Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[ponchi101]

Serious question.
Is Naomi clear about what "mental health issues" encompass? By that I mean that coming out of a press conference feeling not well, after you lost a match and were asked some questions, does not necessarily equal "mental health issues". We know that some players have addressed this aspect of health, most recently, Sinner starting his "What kept you going?" movement.
And I can't recall any player that has been outspoken about mental health bringing up the interviews as part or source of the problem. They do talk about burnout, the traveling, the separation for long periods of time from family and friends, but, and again, I am seriously asking, I can't recall anybody mentioning that the post match interviews are a burden that pushes them into an unhealthy state. In that aspect, and MJ talked about this, she seems to be trivializing mental health, as your feelings after losing a match are not the same as problems such as Clinical Depression, Anxiety or any other known maladies.

[Deuce]

Someone should ask her if she meant-- oh, wait, never mind. We'll have to wait until she gives us more info on social media if she feels like it. Sounds like a good system.

^ This draws attention to an interesting element of this situation...
Now, it's rather well known that I am not a fan of 'social media' - because most people abuse it to desperately seek attention, which I don't believe is psychologically healthy... but could 'social media' effectively replace the press conference, etc?
We've already seen several examples of 'famous people' choosing to take control of what they share with the general public - and 'social media' allows for this. It seems that more and more 'famous people' are choosing this path, while shying away from the common media.

And so, given that tennis is an individual sport, could we see the ATP and WTA, for example, in the not too distant future, make players post something on 'social media' about their just completed match, rather than make them attend press conferences? It seems that this might be a win/win situation - the fans would get insight into the matches/players, and the players would maintain a control over what they share with the public, no longer having to take the risk of it going through the filter of the media, which have been known to misunderstand, misinterpret, and even outright lie about things in order to 'sell more newspapers'.
The members of the media would be the only ones who don't 'win' in this circumstance.

Of course, the players would be just as capable as the media of putting their own 'spin' on things, which doesn't necessarily reflect the truth. But overall, there would probably be more accuracy if information and insights are coming directly from the players than if they continue to be filtered through the media.

[nelslus]

I am just shaking my head with some of the Naomi posts in here. And why, seriously, for the sake of my own mental health issues, I pretty much only come in here with the Pools. (Clinical depression has not robbed me of my lust for imaginary little tennis trophies/past imaginary little gold medals.)

How does Naomi make the WTA look, when "male players don't seem to be complaining either"? WELL, then, we have had plenty of stories about male players from numerous sports who, especially after they retire, DO go through bouts of depression, anxiety, etc. Who batter their spouses. Who attempt or succeed with suicides/homicides. So, you know: men have mental health issues, too. I'd say that men, historically, have done a pretty (expletive) job when it comes to dealing with mental health issues.

So, how does this make Naomi and the WTA look? I think that, if this world can become more honest- that this makes her look like she's ahead of her time and a leader.

TRUST that I am not saying nor meaning to imply that press conferences are leading anyone to a lifetime of mental health woes. But- when did anyone in here suddenly become an expert at what Naomi is going through? Do any of you REALLY know what is going on in her head right now? What she has been through? I applaud Naomi, because SHE knows better about how to best deal with her own mental health issues than anyone else could. Dealing best with mental issues can be very different for any individual.

I also wish, seriously, that we men would just learn to shut the **** up more. We've done a pretty **** job.

Ultimately, no one's specific mental health issues are anyone's damned business. But, she has chosen to be upfront about this- and I feel it is, at least, inappropriate to question anyone when they say they have mental health issues. You know- maybe just consider going with, believing someone has mental health issues when they say that they do? In my view, that is brave and smart. Especially when you see how the world reacts when you admit you have mental health issues, AND especially if you are a woman who has mental health issues.

Like, in my much, MUCH-smaller-world way, I chose a LONG time ago to be out as a gay man including at my jobs (except working as a social worker with clients, because you aren't supposed to talk about your personal life with clients, period), and then also about my depression and mental health issues. Because, for sure, nothing is going to change unless some speak up. And I've paid the price for sure. I can only imagine how Naomi will get dragged. And, sure, it sucks for me that I can't toss out tens of thousand of dollars in two weeks time to make any kind of a point. But, I'm not going to hate on Naomi because I don't have that luxury. PROPS to Naomi, I say.

To make myself even more popular in here- I'll add that, in my view, sometimes doubters and questioners may very well have mental health issues that they are unaware of, or deny, or they have loved ones with issues and they are in denial. Or, they were raised in the 0.00005% of word-wide functional families and just don't know any better. (It could happen?) Or, they're just, at least on this subject, insensitive. And/or won't listen, won't learn.

BTW, I'll always feel some even justifiable shame that I was not capable of utilizing all of the talents that I have had in my life. (But, I've used some, so there.) And, one of the main reasons is, for all of my bark- I knew what any sizable group of people would say about me, most definitely from any group of gay men. (And now that I am 61, JUST imagine!!!!! ) I am stronger than many might think- but, I ain't that strong. With Naomi's level of world attention?!?!? NO!!!!! thank you.

I do know that I have to speak up, for my own well-being, especially as depression is one huge ****er. Hopefully, even such small gestures can ultimately help, at least in an accumulative way.

I also get that I can be viewed as a complete hypocrite here with my history of vile posts about some players. (And, I can apologize for many, but not concerning Lard-Ass. With his 275 Roland Garros titles, Lard-Ass can handle it.) But- maybe it wouldn't hurt if we managed to live in a world where we don't in the press have to rip Konta a new one during her next Strycova-Wimbledon moments? Maybe, like in so many ways, we can yet again learn that, just because "we've always done it this way" with sports, we can evolve and consider that maybe the "old way" was always wrong, so we can do better? Maybe we just let the player who can handle the stress that already takes place during any major tennis contest, and not have to deal with the rest of the world's crap, win?

[nelslus]

AND, yes, I know, too, TOO many words. (BTW, I also chose to censor myself. When I did censor myself. NO one here asked me to do so.)

[ponchi101]

No such things as too many words.
We, or at least I, talked about this part recently: that we "do not know" what these players go through. But we do, at least a little bit. We know that Naomi leads a life that would be the envy of many, a life of riches and fame. She is famous, extremely successful, has a boyfriend that seems to be very supportive, we hear nothing about family problems in the same fashion that, from very early, we heard about Capriatti, Pierce, Dokic or Mirjana Lucic. Those seem not to be there.
So, although the default mode here is not to blame people, having an opinion is an intrinsic part of what the forum is about.
Plus nobody here has claimed expertise in the subject but, by that same token, Naomi is not an expert either. She is an expert at hitting a tennis ball, not at psychiatric issues. We can talk.
And maybe, just maybe, every once in a while one of the rich and famous is the one that does not know what s/he is talking about. Maybe, just maybe, it is they that don't have a clue of what the rest of the world goes through.
And great that you are not going to hate on Naomi because I have read all the posts and nobody else is doing it either. Not immediately agreeing with somebody does not mean "hate". It simply means disagreement, just like Nadal and Barty, who maybe do know more about that world than we do, did.

[JazzNU]

Naomi absolutely made it clear that race and gender were a factor in this. If you missed that, you're missing the obvious.

Behind the Racquet exists and way too many are acting like the mere idea of mental health struggles on the tour are almost an impossibility.

Real interesting to see y'all pretend like tennis media don't ask ignorant questions of players, especially black players. The tennis media perceiving their questions as fine doesn't make them so.


Overall, tennis media continue to make Naomi's point for her. It's rather pitiful this supposedly objective group don't see they are doing exactly that in their rather petty response to this. And the US "journalists" in particular, really closing out Mental Health Awareness Month with a bang.

[nelslus]

No such things as too many words.
We, or at least I, talked about this part recently: that we "do not know" what these players go through. But we do, at least a little bit. We know that Naomi leads a life that would be the envy of many, a life of riches and fame. She is famous, extremely successful, has a boyfriend that seems to be very supportive, we hear nothing about family problems in the same fashion that, from very early, we heard about Capriatti, Pierce, Dokic or Mirjana Lucic. Those seem not to be there.
So, although the default mode here is not to blame people, having an opinion is an intrinsic part of what the forum is about.
Plus nobody here has claimed expertise in the subject but, by that same token, Naomi is not an expert either. She is an expert at hitting a tennis ball, not at psychiatric issues. We can talk.
And maybe, just maybe, every once in a while one of the rich and famous is the one that does not know what s/he is talking about. Maybe, just maybe, it is they that don't have a clue of what the rest of the world goes through.
And great that you are not going to hate on Naomi because I have read all the posts and nobody else is doing it either. Not immediately agreeing with somebody does not mean "hate". It simply means disagreement, just like Nadal and Barty, who maybe do know more about that world than we do, did.

To be clear, I was not suggesting that anyone in HERE was literally "hating" on Naomi, in the sense of being hateful. "Not hating" on someone these days can just be pretty much an innocuous statement. Some in the world, however, will be hateful towards her. But, I just meant to post that I am NOT hating on Naomi for having a ka-zillion dollars to do what I can't do- and even would love to be able to do, sometimes. Nothing more.

Nevertheless, I am going to suggest that perhaps the default setting should not be to doubt someone talking about mental health issues. How do you know she has no expertise concerning mental health issues? She knows her internal workings. We do not.

And, I have a handsome African-American partner (who, thankfully, clearly is not superficial), we've been together for 26 years, I have some life-long friends, I have done a lot of work in the social services that I am proud of, and both John and me make good incomes- and extremely good incomes compared to the rest of the world. In many ways, of course we are privileged. And, yet, I have diagnosed, clinical depression. Which both just has happened, and for which I definitely feel I have mountains of evidence that, this clinical depression is honestly earned. And that evidence ain't getting discussed in detail in Talk About Tennis 2.

IN any case, depression and mental issues don't ultimately give a **** about our incomes. It's all quite equal opportunity.

So, I am going to continue to question giving an opinion on anyone's life and issues- when none of us truly know. If it were to be definitely proven that I am all wrong specifically about Naomi even- hey, so be it. This is a topic that clearly must be aired, regardless. This all is too important and sensitive a topic, ponchi.

[nelslus]

PS: Most importantly- yes, there are, sometimes, too many words. And I am proof.

[Deuce]

Naomi absolutely made it clear that race and gender were a factor in this. If you missed that, you're missing the obvious.

^ Please point to how she has brought race and/or gender into her stance on not doing any media/press at Roland Garros.
I've done specific searches for this, and have found absolutely no reference - obvious or subtle - to either race or gender in her statements about not doing media.

If you have evidence that her position of not doing media at Roland Garros is about race and/or gender, by all means, show us - in Naomi's words, please, not just in a personal perception of her words.

At the U.S. Open, she wore the different masks and talked about race - so, yes, she has a history of taking on that subject. But I've seen no evidence that this current position is about race or gender in any way. All the evidence I've seen points to her focussing on the mental health/psychological issues of players WITHOUT restricting it to any race or gender. And I feel that's the right approach - to include EVERYONE who may be affected.

Real interesting to see y'all pretend like tennis media don't ask ignorant questions of players, especially black players. The tennis media perceiving their questions as fine doesn't make them so.

I have seen the media be very critical of Djokovic, Zverev, Shapovalov, Paire, etc. - all white men. Going back further, I've seen the media be highly critical of Soderling, Connors, Lendl, McEnroe, Nastase, Tiriac, Tanner, etc., etc. - all white men, as well. And there are many more.
I have also seen Serena get away with several things that some other players - notably white males - would have been crucified for in the media.
I haven't seen any criticism of or disrespect shown toward Cori Gauff that has seemed to be in any way racially motivated or based in any form of discrimination. I've seen very little criticism of Gauff - I've seen far more positive things about her in the media than negative. Far, far more.

That's not to say that black players have not been mistreated by the media - of course they have. But so, too, have white American males. And white Czechs. And Aboriginal Australians. And Japanese. And every other colour and nationality under the sun - of both genders. And some of that mistreatment (I'd say a relatively small portion) has very likely been based in racial bias and/or discrimination of some degree. In tennis media, I don't see how any colour or nationality has been favoured over others, nor do I see that any colour or nationality has been more often criticized or disrespected or more unfairly treated than any other.

Racism certainly does exist, and it is a serious issue. No-one can honestly deny that. But seeing it at and around absolutely every corner serves only to trivialize the issue - in a 'crying wolf' sort of way.

[ponchi101]

Nothing unexpected:
Naomi Osaka fined $15,000 for media boycott, warned about escalating consequences

[Suliso]

From that statement:

We have advised Naomi Osaka that should she continue to ignore her media obligations during the tournament, she would be exposing herself to possible further Code of Conduct infringement consequences. As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

[ti-amie]

From that statement:

We have advised Naomi Osaka that should she continue to ignore her media obligations during the tournament, she would be exposing herself to possible further Code of Conduct infringement consequences. As might be expected, repeat violations attract tougher sanctions including default from the tournament (Code of Conduct article III T.) and the trigger of a major offence investigation that could lead to more substantial fines and future Grand Slam suspensions (Code of Conduct article IV A.3.).

Benoit Paire's on court conduct.
Cirstea literally shoving a chair umpire.
Bashilasvili(sp)
Zverev
Querrey fleeing in a private jet after a positive Covid test

But hey, skip a presser and you suffer the wrath of the ITF.

[ponchi101]

None of the events you are talking about happened at a Slam, so the ITF does not have jurisdiction over those.
You can add to that list:
Fabio's insult to the chair umpire (I believe it was in Italy).
Kyrgios tanking sets at Wimby (which I believe we all agreed warranted more than the nothing they did).
Certainly there are others.

The practical side? Allow Naomi to skip the pressers, with no fines or anything, and most players will not go, not because of any stand or opinion, but simply because they are boring.

[ti-amie]

No these things didn't happen at Slams but tennis "media" losing its collective mind over one player making a decision makes me wonder what provoked her decision.

That said we can always do the "Imagine if player so and so did...". There are bigger things than skipping a presser the tennis media could be upset about especially since it's been years since RG posted transcripts or video of post match pressers.

As Marshawn Lynch said

[ponchi101]

Is the media "losing" its mind? I really don't know if there has been an uproar over this. I have only seen it reported, not blown out of proportion.
What should RG do? Simply accept it? It is a contractual obligation.