relevant. In THIS case, she was nowhere near it, and that should have informed the decision. But even if she had been right next to the ball, if she CHOSE not to play it (for example, EXPECTING an out call that came AFTER she has already let the ball go by) she STILL should have lost the point because the "out" call didn't hinder her. Professional players get this wrong all the time, BTW because they don't know the specifics of the rule.
MMT Sr 100% right. It doesn’t matter how close you are to the ball, if you decide not to hit it, and Li Na challenges it and it’s in and you didn’t touch the ball, it’s Li Na’s point everyday of the week. If Wozniak had just touched the ball a tiny bit it is a replay of the point, but she didn’t.
Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
@@andycouncil5470 Are you serious? The call was made way after Wozniak stopped playing. There is no delay in the video, the call comes after the bounce. Everything is fine.
+Nicolas Pisoni Yes it's a hard job. You know what's harder? Admitting you're wrong. Which is what a lot if these umpires don't do. No matter how many corrections and proof you give some umpires, they still stick to their call because of their arrogance.
The real question is what was the ball thinking??? How dare that ball make a sound of bouncing well after the ball had bounced and gone by.......... The ump isn't stupid she was there live without a huge audio delay
That should've been Li Na's point. Wozniack was too far away for her to even try to touch the ball. Even though Li still didn't get that point, she was very professional and wasn't disrespectful to the chair umpire. I like that about Li :-)
If Wozniak had a chance to play the ball, but didn't because the ball was called out, the point would be replayed. If Wozniak did not have a chance to play it, and the ball was past her before the out call was made, it would have been Li's point. The latter is what should have happened, but the umpire said to replay the point instead.
3:12 The ref tried to claim the player stopped playing because of the call, but the ball was behind her before the OUT call was made. She stopped playing half a second before the ball even LANDED, thinking it was going out and/or that she couldn't get it, so the ref was utterly WRONG here. I'm tired of refs in sports having way too much control over a match with their inability to do their job.
If you tested all tennis line judges with shots/serves over 170kmh near the lines I'd say they will only get 50% correct. (same as guessing). Line judges are basically useless. Just use hawkeye to beep immediately when the ball is out.
Lina seldom argues with the umpire, but this time she was too upset. This is such clearly a winner, the umpire was completely wrong and didn’t admit her mistake.
That must be the most frustrating thing in the world... she KNOWS that she’s right, but the only way that she can attempt to communicate with the judge is in a second language and against someone who would not change their mind... like, that must have been so frustrating for her to try and deal with.
Chair umpires always be fucking up. This was such a bad call. I watched Safarova vs Pliskova recently and that match was one of the worst called matches I think I've ever seen as far as chair umpire and the line judges combined.
That is a clear winner. Even IF wozniak could have reached the ball, she didn't. But look at the distance she had to cover, it was out of her reach. That is a 100% winner. The umpire should be fired. Even the crowd knew that was a winner.
Gotta appreciate we now have technologies that call out automatically and can replay the point to see it clearly. Imagine only 8 years ago, some umpire made mistake but got away from it. Sometimes one bad call can change the outcome of a match, fortunately didn't affect Li Na. In early days, more popular or more favored players often got favorable calls, especially at crucial moments.
On replay, it is crystal clear that Woz was hoping that ball out and had no intention of playing it. The ball was well by her when the out call was made.
My god, what a crazy decision. Li Na is 100% right. The ball was completely out of reach! I don't get how such gross mistakes can be made at this level of umpiring.
It would have been honorable if Wozniak had conceded the point. Clearly she had lost that point and should have gracefully accepted that. She would have certainly won the hearts of millions.
the title says that it's the final game, so i'm guessing that she DID win, considering the score. i think it did affect her game, as you can see from watching the video.
I think Wozniak could have gotten a racquet on it if she hadn't stopped playing, but she stopped playing, and then the ball was called out, so effectively she gave up the point by doing that. The fact that she didn't touch it at all should have been enough for the umpire.
Did you even watch the video? Or do you even know how Tennis works? It matters because if Wozniak had a chance to play it then it's a replay of the point. If she didn't have a chance of playing it, then the point should go to Li automatically.
Cant just say the point has to be replayed because Wozniaki slowed down because of the call. Every tennis player has to get the ball over the net in order for the point to be replayed. THAT IS THE RULE.
+ShootingStar Maniac No, it's not. If they're there to hit the shot, but the call disturbs them, the point is replayed even if the player didn't hit the shot over the net or inside the court, their racket doesn't even have to touch the ball.
Definitely agree it should have been Li Na's point, but umpires have a hard job. I needed to watch slow mo a few times to be convinced, umprirs don't have that luxury
Same thing happened in the Men's Australian Open Final this year with Federer vs Nadal. The umpire made the right decision that time. Rules are if you don't get the racquet on the ball, you lose the point, plus Wozniak was no where near the ball.
Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
I have no idea what you are talking about. "The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit." Are you implying that the video is ahead of the audio? Because it is clear that is not the case. If instead you are saying that the call came when the ball was still in front of Wozniak, that too is not true. The call does not come until 3:13 when the ball is already past her or even with her at best. It is not possible to change an approach to a ball and hold up in response to a verbal signal when the ball is already past. It was an egregious call that should have been reversed.
@@RR-mp7hw I wish I had your inability to notice a significant audio delay. It would make amazon videos more enjoyable. You are always going to get a slight delay but this is 3x the delay of any other tennis video I could find. 3X!!! If you'd like to have an idea what I'm talking about you can do one of two thing: 1. Ask someone who was there in person if the call came as late as this video shows. All testify it was very close. (This is substantiated by the S O U N D of the ball bounce and call being VERY close together). You won't hear the ball bounce sound until after the ball bounces so it is difficult to hear unless you close your eyes and just listen. 2. Listen and watch the video at .25 speed. You will notice that the audio is significantly behind the video making it look like a ridiculously late call. If the call really came that late NO UMP on earth would have replayed the point. Bottom line: Li got robbed but it was pretty close. Trust me, I was furious at the ump until I paid attention to the HUGE delay and heard from people that were there at the time.
Li was hard done by. No two ways about it. But the way she stated her case so calmly is a lesson in class for many. Serena could learn a thing or two from watching this in my opinion...
I agree 100% That said the Ump was right about her stopping pretty close to the call in real time. Watch in .25 time. On this Your wrong (as was I) I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it. I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point. Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire). The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay. It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by. The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call. In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed. It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it. I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable. Li Na was robbed but it was not an egregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog). Na won so all is good. I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
Li na is so expressive. Her desperation and indignation against an unjust authority, yet with enough restraint to stay classy. Years of practise with the ccp.
The chair must judge whether or not the shot was a winner, or whether or not the out call hindered the player from playing the shot. In this case, Wozniak couldn't have gotten to the ball and wouldn't have played it even if there were no out call. The correct call should have been awarding the point to Li. However, as in all sports, umpires need to make split second decisions, and they get some wrong. This umpire is no different. Some of the comments on here are sickening. I'm sure all of you have made at least one mistake at your workplace. Luckily, nobody tapes you doing it and posts it on UA-cam, and nobody says you should be fired for making a mistake. It's a split second judgement call that on replay seems a lot more obvious, but the umpire had to make a call, and she did.
No shit everyone makes mistakes, but Li asks for a supervisor to correct the mistake and the umpire shuts the request down. That's either pure arrogance, or awareness she was wrong and too stubborn to admit it. Either way, disgusting behaviour.
It is a matter of the chair's discretion though, the supervisor wouldn't have been able to do anything. It's pointless to call the supervisor. Of course Li was right, but at least the chair umpire said that she just has to go with her judgement and she may be mistaken but that's she remembered it. The chair wasn't a jerk about it like they can sometimes be
Lmao you may be fuckin joking me? This wasn't just a simple mistake, it was incompetence and a purposeful attempt at hiding it and doing a doing a terrible job at the same time. That warrants getting fired and/or hung drawn and quartered.
these arguments between players and refs happen all the time, I think to prevent confusion, players should be told before the match to play every point to the end, regardless of out calls.
players are not "told" this beforehand because they already know this. both Na and Wozniak played this point "to the end". Na won... ... but line/chair umpires can overule fairness. A bad "Out!" call can ruin a good play. It happens. and current rules allow for human umpires errors.
@@KeepMovieng You didn't fully understand what I wrote, regardless of out calls, players should play the point, so there is no room for this kind of errors in whether a player could or couldn't have reached the ball.
I would've ruled to replay the point too. She probably wouldn't have gotten to it but it is a judgement call. Until the have instant replay for every point (I hope will never happen) calls like these will be made. On a side note the title is dated March 12 and you published March 11. Can you tell me the winning lottery number for PowerBall. Thanks for the video. Great stuff.
For people who are interested Li Na did end up winning the game and the match....took her 11 Match points....
+Dexter Scott Thank you for giving the only info anybody wanted to hear!!! Thank god she won. That was horrible.
Thank you good sir
Thanks for the information.
I look everywhere to see the 11 match points but did not find the video....if anyone find it let me know! thanks
this is extremely interesting
It's very hard for chair umpires to admit their mistakes.
tennis umpires make bad calls 80 % of the time
Geoffrey Dy But there're some super umpires,like Eva in last year's US Open final.
You know that 78% of internet statistics are made up.
They're not allowed to. Once you make a call you have to stick to it. They're told back their own calls. You can't have umpires changing their minds because of the players. It sets a dangerous precedent. I admit that this is far from perfect but I understand why it is the way it is.
Right, once you go back on your own call, it opens you up to doubt, and your credibility comes into question. Not to mention "fairness" might come into play in which one player could say "but you went back on your decision for this person/occasion, why not now"
Atrocious decision. The out call is clearly made after the ball passes Wozniak. She didn't even attempt to play the shot. Li Na's point
+matt langen I welcome your articulate response.. I'd love to get your insight on other tennis-related controversies.
No. In real time both happen simultaneously.
Agreed. Call made after the ball passed her. Clear point
@@soccerguy2433 correct
I thought atrocious was an understatement for this decision actually the worst decision in the history of tennis.
Then someone who watched it live pointed out that there is a Huge audio delay (I thought there was only a slight audio delay) Watch at .25 for proof if you are not good at audio.
Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
"She's like 100 meters far." LOL!!!!
You gotta love Li Na, and yes she was very right, even if she didn't correctly explain it.
English is not Li Na's first language but I understand her point Wozniak was not even close to the ball.
its no different to when we say "she was miles away", we dont really mean miles its overexaggeration to prove the point. she did the exact same thing just in her own broken english way
It's called a hyperbowl ;)
Hyperbole
I don't understand what you mean by "even if she didn't correctly explain it", she did correctly explain it. Look at your own comment, it's not the most "correct" either dumbass.
Wozniak quit on the point before the call was even made.
Yes, it's crazy how often players mis-argue challenges. She didn't really have a play on it, but if Wozniack gave 100% effort, there'd be no debate, it's too close a call and you replay even if Na gets kind of screwed.
But in this case, Wozniack clearly gives up on the ball, either assuming it's out or just being a quitter. Na decided to argue that it was a clean winner..she may have been right but it's a losing argument.
It is a clean winner because the other player didn't want to play the ball. She quit before the call was even made.
So who gives a fuck her fault she gave up the ball was in, buttercup
This video had me so mad until I noticed the audio had a huge delay. Watch and listen at 1/4 speed.
I don't think she could have got the ball back in but she held up as he was calling OUT.
@@seigaku001 trick video, once I found out I Had to take back my comment that this was the worst call in the history of tennis
Woźniak didn't have chance to get the ball as the ball was clearly out of her reach.
And she stopped playing.
maybe but i think the better argument is that it was a slightly late call and Wozniak could not have affected her effort in reaching
If you watch you can see the out shout comes after she stops
Very questionable
Doesn't matter, late call.
Li Na was right, Wozniak was too far away from the ball she even cannot touch it
Not just that, she didn't even attempt to play the ball. With all the technology around these days, can't umpires get a quick little replay on a screen in their chair so they can be certain of whether a call came before or after the player hit the return shot (or if they attempted a shot at all) - how hard can that be?
I've said this in other replies, but agreed 100% jeanroucas19. I think the players should have to at least touch the ball with their racket to prove the "out" call made them distracted or give up on it. In my opinion, just touch the ball in any way and you can have a re-play if their shot was in fact in.
Merciful Zeus, yeah agreed, and touching the ball should be considered the test for whether they attempted to return the shot.
Hundred meters far in fact
😂😂😂😂
That was a clear winner. Bad call.
Hello there after 4 years
Hello
She's 1000% right and I am really impressed with how firm but still respectful she is about it.
She argued with class too. Great challenge
She won with 6-1, 6-4 later on luckily! Bad call from referee..
thank you looking for this
There's no character like Li Na on WTA tour anymore. Always enjoy watched her play. And husband reactions was gold also. Very likeable couple.
What I especially didn't like was that her request for a supervisor was simply shut down and I'm really upset Li didn't pursue that and demand one. It's an extremely important point and she has the right to call a referee
Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
@@andycouncil5470 You are wrong
4:45 "Oh come on" - my thought's exactly. Wozniak was never going to play that ball.
"Come oh"*
How nicely she was complaining. Imagine Azarenka or Williams at this situation. Although, I feel like why do they even argue, I have never seen any umpire correcting him/herself. They are very arrogant many times, except some.
+KoivuTheHab That makes zero sense......
KoivuTheHab yes I do know. But here's my question for you. Do you play tennis? Well I do, and I sure as hell know if I feel like I'm being robbing of a point from a bad call I'm pissed A), and B) I mumble a ton of threats out my mouth. And I'm not black. So you don't have to be black in order to get heated over a point.
+NonyaBusiness! azarenka is not black .. lol..
+KoivuTheHab "Name a tennis player of any other race that has issued death threats during a game." Well, that sentence alone speaks volumes about your intelligence (or lack thereof). Racists go to such great lengths to justify their hatred, it's almost amusing.
+KoivuTheHab Sorry, I should have used shorter sentences... It must be hard for you to follow! Sorry :s (But it's okay, keep trying and you'll get there! Without falling asleep.)
Ball was past her by the time the call was made. Li Na has an argument.
Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
@@andycouncil5470 You are dead wrong. The call was made when the ball was passing the player. She could have not play that ball.
"The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit" - are you serious ?
lifeinhex ... You are correct. Wozniak stops at the same time the ball hits the lines. The out call was later.
If there is a sound delay, why does the sound of the rackets hitting the ball come instantly prior to the call?
Played at .25 speed it is very clear that there is no sound delay and Wozniak stopped play before the call.
The only thing that might be in play here is since the play was on the far side of the court from the chair umpire, she couldn't see the distance of the player from the ball and called for the replay on that basis.
Her opponent did not get a racquet on it, and could not have.... bad judgement by the chair.
i agree with you !!!
cleanplasticchild agreed!!!
cleanplasticchild Just before this video, I saw a video with similar situation occur involving Djokovic where his opponent hits the ball, everyone including Djokovic thinks it's going out into the tram line on the left side but he runs over to it just in case, he is right by the ball, he lets it bounce, it looks out, Djokovic lets it go past him, the linesman calls "OUT", the opponent challenges and it was just in but the Umpire doesn't replay the point and gives the point to the opponent. Djokovic cannot believe this because the Umpire acted as though Djokovic wouldn't have been able to return it. This however has the Umpire acting as though Wozniak COULD have returned it when clearly it was a winner. No consistency.
You can start the video at 3:11
you're welcome ;)
real mvp
I wish I saw this before I watched the whole video.
Was I the only one that noticed that Wozniak actually stopped because it was far for her to get
And then 2 secs later the call came out
Stupid umpire
Li na deserved that point
I think you were the only one in the whole world brah, I bet even the person who posted this video didn't notice that. Heck, I bet even Li Na herself did not notice that.
Lol. It wasn't 2 seconds later. As soon as the ball hot the line the OUT call was made.
Yep, Wozniak slows down and even has time to turn her head to the line judge because she thought it was out. Wozniak wanted the call.
Unless there's a delay between the audio and video it's pretty obvious that the call didn't stop Wozniak.
@@gregorymorales1 HUGE delay.
The ball makes a sound of getting hit when the serve is crossing the net.
Watch in .25
Umpire was clearly bribed
Li Na was absolutely correct. Why can't the umpire just watch the replay to see when the ball was called?
Of Course Li was correct. Unbelieveable umpire
Terrible call by the line judge. Wozniak was nowhere near the ball, the point should've been awarded to Li Na.
I like how composed calm and rational Li was. Very refreshing to see.
Umpire was wrong, 3:12 you can clearly hear the out call made after the ball went past the player. Li Na was right, she should be awarded the point.
Li Na was right. She deserved the point.
Am I the only person to think that Wozniak should've admitted that it was a winner? That would be some great sportsmanship.
wu jimmy Yeah it would be. But in a competitive situation I gotta admit I would’ve probably done the same. Unfortunately it’s human nature...
Why should Wozniak come forward? Her job is to win the match, the umpire has the job of making the correct call.
I haven't seen li na approach the umpire before, but atleast she went in with credentials. lol
Lol if Wozniak had a little bit of sportsmanship in her she would give her the point
+Voted Straw sportwomenship doesn't exist
Voted Straw true.. i agree
Voted Straw Do you actually think someone would even give the opponent a point when they were 2 point away from losing, i mean it's not like they were tied in the first set...
She looks like a total bitch.
Félix Lemay agreed. 227 retarded people who have never been in a competitive situation in their lives.
“She’s like hundred meters far”
My favorite line
Missed Li Na. Wished she were still playing tennis. But I think she has gone to better things like starting a family.
She retired in 2014 because of knee injuries
Lol Li "How you day maybe? How do you say maaaaybe?" So cute ☺️ 4:35
There's no maybe about it, ball was clearly in
I keep rewatching the second half of this clip, it's really compelling.
I guess the right thing to do is to bring in video evidence for this type of decision, however then we wouldn't have amazing clips like this.
I agree with her tho, unless an official in any sport, not just tennis, is 100% sure they're correct they should just keep their mouths shut.
The Necrocast Musician-what do you think is cute about it?
Not only was it semi out of reach for Wozniack, but she even dropped her racquet a good half a second before the call came.
What does it matter whether Wozniak had a chance to play it? The ball was clearly in.
Joshua Harrell if she had a chance to play it, but didn't because it was called "out" the point should be replayed, if she couldn't play it anyways the point should go to Li
Ok and.. isnt the point to hit away from the opponent to win why wouldn't you hit it away
Joshua Harrell gotta learn up on some tennis rules my man
@@thijsbeentjes4008 yes it was very close in real time
It look like an egregious call with a 3/4 second audio delay lol
li na was spot on. Indeed a mistake by the umpire.
4:11 The chair umpire said "This is not a question of fact" twice. What kind of bullshit answer is that from someone who is judging the match?!?
No, she said that it _is_ a question of fact, meaning the dispute is over the facts of what happened rather than a dispute over the rules or how a rule is interpreted. This was in response to the request to get the tournament referee, because both Li and the umpire know that in a fact dispute ("she saw X and I saw Y") they will always side with the umpire, which is also why Li didn't push that issue.
Umpire also said, "its not about the supervisior its about what i think". If I had said that at my job id be fired in two seconds!
Umpire was dead wrong here - the "out" didn't hinder Wozniak's ability to play the ball, and thus the point should have been awarded to Li Na. Just one clarification - how close Wozniak was to the ball is not NECESSARILY relevant. In THIS case, she was nowhere near it, and that should have informed the decision.
But even if she had been right next to the ball, if she CHOSE not to play it (for example, EXPECTING an out call that came AFTER she has already let the ball go by) she STILL should have lost the point because the "out" call didn't hinder her.
Professional players get this wrong all the time, BTW because they don't know the specifics of the rule.
MMT Sr 100% right. It doesn’t matter how close you are to the ball, if you decide not to hit it, and Li Na challenges it and it’s in and you didn’t touch the ball, it’s Li Na’s point everyday of the week. If Wozniak had just touched the ball a tiny bit it is a replay of the point, but she didn’t.
Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
@@andycouncil5470 Are you serious? The call was made way after Wozniak stopped playing. There is no delay in the video, the call comes after the bounce. Everything is fine.
it was definitely a winner. i just don't understand what the umpire was thinking.
If you think it's easy, try it and you'll see it's not that easy ...!
+Nicolas Pisoni Yes it's a hard job. You know what's harder? Admitting you're wrong. Which is what a lot if these umpires don't do. No matter how many corrections and proof you give some umpires, they still stick to their call because of their arrogance.
+Aaron M I totally agree with you!!!
The real question is what was the ball thinking??? How dare that ball make a sound of bouncing well after the ball had bounced and gone by..........
The ump isn't stupid she was there live without a huge audio delay
@@andycouncil5470 Get decent equipment to watch UA-cam videos on and you might have no audio lag ;)
One of the only times I can ever remember Li getting angry - and justifiably so in this case.
Watch it in slow motion, the linesman called out *after* Wozniak already gave up on the ball. Ref is ridiculous.
you're right.
They didn't have the benefit of super slow motion replay like you do, 6 years after the fact, numbnuts.
Argh I wanna watch the rest of the game
That should've been Li Na's point. Wozniack was too far away for her to even try to touch the ball. Even though Li still didn't get that point, she was very professional and wasn't disrespectful to the chair umpire. I like that about Li :-)
What does it matter whether Wozniak had a chance to play it? The ball was clearly in.
If Wozniak had a chance to play the ball, but didn't because the ball was called out, the point would be replayed. If Wozniak did not have a chance to play it, and the ball was past her before the out call was made, it would have been Li's point. The latter is what should have happened, but the umpire said to replay the point instead.
She's the best
3:12 The ref tried to claim the player stopped playing because of the call, but the ball was behind her before the OUT call was made. She stopped playing half a second before the ball even LANDED, thinking it was going out and/or that she couldn't get it, so the ref was utterly WRONG here. I'm tired of refs in sports having way too much control over a match with their inability to do their job.
If you tested all tennis line judges with shots/serves over 170kmh near the lines I'd say they will only get 50% correct. (same as guessing).
Line judges are basically useless. Just use hawkeye to beep immediately when the ball is out.
Hawk eye needs a few secs to be generated. No way would it keep up with a rally with 10 line balls and an out among that.
HornetPilot18 It worked in the next gen finals no?
And when Hawkeye doesn't work or malfunctions? Genius idea, right here.
Lina seldom argues with the umpire, but this time she was too upset. This is such clearly a winner, the umpire was completely wrong and didn’t admit her mistake.
women's tennis sure miss this player
That must be the most frustrating thing in the world... she KNOWS that she’s right, but the only way that she can attempt to communicate with the judge is in a second language and against someone who would not change their mind... like, that must have been so frustrating for her to try and deal with.
3:50 "It's a winner, okay?!.." So cute the way Li Na says it.
Clear winner. Every right to say to the referee.
Chair umpires always be fucking up. This was such a bad call. I watched Safarova vs Pliskova recently and that match was one of the worst called matches I think I've ever seen as far as chair umpire and the line judges combined.
I have never gotten why a challenge is a cartoon in tennis. They have like 50 actual cameras looking at it.
I'm respecting Li Na managing herself very well and being calm during the argument.
That is a clear winner.
Even IF wozniak could have reached the ball, she didn't. But look at the distance she had to cover, it was out of her reach. That is a 100% winner. The umpire should be fired. Even the crowd knew that was a winner.
2 wrong balls of the referee in less than 5 minutes. As players can be disqualified, referees also
IT WAS A WINNER ='(!!!!!
LOOOOOL. but yeah, THIS IS A WINNER !!!!!!
think its pronounced Weeeener
Perfect verbal challenge imo, she focuses on the matter rather than focusing on her emotion like so many other players in her position
This needs a Kill Bill soundtrack tbh. :P
The umpire is wrong. The point should have gone to Li Na :(
" I'm sure this is a bit of desperation" ... Is that so? 😅
Gotta appreciate we now have technologies that call out automatically and can replay the point to see it clearly. Imagine only 8 years ago, some umpire made mistake but got away from it. Sometimes one bad call can change the outcome of a match, fortunately didn't affect Li Na. In early days, more popular or more favored players often got favorable calls, especially at crucial moments.
On replay, it is crystal clear that Woz was hoping that ball out and had no intention of playing it. The ball was well by her when the out call was made.
Is her full name Lithium Sodium?
Li was correct.
I love you Li Na!!!❤️❤️❤️
which ball was on the court
( why didn't you put the rest in there )
My god, what a crazy decision. Li Na is 100% right. The ball was completely out of reach! I don't get how such gross mistakes can be made at this level of umpiring.
It would have been honorable if Wozniak had conceded the point. Clearly she had lost that point and should have gracefully accepted that. She would have certainly won the hearts of millions.
I hope Li Na is inspired by Venus making 2 GS finals and maybe can make a comeback for 1-2 more seasons.
Good example of a civil argument, & proof that it’s not always unsportsmanlike to argue a call
And the most important question, who won the match? Did the drama effect Li Na's play? Please deliver the response
the title says that it's the final game, so i'm guessing that she DID win, considering the score. i think it did affect her game, as you can see from watching the video.
Li won.
95chanz
Thankyou
I have to scroll all the way down to find out the most important information: the winner
Why doesnt Wozniak give her the point? Where is her fair play?
too much money at stake
Referee sure fighting for million bucks.
Love the sound of when the ball hits the racquet!
What kind of Finals was this?? There are more people at my soccer game then there.
@flyhound97 lol wow
I think Wozniak could have gotten a racquet on it if she hadn't stopped playing, but she stopped playing, and then the ball was called out, so effectively she gave up the point by doing that. The fact that she didn't touch it at all should have been enough for the umpire.
What does it matter whether Wozniak had a chance to play it? The ball was clearly in.
Did you even watch the video? Or do you even know how Tennis works?
It matters because if Wozniak had a chance to play it then it's a replay of the point.
If she didn't have a chance of playing it, then the point should go to Li automatically.
Jacky Ma yes yes
Totally agree with Li, that was a clean winner and Wozniak had stopped running BEFORE the ump called out!
love Li na , fight for what is right for the truth
She's like 100 meters far.
looked more like 300 !
Audio is 300 seconds delayed. Hence the call.
That's the worst, you gotta focus on your game and deal with an amateur umpire.
That ball was 5 feet past Wozniak when the linesman made his call
The one job that AI truly needs to replace is umpires.
big time failure of the ump
Cant just say the point has to be replayed because Wozniaki slowed down because of the call. Every tennis player has to get the ball over the net in order for the point to be replayed. THAT IS THE RULE.
Maybe Li had a point penalty
+ShootingStar Maniac No, it's not. If they're there to hit the shot, but the call disturbs them, the point is replayed even if the player didn't hit the shot over the net or inside the court, their racket doesn't even have to touch the ball.
The call came AFTER she had slowed down.
Definitely agree it should have been Li Na's point, but umpires have a hard job. I needed to watch slow mo a few times to be convinced, umprirs don't have that luxury
Same thing happened in the Men's Australian Open Final this year with Federer vs Nadal.
The umpire made the right decision that time.
Rules are if you don't get the racquet on the ball, you lose the point, plus Wozniak was no where near the ball.
That umpire should be in the kitchen.... I don't mean all woman... that ref... ^_^
Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an Agregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
I have no idea what you are talking about. "The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit." Are you implying that the video is ahead of the audio? Because it is clear that is not the case. If instead you are saying that the call came when the ball was still in front of Wozniak, that too is not true. The call does not come until 3:13 when the ball is already past her or even with her at best. It is not possible to change an approach to a ball and hold up in response to a verbal signal when the ball is already past. It was an egregious call that should have been reversed.
@@RR-mp7hw
I wish I had your inability to notice a significant audio delay. It would make amazon videos more enjoyable. You are always going to get a slight delay but this is 3x the delay of any other tennis video I could find. 3X!!!
If you'd like to have an idea what I'm talking about you can do one of two thing:
1. Ask someone who was there in person if the call came as late as this video shows. All testify it was very close. (This is substantiated by the S O U N D of the ball bounce and call being VERY close together). You won't hear the ball bounce sound until after the ball bounces so it is difficult to hear unless you close your eyes and just listen.
2. Listen and watch the video at
.25 speed. You will notice that the audio is significantly behind the video making it look like a ridiculously late call. If the call really came that late NO UMP on earth would have replayed the point.
Bottom line: Li got robbed but it was pretty close.
Trust me, I was furious at the ump until I paid attention to the HUGE delay and heard from people that were there at the time.
Li was hard done by. No two ways about it. But the way she stated her case so calmly is a lesson in class for many. Serena could learn a thing or two from watching this in my opinion...
I agree 100%
That said the Ump was right about her stopping pretty close to the call in real time.
Watch in .25 time.
On this Your wrong (as was I)
I couldn't understand why she stopped play on the ball when to me it look like she should have at least made a stab at it.
I said she just stopped because she hoped it was going to be out Which I do at times but it seemed really stupid considering the point.
Then I analyze the video in detail (That's how steamed I was at the umpire).
The sound comes when the ball is almost crossing the net after it is hit. That is a considerable delay.
It was definitely a Bang Bang play as people watched it live. That also explains why the commentators weren't saying Hey a call was way after she stopped and let it go by.
The fact is she was near the ball and stood up right when he called out so it looked like she could be stopping due to the call.
In reality I think she stopped because she knew she couldn't hit it back in and if she held up as it would hopefully be called out she would get the call or have it replayed.
It was a smart move on her part because she got away with it.
I agree she would not have been able to return the ball in but she could have made contact but that would have only proved it was unreturnable.
Li Na was robbed but it was not an egregious call by any means. It was a coin toss at best because of the way her opponent held up (that dirty dog).
Na won so all is good.
I do feel a little bad for the ump because this video makes it look like she should be banned for life
A tennis umpire reversing their decision is like Sean Bean living through a movie.
Even I saw a few times the ball was just in the line but the side judge called out. It is unbelievable
The judge was extremely stupid.
rubbish umpiring
Many when you can't trust close calls, it cuts off so much of the court and puts you at quite a disadvantage. Glad she was able to win this match.
Li Na ended up winning the game after 11 match points
Li na is so expressive. Her desperation and indignation against an unjust authority, yet with enough restraint to stay classy. Years of practise with the ccp.
The chair must judge whether or not the shot was a winner, or whether or not the out call hindered the player from playing the shot. In this case, Wozniak couldn't have gotten to the ball and wouldn't have played it even if there were no out call. The correct call should have been awarding the point to Li. However, as in all sports, umpires need to make split second decisions, and they get some wrong. This umpire is no different. Some of the comments on here are sickening. I'm sure all of you have made at least one mistake at your workplace. Luckily, nobody tapes you doing it and posts it on UA-cam, and nobody says you should be fired for making a mistake. It's a split second judgement call that on replay seems a lot more obvious, but the umpire had to make a call, and she did.
No shit everyone makes mistakes, but Li asks for a supervisor to correct the mistake and the umpire shuts the request down. That's either pure arrogance, or awareness she was wrong and too stubborn to admit it. Either way, disgusting behaviour.
It is a matter of the chair's discretion though, the supervisor wouldn't have been able to do anything. It's pointless to call the supervisor. Of course Li was right, but at least the chair umpire said that she just has to go with her judgement and she may be mistaken but that's she remembered it. The chair wasn't a jerk about it like they can sometimes be
Lmao you may be fuckin joking me? This wasn't just a simple mistake, it was incompetence and a purposeful attempt at hiding it and doing a doing a terrible job at the same time. That warrants getting fired and/or hung drawn and quartered.
How can this match be played the day after it was published on UA-cam?
Wow, what a joke of an umpire. Li Na was 100% right. Wozniak could have shown some sportsmanship and conceded the point too.
Li Na got robbed against Radwanska at Wimbledon too. I know Wozniak reps Canada, but she's of 100% Polish ancestry. Are the linesmen all Polish?
"It's a weiner! A weeeeeeiinner!"
What competition was this? French open?
these arguments between players and refs happen all the time,
I think to prevent confusion, players should be told before the match to play every point to the end,
regardless of out calls.
players are not "told" this beforehand because they already know this. both Na and Wozniak played this point "to the end". Na won...
... but line/chair umpires can overule fairness. A bad "Out!" call can ruin a good play. It happens. and current rules allow for human umpires errors.
@@KeepMovieng You didn't fully understand what I wrote,
regardless of out calls, players should play the point,
so there is no room for this kind of errors in whether a player could or couldn't have reached the ball.
I would've ruled to replay the point too. She probably wouldn't have gotten to it but it is a judgement call. Until the have instant replay for every point (I hope will never happen) calls like these will be made. On a side note the title is dated March 12 and you published March 11. Can you tell me the winning lottery number for PowerBall. Thanks for the video. Great stuff.