Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Curious - did the officials sit for a press conference on this and take questions?

the officials aren't entertainers, the players are

+1. Athletes are paid to entertain, not officials. Their jobs are very different.

If you want to run an organization you are required to answer questions from the press. If you don’t like it don’t take the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Using Code of Conduct article III Is unprecedented in this situation. It has never been levied against another player for the same actions. It was actually used to manipulate her not to evenly enforce an already established rule.

I disagree. Repeated violation of *any* rule is subject to suspension or expulsion. Lower-tier players can't afford to pay $15k/day to avoid the press conference. Are you suggesting that only the rich players can take care of their mental health and avoid the press "messing with their game"?

Are you saying that there should be a sliding scale for fines? I’m cool with that.

The rules were she would be fined for not doing interviews, she agreed to those rules. Then they decided to change the rules because they didn’t like that she was willing to pay the fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Curious - did the officials sit for a press conference on this and take questions?

the officials aren't entertainers, the players are

+1. Athletes are paid to entertain, not officials. Their jobs are very different.

If you want to run an organization you are required to answer questions from the press. If you don’t like it don’t take the job.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Curious - did the officials sit for a press conference on this and take questions?

the officials aren't entertainers, the players are

+1. Athletes are paid to entertain, not officials. Their jobs are very different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Using Code of Conduct article III Is unprecedented in this situation. It has never been levied against another player for the same actions. It was actually used to manipulate her not to evenly enforce an already established rule.

I disagree. Repeated violation of *any* rule is subject to suspension or expulsion. Lower-tier players can't afford to pay $15k/day to avoid the press conference. Are you suggesting that only the rich players can take care of their mental health and avoid the press "messing with their game"?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Curious - did the officials sit for a press conference on this and take questions?

the officials aren't entertainers, the players are

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Curious - did the officials sit for a press conference on this and take questions?

Anonymous wrote:Citation for repeated rule violations resulting in expulsion/suspension. They did not change the rules.

As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

https://www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Using Code of Conduct article III Is unprecedented in this situation. It has never been levied against another player for the same actions. It was actually used to manipulate her not to evenly enforce an already established rule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Using Code of Conduct article III Is unprecedented in this situation. It has never been levied against another player for the same actions. It was actually used to manipulate her not to evenly enforce an already established rule.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Well yep, they’re in agreement. All four major championships agreed to talks a look at the policies of the pressers and evaluate how the players can be better served. They are absolutely getting dragged in the press over this. Yeah, so maybe things won’t change right away, but change is coming and Naomi was willing to lead the charge. Just like challenge/replay rules started with the Williams sisters. She will come out smelling like a rose over this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .

Where are you seeing that they changed the rules? I see them explaining the escalating rules. I see Osaka deciding for herself what the rules should be for her. Instead, they're saying, no, these are the rules, up to and including expulsion. She doesn't get to decide her own punishment. They do. And they're in agreement, so I don't see where or how the rules changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really don't understand all the controversy here.

1) The reason the players get paid lots of money, is because of the tv contracts and sponsors, and making interviews mandatory to give them their money's worth is entirely reasonable.

2) Mental health is a serious thing, and if a player fells they are not mentally capable of playing and fulfilling their media obligations, then they should withdraw, and take care of themselves, just like they would for a physical injury.

No.

1) players are supposed to do interviews on game day and if they don’t they get fines. No problem, that’s the rules and she agreed to pay the fine.

2) if organizations get frustrated because the player plays under the fine rule with no problem they should not threaten to expel them from the tournament. Don’t Change the rules .