After the rallies at a Grand Slam tournament finish, the reckoning and reflection begin. Who won and why? What were the highlights, controversies and disappointments of the tournament?
This year’s Australian Open concluded on Australia’s national day. Tennis, it seems, can never escape the broader world of politics. Tournament organisers chose not to have on-court Australia Day celebrations out of respect for those who consider January 26th an inappropriate day for national jubilation.
Australia, like comparable Western nations, is at a point of intense national self-reflection. Are Western states entitled to celebrate their status as liberal democratic free societies where the rule of law prevails and most citizens enjoy enviable standards of living? Or should the West more openly acknowledge and be concerned that its progress and prosperity has been achieved at the expense of indigenous cultures and the perpetuation of unethical race, class and gender divides? Perhaps even more concerning is that this debate has become increasingly shrill and divisive. Consequently, it is affecting the ability for debates about national priorities to occur, let alone take place in a constructive manner.
Speaking specifically about Australia, one of its pre-eminent claims for being a lucky country is that modern Australia is a broadly egalitarian society, where opportunities have not been exclusively given to those of privilege. Many have observed that modern Australia has been, compared to older European countries, a relatively classless society, where everyone is everyone’s mate and the greatest personal solecisms are to “stand on ceremony” and/ or to have “tickets on oneself.”
The corollary of this social outlook is that Australians have also lauded themselves as a land where all are given “a fair go.”
Regrettably, this year’s Australian Open was one which will be remembered for too many Australians demonstrating classlessness of the worst kind. Far from demonstrating a “fair go” for all Australian crowds displayed a raucous and rancorous lack of respect for players and for the game itself. The classiness of spectator etiquette disappeared before our eyes.
With equal pace with President Trump’s promulgation of executive orders[1], the Open had a series of off-court controversies that arguably changed the perception of the Australian Open from the “happy slam” to a “churlish and crass one”.
Let’s remember:
The opponents of Australian players, Kyrgios and Kokkinakis, had to contend with overly vocal crowds that booed them and clapped and cheered their errors and, most egregiously of all, cheered their double faults. Cheering a double fault in tennis is the equivalent of celebrating the crown falling off the head of a monarch at a coronation.
Australia only had two female players advance to the second round. One of them, Destanee Aiava, was a natural crowd favourite, not purely because she is Australian. She had overcome openly discussed battles with mental health to qualify for her first Australian Open and had recovered from a parlous position to win her first round match.
Her opponent in the second round was the feisty American, Danielle Collins who was runner-up to Ash Barty in the 2022 Australian Open. The behaviour of the night-time crowd towards Collins was boorish and entirely without decency. Not one to retreat, Collins incited the crowd with a visual invitation to “kiss my ass” after she won the match. She then mockingly thanked the crowd for encouraging her to receive a “big fat pay cheque.”
No sooner had Novak Djokovic leapt to Collins’ defence, than, he too was caught up in the uncharitable airs of the arenas. First, he had to contend with a journalist mocking his Serbian supporters. The journalist, Tony Jones, in a live on-air presentation turned to the supporters outside the courtside studio and suggested they were chanting that Novak was overrated, a has-been and should be sent home, alluding to Djokovic’s Covid deportation dramas of 2022.
Insulting at worst, crass at best. Jones was forced to apologise. Serbia’s ambassador to Australia voiced his disapproval. There are many comments that one could make about Djokovic; however, to call the winner of 24 Grand Slam titles “overrated” was as gratuitous as one could be.
Djokovic was not alone in tasting the media’s lack of respect. One of the success stories of the tournament was American tyro, Ben Shelton, who made his first Grand Slam semi-final; sadly, I am old enough to remember watching his father play doubles! Shelton spoke on behalf of many players when he commented that many of the after-match interviews had crossed the line from informative and fun to invasive and inappropriate.
Jelena Dokic’s questioning of Madison Keys after a match about her relationship with her coach, who is also Keys’ husband, was singularly personal and unnecessary. She was not alone in missing the mark. Shelton is a brash 22 year old from Georgia. Yet he spoke for many about the gaucheness of the media.
None of this stopped the crowds.
Iga Swiatek was labelled a cheat by many not recognising the double bounce of a ball in her quarter-final match. Whether the ball was “not up” was desperately hard to determine with video technology and the umpire’s call that the ball was in play stood. Again, from the crowd and much of the commentariat, Swiatek was given no generous assumptions or the benefit of doubt.
Then it was Djokovic’s turn. Following a stirring four-set victory against Alcaraz in their quarter-final he faced Alex Zverev in a semi-final. Many had written that Djokovic overly exaggerated the extent of a hamstring strain in his quarter-final and that this was typical of a pattern of “cry wolf” injuries from Djokovic over the years.
In his semi-final, Djokovic defaulted after losing the first set in a tiebreaker. Many in Rod Laver Arena chose to boo Djokovic from the court. The default position was contempt and derision. This for a man who has won 10 Australian Open titles. Zverev had to remind the crowd of why no-one who defaults from injury should be harassed as they leave the court. Djokovic has subsequently posted a scan of the strain showing that it will take 4-6 weeks to heal.
Zverev was left to endure a last insult from the ignorant. About to begin his post-match speech after his loss to Sinner in the final, a spectator yelled out that Australians believed the allegations of domestic violence made against Zverev by two of his former partners. Splenetic and bilious commentary and behaviour replaced self-restraint and balance.
Thankfully, there was no doubting the class of this year’s Singles’ champions.
Jannik Sinner won his second successive Australian Open and his third Grand Slam title from three finals appearances. He defeated Zverev who was disconsolate at losing his third Grand Slam final. Sinner did not face a break point against him in the final. Not that he needed them, but it seemed the Gods were also on his side. In the second set tiebreaker at 4-4, Sinner’s forehand clipped the net and dropped like a stone on Zverev’s side of the net. Neither Sinner nor the fates were going to give Zverev a break.[2]
There is, predictably, much talk about Sinner’s ascent into the pantheon of greatness. He is 23. If he won an average of two Grand Slam titles for the next ten years, he would pass the records of Federer and Nadal. I am reserving further judgement, however, until I see how Sinner, who has the unathletic gait and build of a spindly adolescent, performs at Roland Garros and Wimbledon. He is however, indisputably primus inter pares!
Playing in her 47th Grand Slam tournament, Madison Keys won her first Grand Slam title in her second Grand Slam final, having lost the 2017 US Open final.
No one could begrudge her the victory. Her semi-final against Swiatek and final against Sabalenka, the two top seeds, were the most stirring matches of the tournament.
Keys’ steelier temperament prevailed in both, especially in the absorbing 10 point tiebreaker that decided her semi-final. Sabalenka’s post-match implosion in which racquets were the casualties did not diminish from Keys’ vindication.
Australians return to work and school this week after the summer holidays. There were record crowds at this year’s Open, but much of their behaviour will be recorded for all of the wrong reasons.
Thankfully, the skills of Sinner and the relentlessness of Keys are worthy distractions.
*****************************
[1] The ironies of the President’s determination to stop immigration are many. He is the first President in over two centuries to have a foreign born wife and his Vice-President’s wife, Usha Vance, is the child of immigrants.
[2] This net cord moment reminded me of a very similar moment in the 1986 Wimbledon Men’s final between Boris Becker and Ivan Lendl. Deep in the third set, a Becker forehand clipped the tape and stranded Lendl. The late and great Tony Trabert quipped, “the best kind of luck for Becker, the worst kind of luck for Lendl.” Zverev will hopefully remember that Ivan Lendl lost his first four Grand Slam finals before winning twice that number.
As always a new year is a time for wishes. Some requests if I may?
Can we no longer have commentary about “sad” or “dreadful” tragedies? A tragedy is a tragedy.
Can we ensure all required words are used? A news report recently told me that “CCTV had captured the intruder on the premises.” That’s one clever camera! Surely, the camera just captured images of the intruder?
Can we abandon facile and obvious mission statements for institutions and companies? Recently, I called a hospital and waiting for a response, I was informed by an automated message that the hospital aimed to provide “safe, sustainable and compassionate care.” How extraordinary- what had they be doing in previous decades one wonders?
Can we be careful with the wording on signs: what happens if the tenant is an extrovert?
Commenti