PDA

View Full Version : Here is an interesting Lindsay article regarding Larry Scott


Lindsayfan32
Sep 12th, 2006, 11:41 AM
Here is an article that was written after Lindsay's Monday press conference in Bali its from the Jakarta post and it seems sueing Mr Scott and the tour might be back on. Here is the article. Links on the bottom if you want to read the orginal and in case anyone is intersted Lindsay won her 1st round 7-5 6-1

Davenport glad to be back in Bali



Bruce Emond, The Jakarta Post, Nusa Dua, Bali

Lindsay Davenport is in a very different place today from this time last year.

Then, she was coming off a strong summer, despite having lost an achingly close Wimbledon final to Venus Williams. She went on to take the Wismilak International title here, a tournament experience she called the best of her career.

Now, the 30-year-old Californian is on the comeback trail. The former world number one is only seeded three, her ranking falling to 12th after injury and a freak accident -- she blacked out and hit her head at home -- limited her to 13 tournaments this season.

Although she says she is happy to be back playing again, she is still smarting from a dispute with the WTA Tour administration. She talked at length in an Aug. 22 New York Times article about the row over special wildcard exemptions, but said she would not sue, because "it's just not my style".

Speaking to The Jakarta Post on Monday at the tournament's opening, Davenport said it might take court proceedings to settle the matter.

She gave up US$500,000 in bonus money in order not to have to commit a year ahead to 2006's demanding schedule. But she believed she had clarified with WTA Tour CEO Larry Scott that she would be able to receive wildcards for direct entry to tournaments; he was not forthcoming when she did came back from injury in August.

"It's a very long and complicated story," she told the Post. "It's unfortunate. It's about a lot of rules, and about discussions I had with the CEO, and the agreements that I thought we had and he did not follow through with."

Pointedly, Davenport never refers to Scott, a former men's player and ATP Tour executive, by name. She stressed she was not asking for special treatment.

"It was a rule I felt I was eligible for. He then chose not to give it to me. As for his reasons, I will never know. I didn't want any special favors, I was adamant that I don't believe in that anyway...

"And I think now it will probably be a matter for a court of law to decide."

Scott could not be reached for comment Monday; he told the Times that while he felt bad about Davenport's reaction, "... I'm sending a signal that we have to toughen up our entry and commitment rules".

During her time away, Davenport enjoyed a rare period of domesticity with her husband of three years, Jon Leach. She did not watch any women's tennis: "It's hard to watch a tournament that you are not part of..."

With 51 titles, including three grand slams, and more than $22 million in prize money in her 13-year professional career, Davenport could have easily settled into a quiet retirement. Instead, she found she missed competing, and even the tough practice required to return. "I've come back to enjoy it," she said.

Although Davenport is in Bali along with top seed and world number seven Svetlana Kuznetsova, the event, as with so many tournaments recently, has been hit by withdrawals.

She attributes the problem to the packed tournament calendar, with little letup for players to recuperate from the grind.

"The people who are running our sport could do a much better job of putting together a calendar that makes more sense, for players, for fans... Sooner or later, they will listen to us."

But she is not quite ready to say good-bye, despite speculation since her 2004 Wimbledon semifinal loss to Maria Sharapova.

"It's a week by week, month by month decision," she said. "Part of the dispute with the Tour is that they wanted me to enter tournaments eight months in advance, and at my age and with my health, that's not possible."

As for her legacy to the game, she is magnanimous.

"... I'm not the greatest player who ever played. But I feel that I've done things a bit differently... I've shown that you can act with a certain level of class and respect for other players."

http://www.thejakartapost.com/detailheadlines.asp?fileid=20060912.B08&irec=7

Andrew..
Sep 12th, 2006, 01:21 PM
If she goes to court, she's going to lose. The WTA treating her that way after years on tour isn't nice, but it's not illegal.

mike/topgun
Sep 12th, 2006, 01:24 PM
So will she ger her GEE status if she's not gonna commit till next years July?

Andrew..
Sep 12th, 2006, 01:32 PM
If she goes to court, she's going to lose. The WTA treating her that way after years on tour isn't nice, but it's not illegal.
Rereading it...

"It's unfortunate. It's about a lot of rules, and about discussions I had with the CEO, and the agreements that I thought we had and he did not follow through with."

It looks like she had a verbal agreement with him. If so, then she does have grounds to sue, but it's hard to prove.

mike/topgun
Sep 12th, 2006, 03:39 PM
It looks like she had a verbal agreement with him. If so, then she does have grounds to sue, but it's hard to prove.
she can't prove that, I'm afraid:rolleyes:
it's a bona fideis obligation...it's all between Lindsay and Larry to get along, go out have a drink and have a nice conversation. What he did was not right, but it's perfectly within the rules...The main concern is that she hasn't decided yet. Maybe she should commit and then withdraw like the others...She won't change their politics towards players by fighting with them alone herself. She won't get the 500.000$ prize anyway she's to wealthy to count the money she earns. It's gonna be her last months/years on tour. Just get along with it, as long she's healthy. Sign the list Lindsay!

hurricanejeanne
Sep 12th, 2006, 07:55 PM
It probably was a verbal agreement. And where she'd have the grounds to sue, she wouldn't be able to prove that there was an agreement.

But, what exactly is the rule she is trying to get her entries in under. I haven't heard the name of it or it's description? And have they stripped her of her Gold/Silver Exempt status?

Also, I really can't see her going to court unless she knows pretty damn sure she's going to win. She's too smart for that, and it would ruin her final months of being a pro. Not to mention be incredibly embarassing. Yeah, she's been fucked over and back stabbed but...
Andrew, Mike, and anyone else do you guys think she'll actually sue the tour over this?

Lindsayfan32
Sep 12th, 2006, 09:44 PM
I'm no legal expert but I don't think Lindsay going to go the tour and Larry Scott over a verbal agreement. I think she will go the tour and Larry Scott over the rules as they stand now. She might go restict of trade as the rules inhibit Lindsay work as a pro tennis player. I've seen ot done before a long time ago but it's possiable. Also Lindsay is not dumb she will only do it if she knows/thinks she can win and she can hire a top legal team to do it.

MH0861
Sep 12th, 2006, 10:00 PM
Well, like some have said -- she probably has some sort of evidence/basis for the lawsuit, which she's probably not talking about. I wonder if Zurich put her over the edge back to suing.

However, I think she's also doing this to make change -- win or lose, she's getting word and awareness about what Larry Scott and the WTA are doing, and maybe this can get the ball rolling to make some changes.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 12th, 2006, 10:21 PM
Well I found the said Rule they keep refering to:
(from another article, in another thread...also posted in same thread in GM)

Rule II. A. 2. allows the tour to confer Gold Exempt Emeritus Status on a player who has won a minimum of three slams or titles, has been ranked number one at least once in her career and has “demonstrated an exceptional level of commitment and excellence on the Tour over an extended period of time.” Such a player can receive unlimited wild cards.

Davenport satisfies all of those conditions and more, so what’s the problem? I left one condition out: “The player has provided at least 14 years of service to the Tour.” According to Liz Robbins’ interview with Davenport in the NY Times earlier this week, that rule was put in so that a semi-retired Monica Seles could play on the tour.

She has the three grand slams, she's been number one for 98 weeks, and she has always throughout her career made good on her commitments.
14 years...
Lindsay played her first professional events in 1991 (that makes 15 years).
Lindsay turned professional on February 22, 1993 (that's 13 years and some odd months).
Gray area...when she began playing professional or when she turned professional?

Also me thinks, after looking at this rule, that Larry Scott probably said to her that she was indeed eligible for this rule, and upon her return she was told that she wasn't. It's an angle no one thought of. Throwing it out there.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 12th, 2006, 10:26 PM
Well, like some have said -- she probably has some sort of evidence/basis for the lawsuit, which she's probably not talking about. I wonder if Zurich put her over the edge back to suing.

However, I think she's also doing this to make change -- win or lose, she's getting word and awareness about what Larry Scott and the WTA are doing, and maybe this can get the ball rolling to make some changes.

I agree with everything, I do think Zurich pissed her off. She can go on to the next in list, but she shouldn't have to.

I am all for her getting the ball rolling for change and all, but I just don't want this to be hurtful to her tennis as a career and I don't want this to be the reason she walks away.
It's selfish as hell, but I am more concerned about Lindsay, her tennis and her mentality, right now.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 13th, 2006, 02:21 AM
Gold Exempt Emeritus Status

a. In addition to those named on the gold exempt list, the tour and the worldwide tournament may, in their discretion, in consultation with the player board of representatives agree to confer GEE to the tour year for one or more players who satisfy the following critiera:

i. the player has won three grand slam singles and/or Tour championships.
ii. the player has provide the tour with at least 14 years of service.
iii. the player has been number one in the tour rankings at anytime during her career.
iv. the player has demostrated an exceptional level of commitment and excellence to the tour over an extended period of time.

b. a player that has been confered to being GEE is entitled to the following for one tour year:

i. unlimited wild cards in both singles and doubles.
ii. the gold/silver exempt wildcard spot at tournaments an unlimited number of times reguardless of her ranking.

iii. late entry into tournament (according to Gold expemt status procedures). according to her ranking at entry deadline

iv. an exemption from the minimum commitment requirements of the tour.

c. a player that has been conferred for GEE shall not be eligible to enter a player commitment contract with the tour and her participation at tournaments shall not be used for the purposes of determining if a tournaments player commitment formula has been satisfied

And the plot thickens. Well the rule doesn't say when the fourteen years of service begins and stuff, and reading it straight from the rule book itself...I do believe Lindsay is indeed eligible for the exemption.

Therefore, she deserves to have the tour grant her GEE. I see no reason for them to not grant her this exemption. I now officially understand why she is pissed. At the tour's "discretion"....is the only loop hole.

Lindsayfan32
Sep 13th, 2006, 08:55 AM
Lindsay 15 years includes 1991 & 1992 were as a part time ameteur if they are talking about service as a pro its only 13 years and a few months. She turned pro in Febuary 1993. I hate to brust the bubble here but she might not quite fit the criteria.

mike/topgun
Sep 13th, 2006, 09:39 AM
LF32
Lindsay must commit til July next year (before Oct 8th). Then she'll get her GEE Status in Feb'07. That's my guess.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 13th, 2006, 10:27 AM
Lindsay 15 years includes 1991 & 1992 were as a part time ameteur if they are talking about service as a pro its only 13 years and a few months. She turned pro in Febuary 1993. I hate to brust the bubble here but she might not quite fit the criteria.

Yeah, that's the gray area, the rule doesn't state when the fourteen years of service must begin. I'm sure Lindsay feels that it begins when she played her first pro event in 1991.
With the rule not specifically stating about when the fourteen year starts, it leaves it open to interpretation. Which is probably why there's so much crap going on at the moment. But, reading it straight from the rulebook, I can see where there is confusion and I do believe she is eligible.

Also she isn't technically stripped of her G/SE status. She still has the obligations to the tour for being under said status, but she has none of the benefits of it (ie. that late entries via wildcard into tournaments).

It's sad, she may be playing one of her last tournaments ever and all she wants is to be granted GEE. It's not that hard.
I really hope she plays next year, even if that means committing to the contracts until the end of Feb. when she knows for sure she's eligible for GEE.
This whole thing is confusing and worrisome. I said it before, I am more worried about Lindsay than the tour right now.

lindsayno1
Sep 13th, 2006, 10:45 AM
at the end of the day lindsays just a number to the WTA. They still have sharapova, christine and all that malarky...

Andrew..
Sep 13th, 2006, 01:28 PM
Seles and Hingis weren't pro for 14 years when they received GEE status.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 13th, 2006, 05:02 PM
Larry Scott is a fucktard and million other things at the moment that I would love to call him.
He is doing it against rules. He just doesn't want to give Lindsay the GEE. End.
She has to sue the tour to get GEE then so be it, especially if she wants to play at least one more season.

PS. when the hell did Hingis get GEE?

Lindsayfan32
Sep 13th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Seles and Hingis weren't pro for 14 years when they received GEE status.

Yeah Andrew your right but they do something that Lindsay doesn't and that's put bums on seats. The rule Lindsay is fighting was made so Monica could make a comeback. It should apply to all players if its a "tour" rule not some.

hurricanejeanne
Sep 13th, 2006, 09:26 PM
It doesn't matter, Lindsay is eligible for GEE. She asked for it. They denied it without reason.
Lindsay should get her GEE. Period.

Andrew..
Sep 13th, 2006, 09:55 PM
Yeah Andrew your right but they do something that Lindsay doesn't and that's put bums on seats. The rule Lindsay is fighting was made so Monica could make a comeback. It should apply to all players if its a "tour" rule not some.
Not really. She is THE draw for every SoCal event, New Haven, and Amelia Island. Those are five events where if she enters, ticket sales skyrocket. Same was true when Phili was around.

MH0861
Sep 14th, 2006, 02:33 AM
Not really. She is THE draw for every SoCal event, New Haven, and Amelia Island. Those are five events where if she enters, ticket sales skyrocket. Same was true when Phili was around.

I think she's become a much bigger draw at the US Open in the past few years as well - I think her overall popularity in the US atleast is higher than ever with the demise of most of the other American talent. I can't speak for the rest of the world, but I'd imagine she's reasonably popular.

Lindsayfan32
Sep 14th, 2006, 06:51 AM
Not really. She is THE draw for every SoCal event, New Haven, and Amelia Island. Those are five events where if she enters, ticket sales skyrocket. Same was true when Phili was around.


This scary we're agreeing on something. I have to say your point is not one I thought of at the time of replying. I think there are certain places where all top players are drawcards. Either way Larry Scott should look at what Lindsay has done for the tour overthe years and stop being a dickhead and help her get her GEE.