Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think the person who brought their baby to Wimbledon should be ashamed

335 replies

StunningCunt · 03/08/2012 16:41

Crying in the middle of the point, 17-16 in the final set of the semifinal, do people have no sense???

OP posts:
Original poster
StunningCunt · 03/08/2012 20:40

In fact you can hear the baby crying during Del Potro's service game, which he loses, after AIR, not dropping a single service game in the match. And that's then game over.

OP posts:
AnnieLobeseder · 03/08/2012 20:43

SirBoobAlot - your attitude seems to be one of stunning entitlement. Why should parents miss out if they can't get a babysitter? Because they will ruin an event that other people have trained a lifetime/paid very good money to enjoy without the distraction of a baby crying. As I and other have said, it's not about not wanting babies out in public, it's not wanting babies at events which are not suitable for them and other people will suffer for them being there.

ilovesooty · 03/08/2012 20:46

David Ferrer was similarly distracted by a crying baby during a match last year. Some parents just appear to have no common sense or basic manners.

janey68 · 03/08/2012 20:48

"Why should the parent miss out" is the stupidest comment on the thread.

To put it bluntly, pushing a baby out of one's ladybits does not give you an automatic right to take that baby everywhere or let it disturb other people's enjoyment - whether that be enjoyment at a film, or winning a gold medal.

It's not about babies not being allowed in public. I have already said, I don't see any harm in taking a tiny baby to a film, as long as you are prepared to miss it if the baby starts crying and you have to leave. I used to express milk and get a babysitter, because I weighed it up and didn't want to risk getting 20 mins into a good movie and then possibly missing it. If I'd had a baby who couldn't drink from a bottle or if I was one of those mothers who can't bear to be apart from baby for a couple of hours, I would have taken the baby and risked having to leave. Or given up on going to the cinema for a while. Them's the choices.

maras2 · 03/08/2012 20:48

Old gimmer here but isn't the cinema a bit loud for babies?I know that my ears ring for a while after watching a film.However about the olympics,it was such a shame for the players but seems that mum was shameless.

princelypurpleparrot · 03/08/2012 20:49

I initially felt guilty for not applying for "pay your age" tickets for DS (2). Now the Olympics are here I am so glad I didn't. I also have a 9mo, and the thought of having either of them at any event is scary! Both are noisy, wriggly and can't sit still. No enjoyment for anyone!

I don't understand how anyone can get annoyed at people thinking that having a crying baby at the tennis is inappropriate. I wish we were a much more child friendly country, but there are limits. It's sad if someone can't get a babysitter, but I'd rather someone miss out on seeing the tennis than a player who's trained hard for years miss out on winning!

roundtable · 03/08/2012 20:51

Blimey, some people are selfish.

Be interested to see if their opinion would change if it was their 'baby' competing and someone elses baby cried and put them off.

bogeyface · 03/08/2012 20:54

they should be "Disgraced"? Really?

Have you ever been to Wimbledon? Getting in is a job in itself, getting out again especially with armfuls of crying baby would be a nightmare! Perhaps the mother thought that she could calm the baby or was actually trying to leave.

I am more disgusted at the attitude that a tennis match (a GAME) is worth this level of vitriol at someone who you dont know was actually being selfish.

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 03/08/2012 20:55

YANBU, but why did they allow a baby in in the first place?

bogeyface · 03/08/2012 20:55

That is, getting out again when everyone is sitting watching the match. She might have thought that the crying was the lesser of 2 evils than the cry AND a mexican wave of people having to let her out!

youarewinning · 03/08/2012 20:57

They probably weren't eben pg when they booked and paid for the tickets!

Agree they shouldn't have a baby there though. Did they leave when it cried?

OutragedAtThePriceOfFreddos · 03/08/2012 20:57

That's why she shouldn't have taken the baby in at all Bogey.

miaowmix · 03/08/2012 20:58

Bogeyface presumable that mother that the 'game' was important enough to bring her baby to. Babies + sport don't mix, it's a very straightforward equation.

Loshad · 03/08/2012 20:59

agree roundtable, amazingly selfish. Was at the olympics yesterday and sat next to a very bored, upset and wriggly crawler. Utterly pointless her being there, and actually not that nice for her either.
I missed out on the cinema for years, 4 dcs, all breastfed and who wouldn't take a bottle. Know what, i survived Hmm

Original poster
StunningCunt · 03/08/2012 20:59

I have been to Wimbledon, yes. And I wouldn't take a baby there in the first place, forget trying to get out when it starts crying in the middle of the point!!!

The world's best players neither deserve nor expect you to 'calm the baby', they don't expect to hear it in the first place!!!

Calming a baby is appropriate on a say a plane (yes people moan there, but you know, they'll get over it). It is not appropriate in a Shakespeare play, a tennis match, a ballet, etc.

OP posts:
ilovesooty · 03/08/2012 20:59

She shouldn't have taken the baby and the baby shouldn't have been admitted.

It's a bit more than a game. It represents years of hard work and traing: it wasn't a knock up in the park.

QueenMaeve · 03/08/2012 21:01

I think this is yet another example of people thinking they are raising little dauphins. 'Make way, make way for I have a baby, bow down and adore the baby'

sayanythingrogerjustrogerme · 03/08/2012 21:03

I don't know why a baby was allowed tbh. I know at Wimbledon no "babes in arms" are admitted, but I guess they have different rules for the Olympics.

JollyHockeyStick · 03/08/2012 21:04

Although I agree that the baby shouldn't have been there, it's not quite as simple as "just leave them with a sitter, it's only a few hours". We live 100s of miles from London and if we'd been the parents in this case we would have had to give up our tickets in order to avoid the situation.

We would have given up the tickets though, rather than take a small baby to a tennis match or leave them with someone else for at least 36 hours.

bogeyface · 03/08/2012 21:04

Then the blame lies with whoever decided that babies would be admitted.

I assume that the parents wouldnt have dreamed of taking the baby if they thought that would happen, I know that out of my lot 3 I could have taken and they would have been a dream and 3 I would have kept away when they were babies. But sometimes things go wrong.

I still think that the level of nastiness towards a parent is way OTT. As I said, you dont know what happened, and as for blaming the baby for a match being lost, that is ridiculous and frankly quite childish.

Olympia2012 · 03/08/2012 21:05

'a game' Hmm

bogeyface · 03/08/2012 21:05

Yeah, a game.

Get over it.

Floggingmolly · 03/08/2012 21:06

If getting out with a screaming baby was really that difficult, then common sense should have dictated they shouldn't have gone bloody well in in the first place. Why would you excuse her on that basis Confused

GhostShip · 03/08/2012 21:06

Bogeyface no it isn't! It's the blame of the person doing the act not the person allowing it.

And what sort of parent doesn't 'dream' that their BABY could cry.

ilovesooty · 03/08/2012 21:07

Who's blaming the baby? I'm blaming the selfish mother and the officials who let them in. Perhaps the match's outcome might have been the same without the crying but it didn't help.