Though Alexandre Dumas was speaking of a sea man when he wrote, “an old sailor, at once the pilot and captain, looked on with that egotistical pity men feel for a misfortune that they have escaped yesterday and which may overtake them tomorrow,” he could easily have been speaking about the sportsman.
This season we’ve witnessed Mourinho’s bizarre unraveling at Chelsea and Gary Neville’s Valencia debacle. In the recent past we’ve seen David Moyes’ failure and Fernando Torres’ goal drought. These men endured hardship and humiliation in a most public forum, inspiring pity and cruelty around the world. The jokes made at their expense were merciless and plentiful, but they were rarely made by peers.
The desperate plight of David Moyes at Manchester United was mocked relentlessly in the media and by fans–but never by other managers. In Moyes’ struggles, the managerial world could see their own. It doesn’t pay to tempt fate and what happened to Moyes was widely agreed to have been the inexorable destiny of any manager who followed Sir Alex.
While respect amongst colleagues would appear to be an admirable quality in all professions, certain personalities on the tennis circuit feel otherwise.
The tennis world has been criticized for being too nice. There is an outcry for more rivalries like Connors-McEnroe–replete with open hostility and smack talking. The outcriers assert that Nick Kyrgios and Ernests Gulbis are “refreshing” in their hubris.
Kyrigos incited critisicsm from players and fans when an on court mic caught his mumblings during a match against Stan Wawrinka. Kyrgios, speaking of Stan’s girlfriend, said, “[Thanasi] Kokkinakis banged your girlfriend. Sorry to tell you that, mate.” Kyrgios was fined for his comment and chastised by Roger Federer (the closest thing to being excoriated in the polite tennis world). Federer said, “I think we all agree that [Kyrgios] definitely crossed the line by a long shot. We’re not used to that kind of talk in tennis. I know in other sports it’s quite common, maybe normal. Not in our sport, really. I think it’s normal that the tour comes down hard on him and explains to him that it’s not the way forward.” Federer didn’t come down too hard on the young Australian and Wawrinka himself only asked that the ATP dispense justice–this is, after all, the gentlemen’s game.
Perhaps less inflammatory, but plenty audacious, Gulbis called the Big Four boring. He said their press interviews are “crap”. He said tennis is missing “war, blood, emotion”. Tennis players give press conferences that are, like most professional athletes, exceedingly politically correct. They typically cite luck as a factor in their victories and refuse to be baited into saying anything negative about their opponents.
Gulbis was ranked 40 at the time of his comments. The comments alone were the most notable thing he had contributed in some time. He possessed a luxury the Big Four did not–anonymity. The Big Four would be subject to immense scrutiny if they strayed from the standard party line, “I played exceptionally today and my opponent put up an admirable fight,”
Additionally, the Big Four are endowed with wisdom. Their own careers have had dips and and having reached the highest heights (unlike Gulbis), they know the devastation of a comedown. Perhaps Gulbis, unaware that a drop from the top spot is the most painful, is unable to empathize and recognize that a brutally honest press conference could be counterproductive.
While most people are thankful that Djokovic has greatly reined in his immature behavior and controversial comments (and impersonations) over the years, there is a population who decry the sanitization of his public image. Djokovic, they argue, has been peer pressured into behaving like a bland tennis robot.
Boris Becker has tried to bait Federer into saying something headline worthy, declaring that is it common knowledge that Novak and Roger do not get along. Federer would not take the bait and Becker is the one who ends up looking provocative and stupid. We began with a discussion about empathy.
How much of the political correctness in the tennis world is due to that “egotistical pity men feel for a misfortune that they have escaped yesterday and which may overtake them tomorrow?” A great deal, I believe.
The Big Four always express the belief and hope that Rafa will be back and play at the level ‘we know he is capable of’, though all evidence points to a slow, but real, demise. Do they believe recovery is possible? Or do they espouse such views out of charitable and empathetic motivation?
Tennis is a lonely sport in which the only people you can relate to are your bitter foes–who else knows the devastation of losing in the final of a Grand Slam? Tennis is a sport so mentally grueling and emotionally taxing that shared experiences forge friendships and respect that can transcend rivalry. The Big Four’s empathy is no act. It is a sincere product of the common experience of going through the greatest highs and lowest lows that only a chosen few at the apexes of their fields can understand.
Polite answers and a refusal to be provoked are not entirely rooted in self-preservation and the avoidance of controversy. The list of athletes touted as the next big thing who fail to reach their potential is almost as long as the list of career journeymen who never make it out of relative obscurity. Given the luck and timing required to have the sort of athletic career that makes you a global superstar, it is easy to imagine that a few points played differently or an injury or two could be the difference between a Federer career and a Monfils career. The perspicacity that comes with success is a huge part of tennis’ “too nice” problem.
No comments:
Post a Comment