To not appreciate Serena using sexism in her arguments against umpire

[user1471517900]

Sorry if there is a thread, I did scan four pages to check.

Serena gets coached (which her coach admits) but claims she didn't see it. Then smashes a racquet in separate fit of temper. Then tells the umpire she can't be a cheat because she's a mother(!), he will never referee a match again with her, and he's a thief.

The punishments all seem fine to me and I really felt for Osaka having to apologise in her winners speech. Serena should be saying sorry today IMO.

wowfudge and Rainbunny

Its always been a problem when players become bigger than the sport that they play.

It will be interesting to see if this stops the rot, or we end up with another sport like football.

("He" being the cartoonist)

Serena is a great player but I'm not with her on this. Maybe other players have got off too lightly in the past (I don't know), but if so the answer is to toughen up across the board, not allow a player to harass the umpire out of applying the rules correctly during a match. There's absolutely no point having an umpire if a player can effectively overrule them.

If I get caught speeding, I can't demand an apology from the cops on the basis that the majority of other speeders aren't punished and for whatever reason I'm feeling victimized. You'd all be telling me just not to drive too fast. Same logic applies here, harsh as it may feel.

From beginning to end her own actions caused this, and I think she'll lose respect if she tries to politicize it and shirk responsibility at the expense of an umpire who simply did his job. The sporting thing to do is to apologize and congratulate the winner, move on.

Rainbunny I agree entirely. I am a tennis player too and there is almost universal condemnation for Serena's behaviour at my club.

What was really heartening was to hear DS and a group of 15 yr olds discussing the issues of sexism and racism that this incident has highlighted, after their coaching session today. They made some very thoughtful points ( instead of the usual discussion about X Box!). This didn't change their conclusion that her behaviour towards the umpire was outrageous... but the way the talked about equality did give me some hope for the future.

Women tennis players aren't PAID unfairly though, are they? The same money for 69% of the work. And the men don't dare to say it's unfair.

Women tennis players aren't PAID unfairly though, are they? The same money for 69% of the work. And the men don't dare to say it's unfair.

Men only play five sets in the grand slams and I think the Davis Cup. There's a lot more tournaments where both sexes play three sets, so it isn't really possible to calculate a percentage because how many tournaments a player chooses to play is variable (not to mention how deep they might go into that tournament).

Part of the reason that women do not play five sets is the traditional notion that they're not up to the physical challenge, but the main reason it won't happen - ever - is because the tournament organisers don't want it, and the television companies don't want it because it makes scheduling too hard. I believe it's also the case that the spectators don't want it. If the men really felt it wasn't fair, they could play a three set format, but I suspect they know that part of the attraction of men's tennis at the GSs is because it is five sets, five sets is more exciting, and they don't want to give that up.

This article is quite interesting on the subject of a three-set experiment in the men's game at the majors
www.nytimes.com/2016/06/25/sports/tennis/still-questioning-the-best-of-five-format-in-mens-tennis.html

Martina Navratilova has put it very well

www.nytimes.com/2018/09/10/opinion/martina-navratilova-serena-williams-us-open.html

I am baffled about why my post was removed. Mumsnet, please could I have an explanation?

I genuinely don't understand which part of the guidelines I transgressed.

DolorestheNewt

Another reason is that the women only playing 3 sets don't want it to change as it allows them to play doubles in the tournaments and increase their pay.

BoneyBackJefferson That's interesting and I genuinely didn't know that, but presumably there's no reason that it's equally a route that could be explored for men if fairness were the issue, particularly if they all introduced tie breaks for the final set as well as the earlier ones (following, I think, the example already set by the US Open)..

Or, and my sarcasm is honestly not directed at you because I did truly find your post an interesting addition!, but at the world in general, I guess the other way of looking at it could be that the system does work well for women in this arena and oh my God an argument related to money has been adjudicated in women's favour - I wonder what it feels like for an entire gender to feel financially disadvantaged? I know, let's ask men in the context of equal pay in tennis.

I know many female county level tennis players. None of them agreed with the ladies getting the same prize money at Wimbledon when that was changed a few years ago, which I found interesting. They felt that if the competition is identical and men and women play best of three sets, the prize money should be identical but in tournaments where the men play best of five the prize money should be higher.

I think that a Wimbledon men's final over 5 sets is fairly obviously a superior product to a women's final over 3 sets. However I would have thought the solution is to play 5 set matches for women as well.

If you have a 5-set product for women then that would boost the appeal of the game.

doedoe90303811 Organisers and TV companies don't have the will to organise it logistically. That was a key plank of the argument. It's not a choice that's practically being offered to the women.
The choice of reducing the men's game to three sets is open to the male players, but they didn't appear to want it when that was trialled (admittedly a few decades ago).

Sorry, when I say it's open to them, I don't mean three sets has been offered to men as a point of discussion in recent years. I just mean that if they wanted to play the same number of sets for the same money, that would be the obvious way to level it, rather than the logistical problems of scheduling both sexes for five sets. Just to be clear!

Women tennis players aren't PAID unfairly though, are they? The same money for 69% of the work. And the men don't dare to say it's unfair.

Does the venue sell fewer tickets or are the ticket prices reduced for women's matches? Are the television rights cheaper? If not then it doesn't really matter, if women bring the same money to the tournament organisers as the men do in fewer sets it's actually better for them.

On Serena - I do think there is sexism in that there are male players who throw tantrums, scream, shout, swear etc.

I think Baghdatis only got a fine for all this
www.reuters.com/article/us-tennis-open-baghdatis/baghdatis-causes-racquet-as-his-rage-goes-viral-idUSTRE80I0IC20120119

At this point - it hasn't always been thus - men's tennis is currently more popular than women's tennis, and may well generate more money.

One argument would definitely be that it's more popular, so men should be paid more, and that was the basic thought behind the comments that someone made - can't remember who but it's easily Googlable - when he said that Serena et al should "go down on their knees every night in thankfulness" (that's more or less right) for Roger and Rafa as they're just coattailing the guys. (and don't tell me he didn't have a particular image at the back of his mind when he chose that particular knees phrase).

Another argument would be that the five set product is partly why men's tennis is more popular - it sends a subliminal message that it's more important, which the audience is responding to, and it is more exciting on a literal practical level for the obvious reasons that you can still get a reversal after two sets.

It's hard to reverse the opinion that a male version of something is better than a female version. Women in comedy is a good example - very few female comedians, and from what I understand from people who work in the field, very hard to "sell" as an act, particularly to mixed audiences (easier to female audiences, but even among women, there's a massive preference for male comedy - again, I'm working on what I've been told rather than first hand experience). Are men funnier? Or is it more complex than that?

I know I'm drifting off topic. End of musing!

dolores during tournaments I’ll watch any man’s match over a woman’s match where one of the women screeches. I can’t stand it.

nolongersurprised ah, that is indeed an issue
I seem to remember that Azarenka versus Sharapova was pretty much peak screech

Though men are definitely not blameless either. Nadal is a right grunter.

I'd always choose to watch a Men's match over Women's tbh, even if both played 5 sets, and regardless of who was playing.

@Tessellated

the point is, male players doing similar - or worse - things - haven't had a game taken off them, impacting on the whole match.

If it's all about equality, and there's not a single hint of misogyny whatsoever, the why are so many people up in arms because of equal pay in tennis, when no-one seems to care that professional female footballers play the same length of game as the men for less pay?

no-one seems to care that professional female footballers play the same length of game as the men for less pay?
I was thinking about this earlier, @JamieVardysHavingAParty, but felt I was being quite ranty enough without starting to compare earnings between tennis and football, which starts to bring in class, colour, and sex! Plus there's the inevitable "overpaid diva" rhetoric, which is just noisy, reductive, and unproductive in terms of advancing the argument.

Yup, that's got the potential for a much more feisty debate, given the disparity in interest between men's and women's football. That's really going to test some theories. Not least some of my own