Tennis Random, Random (On Court)

[meganfernandez]

Now I like him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ponchi101]

It took you THIS long?
He is either legit or his management team is a marvel.
I say a bit of both but, he seems legit to me.

[Fastbackss]

Paywalled by the umpire article. Oh well.

(Tangential sidebar - I still hate the Sports Illustrated website - so many ads and the like - and it often makes me avoid Wertheim's articles, which makes me sad because I enjoy his work)

[atlpam]

Paywalled by the umpire article. Oh well.

(Tangential sidebar - I still hate the Sports Illustrated website - so many ads and the like - and it often makes me avoid Wertheim's articles, which makes me sad because I enjoy his work)

Same here - I used to read Wertheim's articles on a regular basis but I gave up on the SI site even before the paywall went up. If anyone has the link to request his weekly mailbag by email, please repost it here.

[meganfernandez]

Paywalled by the umpire article. Oh well.

(Tangential sidebar - I still hate the Sports Illustrated website - so many ads and the like - and it often makes me avoid Wertheim's articles, which makes me sad because I enjoy his work)

Same here - I used to read Wertheim's articles on a regular basis but I gave up on the SI site even before the paywall went up. If anyone has the link to request his weekly mailbag by email, please repost it here.

I think you just email him - and I think it's jon_wertheim@si.com but you could CC jwertheim@si.com and jonwertheim@si.com to cover your bases. If you're on twitter, you could ask him.

I don't find it annoying myself. I access it through Twitter usually. There are some slightly irritating scrolling elements and a video that pops up - I think - but it hasn't bothered me enough to give up. I subscribed once it went paywalled. I have been reading the Mailbag every Wednesday for like 20 years! I can't stop. I have read it so long that I remember when he compared members of Fed's generation (his age and older, like Safin) to the characters in the Wizard of Oz. I think Fed was the cowardly lion, didn't have nerve. It was before he won his first Slam. I think Safin was the scarecrow - "If I only had a brain." I forget to the tin man was, the one without a heart.

This sent me down a little rabbit hole, where I saw these headlines from 2002:

Screen Shot 2022-04-15 at 10.37.12 AM.png

Screen Shot 2022-04-15 at 10.43.05 AM.png

[mmmm8]

Here's the umpire article without a paywall: https://archive.ph/ip3Xh

[ponchi101]

Thanks for the link. An interesting read.
So, is tennis in real trouble? The current behavior of the top players, this information, the incoming retiring of the top three in the ATP and Serena in the WTA. This does not paint a rosy picture.

[Deuce]

For those who couldn't access the article about umpires and officiating, here it is below...
It's worth reading.

Or you could try the link again and just click on your browser's 'Stop' button as soon as the page appears. That should stop it before the restriction aborts the article. That's what I do with paywalls, and it usually works (as it did with this article)...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tennis/2022 ... ear-power/

Revealed: 'Secret society' of tennis umpires living under reign of fear, power abuses and sexual favours

Exclusive: Telegraph investigation has exposed allegations of exploitation going on for decades which have been kept secret

BySimon Briggs, TENNIS CORRESPONDENT
14 April 2022 • 1:06pm


Tennis umpires are living under a “rule of fear” and are at risk of predatory sexual advances according to leading figures within the sport, who have called for urgent reform to prevent the exploitation of young officials.

A Telegraph investigation into the case of Soeren Friemel – the ITF head of officiating who resigned last month after making “inappropriate comments and invitations” to a younger umpire – has revealed previous instances of similar behaviour.

We found that:

• Power abuses of this kind have been known to tennis authorities for at least 15 years

• Non-disclosure agreements have been employed to keep such cases secret

• “Using your body” – being open to sexual advances – has long been considered a fast track for aspiring umpires

• A small number of people have disproportionate influence over umpiring appointments, creating networks of patronage and the potential for exploitation

• People are afraid to speak out, as whistleblowers tend to be ostracised

The investigation also found that tennis’s authorities, including the International Tennis Federation, have kept a lid on controversies by banning umpires from any interaction with media.

In the words of Richard Ings – a former head of officiating at the ATP Tour – “This rule was designed to prevent discussion of particular instances within matches. It was never designed to protect the sport from embarrassment. But that’s what it has become.”

Friemel’s resignation took place in the middle of the most turbulent period for player-umpire relations since John McEnroe was at his peak. In the first major event of 2022 – January’s Australian Open – Canada’s Denis Shapovalov earned an US$8,000 fine for yelling “You guys are all corrupt” at chair umpire Carlos Bernardes.

The case for a new umpiring regime is today put forward by Andrew Jarrett, the Englishman who was one of Friemel’s predecessors as ITF head of officiating, while also serving as Wimbledon referee between 2006 and 2019.

“The recent investigation by a QC [into Friemel’s behaviour] and the subsequent announcement by the ITF came as no great surprise,” Jarrett told the Telegraph in an email. “World tennis and the officials working within it deserve better governance. This is now an opportunity to make changes to a system that has long been broken.”

'We have to rip the system up'
Friemel’s case drew worldwide interest when it was first reported by the Telegraph on Feb 3. A 50-year-old German, Friemel was suspended for 12 months in relation to four incidents involving the same umpire between 2011 and 2015. According to an ITF spokesperson, “The issue was the situation of power imbalance.”

Now the Telegraph can reveal that similar allegations had previously been made against another leading tennis official, who cannot be named for legal reasons. This second case is widely known within the officiating world but has never been brought to public notice, because of the non-disclosure agreements used in what one insider called “a compromise departure”.

According to a senior tennis administrator, who spoke on condition of anonymity, the fact that two similar instances have emerged from the closed-off world of umpiring is evidence of the need for change.

“Officiating needs to be reviewed,” the administrator said. “We just have to accept it’s not right. It doesn’t need a sticking plaster. We have to rip it all up.”

Other former officials have told the Telegraph that abuses of various kinds have been going on in secret for decades. Networks of patronage develop because power is concentrated in the hands of a small number of individuals. Young officials have every reason to want to curry favour with their superiors.

“In my time, it was a well-known fast-track for your career if you were open to using your body to promote your career,” said Martin Wikstrom, a Swede who was a chair umpire in the early 2000s, before becoming a successful business executive. “When you look at some of the officials that came through – let's say within 10 years – there was no way that they would have made it, if the decision was purely based on their competence.”

Friemel’s suspension is unusual in that it emerged into the public domain, unlike previous scandals. Umpiring’s culture of silence starts with the Code of Conduct signed by all officials, stating that they “shall not, at any time, participate in any media interviews or meetings with journalists … without the approval of the supervisor/referee”. In practice, this approval is rarely given. And without any means for the younger, less experienced officials to have their voices heard, they become vulnerable to exploitation.

“Officials are afraid to speak,” said Richard Ings, who was the ATP’s head of officiating from 2001 to 2005, as well as the world’s highest-ranked chair umpire in the late 1990s. “If they do tell a reporter about anything that is happening backstage, even anonymously, their bosses will go hunting for who gave that information. If they find who spoke out, or maybe just have suspicions, they don’t even have to bring a Code of Conduct charge. They can simply not select that person for the next job. People quickly get the message and there is a wall of silence that develops.”

'Your face needs to fit'
If the umpiring world worked smoothly on its own terms, its inward-looking nature would not be so much of an issue. But the promotion of officials is a subjective business, which is further complicated by an apparently dysfunctional structure.

As one former grand slam referee told the Telegraph, “The structure is a legacy from the beginning of tennis’s Open era in 1968. The tours needed to provide top-class officiating for their events. But this meant we ended up with three different organisations, each with its own officials. It’s a horrible outcome because you end up with each group protecting its own patch.”

The ITF employ nine full-time officials, the Association of Tennis Professionals nine and the Women’s Tennis Association seven, plus five more in a “development” category.

Chair umpires start off with a white badge and then earn promotions through the three higher categories – bronze, silver and gold. Their performances are assessed by umpires in the band immediately above them, which presents an immediate conflict of interest. One former gold-badge umpire told the Telegraph that he had been encouraged by his peers not to mark too generously.

At the end of each year, a five-person “re-evaluation panel” meets. The panel – which comprises the heads of officiating at the three tours, plus one representative from the grand-slam events and one independent observer – decides who should be shunted up the hierarchy, and who down, in a process which many believe to be flawed.

“It’s a boys’ club,” said one silver-badge umpire. “They manage the marks to keep people in certain positions. The organisations know who they want and then the end-of-year meeting is a negotiation, an exchange. ‘If you let us have our person, we’ll let you have yours.’ They arrange the grades they want, pump them up for the favoured ones, penalise others by ignoring the good things.

“Supervisors and judges have the flexibility to write up the reports in any way they want. It’s not transparent. It’s not neutral. Gold badge umpires” – of whom there are 33 – “come in 50 shades of gold. Some have half the draw on their ‘No List’, while others can handle all-comers. [The ‘No List’ comprises the players whose matches an umpire is kept away from, because of previous run-ins.]”

According to another official, the lack of clarity around appointments allows networks of patronage to develop. “Nowadays, for an umpire to make a good career or to be promoted, it is not enough to be good in the chair. Your face needs to fit as well. If you make the right connections, or go to the right weddings, your career will jump up in front of people who are much better than you, and you’ll keep going even if you make very bad mistakes on live worldwide TV.”

The Telegraph put these claims of nepotism to Kris Dent, the ITF’s director of professional tennis, whose department oversees officiating. “We take any suggestions of wrongdoing seriously and have shown we will act where necessary,” Dent replied in an email. “This includes tackling any perception of unfairness, so that all umpires feel that they are treated the same. We also need to continue our efforts to address diversity in terms of male and female umpires and attract more people from Africa and some parts of Asia.

“I recognise that there are a few who don’t embrace these changes, but change is a constant and we must continue to adapt if we are to remain fit for purpose. The ITF chose to appoint an independent QC to run the investigation into Soeren Friemel. We also asked an arbitration firm based in London to handle the ensuing appeal. In 2016 we introduced additional review and approval layers for Davis Cup and Billie Jean King Cup ties, in terms of the appointment process of officials. It’s not the case at the ITF that these decisions are made by one person.”

A better model?
The Telegraph also asked Dent whether the tours should continue to run officiating, or whether it would be better if umpires came under the remit of the International Tennis Integrity Agency – a new umbrella organisation that was created last year to oversee the game’s anti-doping and anti-match fixing operations.

“I have yet to see a compelling case for that,” Dent replied. “What I do believe strongly is that we and the tours must continue to align and work closely for the benefit of officiating globally. By working together we can successfully tackle emerging challenges such as the role of new technology like electronic line-calling, which will undoubtedly require changes to the development pathway for the next generation of umpires and officials.”

Dent’s views on this last question are not shared by all. The senior tennis administrator – who preferred to remain anonymous – emphasised the need for more separation between officials and players.

“When the tours are reliant on good relations with the players, and officials are ruling on their matches, that’s quite tough,” the administrator said. “There’s a conflict of interest. An independent body is a very wise idea. The Friemel case has to be a wake-up call.”

Several recent incidents have drawn attention to the nature of the player-official relationship. Last month, world No3 Alexander Zverev received a suspended sentence for slamming his racket four times into the umpire’s chair after a disputed line call in Acapulco. The decision, taken by ATP head of officiating Miro Bratoev, led Wikstrom to comment on social media that “officials [are] sitting in the laps of the top players”.

Last week, ATP chief executive Andrea Gaudenzi was forced to send a circular to the men’s tour in which he complained that “the first three months of the season have seen an unusual frequency of high-profile incidents involving unsportsmanlike conduct” and promised sterner penalties in the future.

The ITF began advertising for Friemel’s replacement in late February. The appointment is seen by many in the business as a moment of truth. Kris Dent says that “we’re looking outside of tennis as well as inside,” and points out that an external agency – Sports Recruitment International – is handling the process.

For those who feel excluded or exploited by the system, a continuity candidate – meaning someone who is already high up in the industry – would be a further indication that nothing will change. They point at those who have been at the top of officiating for decades and suggest that their very silence is a kind of complicity.

Some believe that Friemel himself could yet return to frontline officiating, perhaps even stepping back into his other former position as referee of the US Open. This would not be a widely popular outcome, however. There are many who see his ITF resignation as an opportunity to rethink the whole area.

Tennis Investigation Form

.

[Owendonovan]

Sex for advancement just seems so basic.

[Deuce]

Sex for advancement just seems so basic.

The revelations/accusations in the article mention other elements of manipulation and corruption, as well...

[ti-amie]

[Owendonovan]

Sex for advancement just seems so basic.

The revelations/accusations in the article mention other elements of manipulation and corruption, as well...

True, but sex just seems so low bar. When that's all it takes, it just seems so unimaginative.

[ponchi101]

...

True, but sex just seems so low bar. When that's all it takes, it just seems so unimaginative.

What do you recommend? An offer you can't refuse? Your horse's head in your bed?
(I actually like your post. I find it unusually different)

[meganfernandez]

Sex for advancement just seems so basic.

The revelations/accusations in the article mention other elements of manipulation and corruption, as well...

True, but sex just seems so low bar. When that's all it takes, it just seems so unimaginative.

I know what you mean by unimaginative, but imagination isn’t very high on the list for most people. Certainly isn’t as important as sex.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ponchi101]

(Uhm, this topic is veering towards IMAGINATION and SEX, and these are the bunch of TAT perverts talking, so... how long before this thing heads straight to the dumpster?)