Wimbledon 2025 – Players, Commentators, Telecast and International Relationships
I was wondering how I should start this post in which I aim to cover the things mentioned in the heading, and then I read the following start to the article on the Gentlemen’ Singles Final contest: “Jannik Sinner’s emotionally restrained, methodical and precise...” in The Hindu of July 14, 2025.
I will start with one of the commentators, the most perceptive, speaking only to make a point (as opposed to filling the silence), the one and only John McEnroe. If you wish to understand McEnroe, you need to reach for no further than comparing him with Tony Trabert, an American commentator. Once in the middle of a final at Wimbledon or the US Open, Trabertsaid, “Not a seat to be had!” at the court; to that, his telecast partner said, on live TV, “What did you expect, Tony?” You would hear no such inanity from McEnroe, only to get insulted by his telecast partner.
Now that I have dragged Tony Trabert’s name into this post, let me drag him further. In a match between Stefan Edberg and Michael Chang (a Chinese-American), the forer was called out for foot-fault. That was what Trabert wanted. From then on till the end of the match for every serve by Edberg, Trabert let out a yell, “FOOT-FAULT!”. And, none was called. Anyways, the American jingoist in Trabert was all over himself congratulating Chang for his defeat of Edberg, in the process forgetting who Chang was, only a half-American, in the thinking of current American president!
McEnroe reportedly pocketed USD 200,000 (near about) for his stint at the mike at the Wimbledon 2025. But, perhaps different than in 2024, he seems to be valuing his words at an exorbitant rate, say, USD 100 for a word! He did come on to share his punditry only in the second week (I did not hear him at all even in the matches played on the Centre Court and Court No. 1 in the first week), and possibly only at matches featuring marquee players, preferably on both sides of the net (that could not have happened). Has his exclusivity coefficient gone through the roof?
I have pulled myself away from watching TV in my current truly retired life, only to type out inane essays on anything under the sun. So, what I have said above, take them with a spoonful of salt.
From whatever I heard from him, I would vouch for his undiminished love for the game, and how he applies his sharp mind (he got admitted to Stanford, not on an athletic scholarship, but on a scholastic scholarship) that gave him the riches he currently enjoys. His voice, or is it his accent, I can never miss him even when he is not on the screen!
McEnroe was a redhead, a fiery one if you went by what the commentators said, and in 2025 we have one in Jannik Sinner. Sinner is everything McEnroe was not: emotionally restrained v. emotionally on the knife-edge; methodical v. free-spirited (not mean-spirited); precise v. here-there-everywhere. While I enjoyed McEnroe’s tennis (so many heart beats went missing), I enjoyed Jannick’s too.
Lendl was the perfect foil for McEnroe. When Lendl was following Dr. Haas Diet, McEnroe was downing Haagen Dazs ice creams, that is how different they were. Lendl was McEnroe’smarquee enemy and so he was mine too!
But, over time, I began to look at Lendl from a different vantage point: how hard he worked. He seemed to have told himself, “I would not be denied.” He built a grass court in his backyard in a swanky Connecticut neighbourhood with his eyes sharply focused on Wimbledon. Yet he was denied there, by Boris Becker (a player I never liked) and Pat Cash (a free-spirit, so much so that he climbed into the player’s box after winning the Wimbledon−what a sacrilege!−and an entertaining player) who was one of my favourites. My acceptance of Lendl did not carry any sympathy, only appreciation for his doggedness.
Sinner lost his French Open final to Carlos Alcaraz. Would Sinner at French Open be a rewind of Lendl at Wimbledon? Or, how about McEnroe’s loss to Lendl at Roland Garros. I hope not.
I saw a number of doubles matches, and let me be frank with you: the matches were shameful. McEnroe and Peter Fleming played classic doubles matches, so much so Fleming claimed that the best doubles pair was McEnroe and his partner, whosoever that maybe. To prove that, John McEnroe played doubles alongside his brother and won the tournament!
Even the Bryan brothers played with some amount of classic doubles strategy, but not any pair in any tournament over the past four years. No wonder that, even as I was glued to the TV expecting miracles, they never came. Except at the women’s doubles final, I would admit. But, that is ersatz, not satiating my hunger.
What might be to blame? Perhaps the large size racquet head (15.5” x 11.5”), the forearm strength of players ... One really does not have to be super tactical at the net as the racquet is well equipped to take care of the player’s deficiencies. Earlier if a stab volley fetched a point, perhaps quarter of the instances could have been put down to luck, Now, it is more like three quarters of the times.
I am nearing the end of this post (about time, you say). Try saying with a straight face that sports and politics shall not mix. I noticed something on the screen and I know many others did too, perhaps earlier than I did. Check out the screen-grab on the side:
Why there is no country listed alongside the name of the top-seed? She is from Belarus, and the people at the tennis governing body decreed that Russian and Belarusian athletes may compete only without the name of the country they belong to. In one not-too honourable stroke, the top seed’s nationality was erased from her identity. Then, think back during the years of Vietnam War. Raise the question whether the names of American athletes were accompanied by their nationality or not. They must have been, yet ought not have been. The excuse, none of the governing authorities stipulated so then. Valid, but moral, ethical? No.
Who pays the piper gets the name splashed on the scoreboard, a variation.
Raghuram Ekambaram
No comments:
Post a Comment