Newsletter

Corona: Tennis needs a common master plan – sport

The good news: tennis has returned, this time not with an exhibition tour that turned out to be a virus thrower like the well-intentioned but inglorious Adriatic Tour in early summer. In the past few weeks it wasn’t about trying out funny modes either, there were sentences up to six, tie-breaks up to seven, the only stopwatch that ran was the one between rallies. By means of a shot clock, the professionals were encouraged to serve within 25 seconds. Patrick Mouratoglou, marketing nerve-wrackers and coach of Serena Williams, had organized show matches in his academy on the Côte d’Azur that lasted four times ten minutes – as if tennis were basketball.

Entertaining, yes. But if the French Open in Paris, which is now drawing to a close, and the US Open in New York before that, have proven one thing, it is that no fun event can match officially significant games. After all, they helped some, players and fans alike, to survive the Corona break better.

The relevance of a tournament is often measured by the relevance of its winners, from this point of view the US Open, to which a relatively large number of professionals still avoided the trip, were a success. Dominic Thiem and Naomi Osaka, globally popular protagonists, triumphed in the legendary Austrian thriller against Alexander Zverev. Paris is also ready for stories, the narrative is: outsiders versus grand slam greats; the young Polish Iga Swiatek challenges Australian Open winner Sofia Kenin, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic lurked in the semi-finals. Or do they fail against Diego Schwartzman and Stefanos Tsitsipas?

Each tournament practiced its own security concept

It is not a given that the industry was allowed to ask itself such sporting questions. In that strange year of struggling to keep a sense of space and time, the concern about how the tour could exist in the pandemic was constantly discussed. The mammoth tournaments in New York and Paris are proof that events of these dimensions can really be organized. But the trade fairs also revealed bad news.

The discrepancies that exist between tours, the world association ITF, the four Grand Slams and among professionals were clearly visible in the security issue. Each tournament practiced its own concept. In the United States, some people cursed this because they felt like they were in prison; in France they complained that there was no dense bubble and that ordinary citizens were also in their hotels. The fact that those responsible cannot always please the players who are generally spoiled on these stages is not new, but they have to dictate the guidelines in Covid-19 times. The fact that Zverev, who dropped out in Paris with a cold, did not report to the test was not ideal – it was also questionable that the French Association (FFT) did not check him immediately. There weren’t even any temperature readings.

The picture came to mind: Roland Garros whistled to orientate himself on what worked at the US Open. As a rich association, the FFT can operate from a position of strength. Nevertheless, this behavior is wrong. Ultimately, it harms the industry if knowledge and concepts are not shared and there is no common master plan for dealing with the season. The players were already wondering what their leadership of the WTA tour would bring about, or rather: what would not happen. The China swing, a source of millions, is canceled, except for one tournament (in Ostrava) the calendar is down. Meanwhile, ten take place on the men’s ATP tour. Ultimately, one thing is clear: the competence of its decision-makers will define the future of tennis. The virus is to blame for a lot. But not in everything.

.

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Trending