Some Things Never Change, John McEnroe Back on Attack

MASON, Ohio -- It's never easy to admit you're wrong. For John McEnroe, it's impossible.

But I gave him a chance Wednesday. Guess how he reacted.

"I don't think you know the game,'' he snapped at me. He went on a rant that included something or other about "the stupidest argument.''

Now I know how line judges used to feel. Only difference was, I was able to talk back.

Breathe in, breathe out, John. You're 51 years old.

Let me step back a little. McEnroe, still the most important face and voice in American tennis, irresponsibly botched the aftermath of Serena Williams' threatening, f-bomb laced tirade at a line judge last year.

He was the fuel on the fire of a debate that grew beyond a simple dispute over tennis and footfaults and into the social fight that inevitably accompanies anything about the Williams sisters. It lined up mostly, but not entirely, along racial lines.

McEnroe and his brother Patrick, the U.S. Davis Cup captain, were on an ESPN conference call Wednesday to preview this year's U.S. Open, which starts Aug. 30. It's the one-year anniversary of Williams telling the linesperson she would take the (bleeping) ball and shove it down her (bleeping) throat.

Williams was given a warning, which meant a point-penalty, after that, and it just happened to be match-point. So she lost to Kim Clijsters in the semifinals. That's all going to be re-lived now.

The pro-Serena side held McEnroe as the example. He had been celebrated for his tantrums, yet Williams was ripped for hers? Great point.

Also, McEnroe said on TV that night that he didn't see a footfault and "You can't call that.''

That was seen as proof that Williams didn't footfault and that she was wronged: McEnroe said so.

In truth, Williams wasn't wronged. She did footfault. And McEnroe has no clue.

He based his statements on TV replays, which showed nothing. The camera angle was behind Williams on her right side. You couldn't see how far her left foot had rolled forward.

"I don't think the person should have been calling the footfault in that situation ...'' McEnroe said Wednesday. "It was a very close call.''

He compared it to the NBA, where officials don't make close foul calls at important moments. The line judge, McEnroe said, should have warned Williams.

Keep in mind, that comes from a guy who spent a career trying to prove that he was right and line judges were wrong, mistreating them. When he was playing, how do you think he would have reacted if his opponent footfaulted on a big point, but the line judge just let it go?

So I told him that when he said he didn't see a footfault, people took that to mean that he was saying Williams didn't footfault. Is that what he meant, or just that he couldn't see?

"I meant that I was not positive if she footfaulted or not,'' he said.

Think about that. Yet, without knowing where her foot was, McEnroe insists that the call shouldn't have been made.

You just made a comparison to the NBA, I said. In the NBA, or the NFL for holding calls, they try not to make calls at the end of games unless they directly affect the play.

"That's right,'' he said.

Are you saying then, that it doesn't directly affect play, doesn't give the server any direct advantage when he stands closer to the net to serve?

"Could you tell it was a footfault?'' he said. "It was very difficult to say. You're talking about an eighth of an inch, or a sixteenth of an inch. That's all.''

There he goes again. What is he basing those measures on?

Nothing.

To be fair, I don't have every word of what McEnroe said. He was talking much faster than my pen could keep up. Luckily, ESPN provides the media with a recording of these teleconferences. So I went to the website to check it out, and saw this:

Due to Technical Difficulties only the second half of the call was recorded.

Amazingly, the technical difficulties ended shortly after McEnroe's tantrum, where the recording picked up.

So going on my memory and some rough notes, it went like this. McEnroe asked if I could see it was a footfault for sure, because "I have pretty good vision, and ...''

Yes, I saw. I was sitting right behind the line judge in the lower deck, in perfect view. How far do you say she footfaulted then?'' he asked.

I'm going with two inches, I said. (It might have been one).

"Two inches,'' he said. "Two inches.''

Yes.

"So she was over the line?'' he asked.

The line is more than two inches wide, I said.

Dead silence.

"Does it help in football when a player holds,'' he asked.

Yes, I said. But that's a subjective measurement. In tennis, it's objective. There's a foot and a line, and ...

I'm pretty sure this is where the stupidest argument stuff came in, and the part about me not understanding tennis.

"I'm going to have to get my eyes tested then,'' he said sarcastically. "Two inches. I respectfully disagree with you. That's all. I don't think it made a damn bit of difference.

"Even if it was two inches, it wouldn't have made a damn bit of difference to her second serve. That's my opinion.''

So I asked Andy Murray, ranked No. 4 in the world, and playing the tournament here outside Cincinnati. Some people argue that even if Williams did footfault at last year's U.S. Open, it shouldn't have been called. Do you agree?

"No, they should call it every time,'' he said. "It's a huge advantage being in the court just two inches.''

I wonder if McEnroe thinks that Murray doesn't know anything about tennis.

E-mail me at gregcouch09@aol.com, or follow me on twitter @gregcouch