Blink moment. I couldn’t believe this long reporting didn’t mentioned the first set point in the quarter final match. South China Morning Post is like NYT of Hong Kong no less. I always wondered how much to trust the reporters. After all, you only see what s/he saw. If her/his view was limited, you won’t get the whole story.
Li Na was serving at 5-4 from ad court to Radwanska at Wimbledom’s quarter final. First serve was out and second serve was called out wide too. She asked for the chair empire for confirmation and it was a YES. It looked awfully close so I wondered why didn’t she challenge? Apparently Mary Carillo agreed with me because she said:
“She has three challenges .. ”
Deuce again.
And soon Li Na lost the game.
The screen now showed the wide call which was on the line.
Mary Carillo couldn’t believe it. And asked again .. “why ??”
The first set was decided in tiebreak and Li lost it.
Funny enough, the following match on the Center Court was by P. Kvitova (CZE) [8] vs K.Flipkens (BEL) [20]. Flipkens served from ad court for the match (5-4). It was an ace but Kvitova challenged it anyway. Of course she lost. Pumpkin said Li Na deserved to lose because she left it on the table, did not grab it when it was still hers. I agree.
Leave a Reply