In yesterday’s post I intimated that based on the live streams that I was seeing, it was possible that women’s tennis would get little or no coverage of the combined events of the BNP Paribas Open, i.e. Indian Wells. I was wrong. Women’s tennis got lots of coverage yesterday. It would have been good though if during the cut aways from the main stadium matches, we got a glimpse of the other women playing during this tournament in the same way that it was done for the men, but that would have been asking too much of the broadcasters.
From the matches I saw yesterday, some of them left me shaking my head and others made me feel somewhat optimistic about women’s tennis going forward.
My issue today is with the commentators in the booth.
I hold no brief for any player on the WTA Tour. The only Tour player that I have had the pleasure of meeting personally is Venus Williams and since we share the same last name I have always considered myself as “holding brief” for Venus in the event that I believe that she is being negatively portrayed in the media. Not that that gets me anywhere but I will defend Venus with my last dying breath as I believe she is the epitome of professionalism and class on the WTA Tour.
Which brings me to yesterday’s commentary. I sat there and listened to Lindsay Davenport not only belittle the current World’s No. 1 but also point out how in her Davenport’s opinion Clijsters is the best player in the women’s game right now. She then went on to make the distinction between quality and quantity. The first thought that went through my mind was whether Ms. Davenport felt that way when she was year end NO. 1 on a number of occasions by amassing tons of tournament wins at tournaments that I have now forgotten while getting her behind handed to her in numerous Grand Slam semis and finals. Did she consider herself a worthy No.1 at that time? Did she think that she was better than those players who were winning majors but ranked beneath her? I am sure she felt that she was better than the others who were winning majors. After all, she was supporting the WTA Tour and turning up to all the events, she just could not get pass the finish line.
I hold no brief for Wozniacki and while I have defended her, I think she really needs to work on her aggression as well as be able to win a match rather than have her opponents lose. In yesterday’s match against Sloane Stephens, Wozniacki played a match that was not worthy of a No.1. She was defensive. She was out hit for most of the match and at some points she had no answers. At the end of the day she won the match, but she left me, a long time admirer of hers shaking my head because she should have, as a No.1 asserted herself and let the world know that this is what got her to No.1 (which I guess she did in a way seeing as she hit only 4 winners in the whole match).
Dinara Safina is not one of my favourite players. I know that there are a lot of people out there who are fans of hers. I admire her hard work and dedication to this sport that has not always been kind to her. In 2010 Safina suffered what can only be termed as career threatening injury. She had a broken vertebrae and I recall at one point seeing a tweet that she could hardly pack her luggage to leave Melbourne after retiring against Kirilenko in the Australian Open 2010.
For the next few months, we had no idea whether she would even show up at tournaments, let alone win them. Safina got little or no sympathy from the media and except for a few die hard fans and bloggers not much was heard in the way of news from Safina. At this year’s Australian Open she was completely humiliated by Kim Clijsters with a double bagel in the first round. News came recently that she had considered retiring after that loss but was talked out of it by her mother.
As a result it was in exceptionally poor taste last night while I sat and listened to Lindsay Davenport, of all people talk about what a fighter Sharapova is by coming back from shoulder surgery, while at the same time implying that Safina’s drop in the rankings was due more from lack of confidence in her game, rather than a serious injury to her back.
She then went on to talk about the fact that Sharapova had to be dealing with the issue of not having Michael Joyce around any more and how good a friend he was. If I am not mistaken I was of the view that after her humiliating loss in Auckland to Greta Arn, a player a lot of tennis fans had never heard of, Sharapova fired Michael Joyce. I guess there is only so much goodwill that friendship will get you.
At the end of the day we have 2 athletes who suffered through career ending injuries. One of them has been getting copious amounts of media ink which talk about her fight, her dedication and her hard work. The other one’s troubles have been grist for the mill for tennis writers who could care less what happens to her.
Safina said it best recently when she said that was looking forward to clay season and she hopes that tournament directors remember who she was. If that is not a sad reflection on the state of women’s tennis and how certain players are treated unfairly, then I don’t know what is.
For the past 2 or 3 years we have been hearing non-stop about Sharapova’s shoulder problems. It has been the reason for her dismal performances for the past 4 years (if you listen to Tracy Austin) and 3 years (if you listen to everyone else). In addition to her shoulder surgery, apparently her results were also caused by a virus. Could a bout of mono be far behind?
At the end of the day as a fan of women’s tennis, I would like to see equal treatment of every single player. In the same way that those in the booth describe Venus’ forehand as needing more work and how her footwork on clay is abysmal. I want them to sit in their booths and call a match as it is happening.
Anabel played her heart out last night. She eventually lost but she competed admirably. You would not have known this by the commentary in the booth last night.
Commentators, we as fans deserve better. We watch tennis because we love it. We have our favourites and our not so favourites.
Now I know why Carillo left the booth. Who needs this really?