Simon Gauzy was right or wrong in that point?

[Arkady]

I guess I will get a lot of shit or love for my post.

Just to get it out of the way, that was an edge ball without a question and I bet Simon feels horrible after the fact for contesting it because he looks like a fraud and he is on camera. I am sure he is not a fraud, he is one of the last of the Mohicans who plays entertaining table tennis. (since XX is in retirement and Zhou Qihao is like a sinus scale in his performance)
But anyway I play table tennis for very long and I am aware of my opponent's contact position and bat angle etc etc more than my opponent is! If I am aware then Simon must be too. I'm sorry, there is no way in this heated moment he blinked.
During a side ball even the bounce sound is very different than edge.

But the problem is that the umpires are mostly just droids flipping the score and once confronted they change their opinion.
For argument's sake if the umpire were Guoliang, Persson, Rosskopf... heck just to not name super respected well-seasoned sly AF foxes, if the umpire were Harimoto and his sis they would have known what happened and Gauzy would have been shut down. I am sure. And I'm talking about Chinese-Japanese players who have the utmost respect.

I don't expect umpires to be pro table tennis players who know all, but for frack's sake look at the bloody replay screen what is happening, and the players can do the same and get to an agreement.
You don't need eagle eye tech, just look at the replay.

My biggest issue is that Mohammed gave up on the point purely on the fact that Simon is a well-respected tour player while he is (well let's face it) not.

Personally I don't think that Gauzy feels bad about the incident. It was just a crucial point and didn't want to lose the game, so he used any means to do it.
The shot came from inside the table, so it was physically impossible to be a side and he was fully aware of that.
He just took advantage -as you very well point out- that he is a famous player while Mohammed is not. He was really lucky that the umpire was a passive one that caved in his "bullying".
Had it been another umpire, he wouldn't be so lucky...

 

[lodro]

He was really lucky that the umpire was a passive one that caved in his "bullying".
Had it been another umpire, he wouldn't be so lucky...

that'sa fair enough comment but first of all the umpire should never have been there .........
Second she called it a fault
Thirdly she changed her mind and called it an edge
fourthly she changed her mind back
and last but not least , she should not have been there 🤣

 

[Manto76]

Increased amount of nets and edges are a skill. Period.

Luck is luck, but you experience more luck when you have more skill.

Yip, I agree with that.

It's always puzzled me that folks get so upset at edge contacts that result from active, attacking shots. If a loop drive contacts the back edge then everyone says, "Lucky shot." But, if that drive had been 1mm shorter, or even 0.5mm shorter, then everyone would've said, "Wow! Amazing shot! What incredible precision!"

Does 1mm or less turn a display of outstanding skill into luck? Not in my opinion. Basically, in that circumstance, an edge contact is The Perfect Shot!

I agree it's a different story on passive shots that happen to connect with the edge—that is just lucky. But still, luck is part of life and you can't remove all luck from the game. For example, it's also lucky when my opponent plays a good attacking shot that deserved to win the point but, by pure luck, my bat just happened to be in the right place and I accidentally block his shot back. Must we now train umpires to decide whether I intended to block the ball back, or I accidentally got it back by sheer luck?

 

[Gtsnake]

Unusual bounces can be returned or created to sometimes display an even higher level of skill in the game. Such is life and table tennis.

That's because you've gotten used to uncontrolled circumstances and have accepted it. What if you didn't have to deal with it? Wouldn't it be a better game?

 

[lightspin]

100% unquestionably an edge. Unreal that Gauzy claimed side and even more unreal that the ref gave in.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

100% unquestionably an edge. Unreal that Gauzy claimed side and even more unreal that the ref gave in.

I think on Gauzy's part, he was about to pivot and do a FH at the BH corner and then had to get into the wide FH.
I don't think he focus or thought on where the ball was coming from and probably thought the ball has curved in a way, and then saw the ball go downwards.

I just think, if I was on the far BH corner and the ball touch the edge/side on the other side (FH side), it is impossible to claim that it is edge or side, as you just can't see it.
Maybe if Gauzy was closer, say starting off in the middle line, he would have a better angle of the ball's flight and arc

 

[Metaxa]

People don't look properly anyway I guess and see other things in the meantime.🤣
Originally, the referee had awarded the point to Simon (her left arm goes up) but the electronic scoreboard then reported 8-9 > 10 for Mohamed.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

People don't look properly anyway I guess and see other things in the meantime.🤣
Originally, the referee had awarded the point to Simon (her left arm goes up) but the electronic scoreboard then reported 8-9 > 10 for Mohamed.

I replayed it again now
1) point to Gauzy, umpire probably saw the ball go out, so 9-9
2) then something about edge, and then 10-8
3) then talking talking talking, and then it went back to 9-9 (I think Gauzy didn't hear the call 10-8, you can hear it in the video, and he probably saw the scoreboard wrong, so moaned about it)

I think the umpire probably still doesn't know what to call it even today

 

[Metaxa]

I replayed it again now
1) point to Gauzy, umpire probably saw the ball go out, so 9-9
2) then something about edge, and then 10-8
3) then talking talking talking, and then it went back to 9-9 (I think Gauzy didn't hear the call 10-8, you can hear it in the video, and he probably saw the scoreboard wrong, so moaned about it)

I think the umpire probably still doesn't know what to call it even today

I don't think I'm writing anything else. But originally, though, there was never 9-9 on the scoreboard. (first 8-10, then 9-9)
A referee shouldn't just overrule himself either. Once the arm goes up, the point must be awarded in my opinion.

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

I don't think I'm writing anything else. But originally, though, there was never 9-9 on the scoreboard. (first 8-10, then 9-9)
A referee shouldn't just overrule himself either. Once the arm goes up, the point must be awarded in my opinion.

The call was first 9-9, then a call of 10-8, and after a long discussion, the call went back to 9-9
go and check it out

the change of points are very normal when players calls edge and umpire changes the call to factor in edge.
You can see the left hand of umpire go out very early - so that is sign of thinking the ball didn't hit anything.

 

[Metaxa]

The call was first 9-9, then a call of 10-8, and after a long discussion, the call went back to 9-9
go and check it out

the change of points are very normal when players calls edge and umpire changes the call to factor in edge.
You can see the left hand of umpire go out very early - so that is sign of thinking the ball didn't hit anything.

Yes, the call was 9-9 but not on the scoreboard which read 8-10. That confused Simon.
I had already written that the referee's left arm went up....

 

[Tony's Table Tennis]

Yes, the call was 9-9 but not on the scoreboard which read 8-10. That confused Simon.
I had already written that the referee's left arm went up....

she changed the call to 10-8, and likely the assistant keyed in the scoreboard as such.
from umpire call, I explained already
from assistant umpire scoreboard key in, it was 10-8 and the 9-9
the call from 9-9 to 10-8 was few seconds apart, so I'm not surprised that the assistant umpire didn't key in the first call.

you should listen to the replay and ignore the scoreboard, since scoreboard is reaction, the call is the most important to confirm the umpire's decision (and not focus on the assistant umpire's scoreboard)

 

[Zwill]

In the female final, final set Sun Yingsha also claimed an edge ball and while it was impossible to tell if it was an edge or not at least she had the brain to force to look at the replay.
She was pretty persistent about it and I think she let it go in the end when she saw it's not visible on the replay. If it touched the table it must have only made a faint sound.

If Mohamed did the same I'm pretty sure Gauzy could have been convinced of edge and not side since it was pretty clear on the replay.

 

[longrange]

In the female final, final set Sun Yingsha also claimed an edge ball and while it was impossible to tell if it was an edge or not at least she had the brain to force to look at the replay.
She was pretty persistent about it and I think she let it go in the end when she saw it's not visible on the replay. If it touched the table it must have only made a faint sound.

If Mohamed did the same I'm pretty sure Gauzy could have been convinced of edge and not side since it was pretty clear on the replay.

Gauzy was just gauzying as usual. It's not his first rodeo.

 

[longrange]

I think half of the problems can really be circumvented by placing a third umpire (or one of the two) in the front view of the table, behind one of the players. I've seen it somewhere in the lower German/Austrian leagues: they have (had) 15 seconds clock against stalling and this third umpire. This way you call out illegal serves and this nonsense as well.