Tennis player Nikolay Davydenko became the "second man to object to Roger Federer's non-interventionist stance over players' grievances in his role as president of the Player Council yesterday," according to Simon Briggs of the London TELEGRAPH. Davydenko said, "I don't know why Roger is not supporting the players. Because he don't want ... any problems. He's nice guy. He's winning grand slams. He's from Switzerland. He's perfect. He don't want to do anything, he just try to be an outsider from this one." Davydenko's comments come after Rafael Nadal criticized Federer's stance. Briggs notes tennis politics are "notoriously hard to get a grip on, because no two players have exactly the same priorities." But the key issues being debated "are two-fold: prize money for lower-ranked players at grand slams and the number of tournaments the leading players have to appear in." Federer declined to broach the subject yesterday, saying, "I choose not to talk about those issues with you guys in the press room because unfortunately it can create negative stories." He added, "I thought the game was healthy. We're in a golden era right now. Everybody is happy, talking positive." Briggs notes the last comment "seems an odd thing to say when the Association of Tennis Professionals players' meeting held on Saturday night was full of angst and anger" (London TELEGRAPH, 1/17). Meanwhile, top-ranked men's player Novak Djokovic today "called for talks to improve conditions in tennis to be kept 'behind closed doors.'" He said the players "don’t even need to say much." Djokovic: "But just looking at the injuries that we have, especially from the top players, including myself … it’s obvious that we need some change. But I prefer talking in detail about these things more behind closed doors" (AFP, 1/17). Nadal said that he would "no longer be discussing in public what he should be discussing with Federer in private." Nadal: "Yesterday, you know, I started, and I say I don't want to talk anymore about this. Finally I talked too much -- as usual. That's not gonna happen again" (Montreal GAZETTE, 1/17).
PLAYING POLITICS? SI.com's Jon Wertheim noted the feud between Nadal and Federer has been "brewing for months." Nadal has been "lobbying for a ranking system based on two years of results," while Federer "publicly opposed this." Nadal was "adamant that the next ATP CEO have a playing background and was firm" in his support of Richard Krajieck. Federer also "opposed this ... expressing concern about his lack of business experience." Some in Nadal's camp "believe Federer has been too cautious and conservative with his approach to the ATP, leaving it to others -- specifically Nadal and Andy Murray -- to make the statements and deal with the political fallout." Wertheim wrote Nadal has a "fair point that the season is too long; that the tournament representatives on the ATP board are not sufficiently sympathetic to injuries and fatigue; that Federer could stand to be a little less political and circumspect." Federer, on the other hand, is "understandably loath to blow up a system that has served him well." He "compassionately points out that he represents all the players who are ATP members," not just the top ones (SI.com, 1/16). ESPN's Mary Joe Fernandez said, "Some of these issues have been around a long time. ... The one positive that comes out of this is that you have one of the best players ever in Roger Federer, ranked three now, and Nadal, ranked two, involved. They are passionate about the sport.” ESPN's Darren Cahill said, “This is not just prize money, this is scheduling and the retirement fund. There are a lot of issues players would like to get resolved." ESPN's Brad Gilbert: "We need a commissioner. We have no real leadership. ... We need to become a union and then when we become a union, we get a commissioner and we can actually make a change” ("Australian Open," ESPN2, 1/17).
CONTROVERSY BEHIND THE SCENES? The TELEGRAPH's Briggs writes fans have become "so used to the nicey-nicey mateship of the main contenders that Rafael Nadal's sideswipe at Roger Federer rang out like a mobile phone at midnight mass." He notes with blanket media coverage and microphones on the court, the players "can’t sledge each other any more." But that "doesn’t mean that there aren’t tensions bubbling away behind the scenes." Tennis professionals find it "notoriously difficult to agree on how the game should be run, because they all have different agendas and there is no player’s union to pull them into line." Briggs: "Little by little, though, they are finding some common ground -- notably on the need for better prize money for the lower-ranked players at Grand Slams." If Federer "continues to shrug about these issues, and to argue that there is nothing wrong with the status quo, then it is difficult to see how he can remain president of the Player Council for much longer" (London TELEGRAPH, 1/17).
