The “pontifications and proliferations over how much tennis the world’s leading players are forced to play is an annual exercise that rears its ugly head almost like clockwork,” but this year’s debate has been “more furious than usual,” according to Alexandra Willis of the London TELEGRAPH. The “debacle that was the US Open -- the weather, the courts, the misinformation and miscommunication -- didn’t help.” The “elephant in the room, of course, is how to fix it.” Willis: “Reduce the number of mandatory events for the top dogs? Lop off a week here and there? Change the rankings system?” Given that the needs of the ATP World Tour, the tournaments, top players and rest of the players “are radically different, we shall have to wait and see if it can” (London TELEGRAPH, 9/21). In London, Matt Scott noted tennis players “have a bigger say in what goes on than in any other major sport than golf.” They hold a “50% share of the ATP, with the other 50% held by the promoters.” Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer are the VP and President, respectively, of the player council, “the 12-man board that feeds their views to the ATP’s board.” The ruling body of the ATP in a statement said, “The players should and do have a major say in how the game is run, which is one of the key reasons the ATP Tour was formed as an equal partnership between players and tournaments” (GUARDIAN.co.uk, 9/20). In London, Paul Newman notes ATP Exec Chair & President Adam Helfant is “leaving at the end of the year and has yet to be replaced.” Newman: “His successor will need to be a true diplomat” (London INDEPENDENT, 9/21).
RIGHT TO WANT CHANGE? In London, Matthew Syed writes the top players “are right to want changes to the tennis calendar and are perfectly entitled to become militant if they do not get their way.” Syed: “It is, frankly, crazy that the likes of Andy Murray and Rafael Nadal are threatened with fines and ranking penalties for not competing in ATP Tour events, creating the insane situation where their bodies are breaking down under the interminable demands” (LONDON TIMES, 9/21). However, in London, Jim White writes under the header, “Andy Murray On Strike? He Can’t Be Serious: The Tennis Star’s Threat To Lead A Players’ Revolt Is Unlikely To Elicit Much Public Sympathy.” White: “Public sympathy is not high for a bunch of workers whose idea of oppression is being paid several million pounds to engage with a game the rest of us have to pay to play” (London TELEGRAPH, 9/21).
