PDA

View Full Version : Lateset nonsense on 'mandatory' tournaments


Volcana
Sep 7th, 2008, 05:34 AM
".....a player really has to want to get suspended to get suspended under this rule,"
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=3567274
Some of the other changes attempt to address the ongoing problem of players skipping events. For the first time, top-10 players who miss any of the nine top tournaments could be suspended.
But it's easy to avoid a suspension: Players must make a promotional appearance in the tournament city, either during the event or at a later date.
"Sort of the way our board's looking at it is a player really has to want to get suspended to get suspended under this rule," Scott said.
If a suspension were to occur, it would be for two tournaments the following year. Players will be automatically penalized in their rankings and earnings for skipping big events.
One tricky situation could be the Williams sisters' avoidance of the tournament at Indian Wells, Calif. They haven't played there since 2001, when the family was booed after Venus withdrew just before a semifinal match against Serena.
They have said they plan to bypass the event again next year.
"I'm sure we can figure out things for them to do that are good for tennis in Southern California, good for the tournament, without being something that's embarrassing for them or the tournament," Scott said of the promotional appearances they'd need to make to comply with the new rule.I would love to know the definition of 'promotional appearance'.

venus_rulez
Sep 7th, 2008, 05:51 AM
I'd like to know what an "embarrassment" for the Williams sisters would be. Suspending the sisters is just going to drive the casual fans they bring in away and I'm sure the WTA is the one that doesn't want this to be a problem, since the sisters have made it clear they aren't playing no matter what. He's tryin to save face knowing the sisters aren't going to change their mind.

schorsch
Sep 7th, 2008, 07:00 AM
Well if you dont play a tournament for personal reasons... its kind of weird to have to promote it. For some people that can be embarrassing.

enchantrezz
Sep 7th, 2008, 08:55 AM
Clarification: it was the crowd who booed them, right? the tournament has got nothing to do with it, i guess?

Slutiana
Sep 7th, 2008, 09:27 AM
If they don't want to play it, I don't think they'll want to promote it. :rolls: Thats the whole point of not playing it. :tape:

And how can you promote a tournament which has just happened? :confused: :tape: :o

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 7th, 2008, 10:54 AM
They won't promote the tournament. They will turn out for a few hours in the area at some point and smile a little, have there pictures taken, say a few nice things about how tennis is growing in Southern California or something like that and just generally appear like they are vaguely promoting WTA tennis. Maybe they will do a training session with a few young kids, something like that. And at the end of the day all parties will have saved face, in a silly pointless kind of way.

court70
Sep 7th, 2008, 01:00 PM
They will not be suspended from any tournament if they do not play IW, I just read that on ESPN in an interview Scott did with Bonnie Ford (i think that's her name)

serenus_2k8
Sep 7th, 2008, 01:20 PM
WS not going is cruel for the organisers, but who cares about them. They should have handled the crowd better.

Rocketta
Sep 7th, 2008, 01:31 PM
:lol: @ "or at a later date" like at the end of the year when no one is even thinking about Indian Wells... V/S will schedule an inner city stop as part of their McDonald's tour. :haha:

Rocketta
Sep 7th, 2008, 01:36 PM
Clarification: it was the crowd who booed them, right? the tournament has got nothing to do with it, i guess?

No not right. The tournament allowed the crowd to continue to act in a mob mentality. The tournament never admitted their part in the fiasco. And finally the tournament never apologized for their part in the . so in my opinion it is the tournament that V&S are boycotting not the fans. :shrug:

duhcity
Sep 7th, 2008, 01:47 PM
Its probably to promote tennis, even if its not Indian Wells. Like last year Djokovic went on Leno.


Anyway people severely overestimate Serena and Venus. Them not playing Indian Wells or Miami or whatever banned tournament truly does not effect ticket sales. Recession, higher prices, and other monetary hardships are going to be much more factorable than "OMG SERENA AND VENUS AINT GOING ". It will definetly affect TV viewership though

Kworb
Sep 7th, 2008, 02:27 PM
Clarification: it was the crowd who booed them, right? the tournament has got nothing to do with it, i guess?
Yeah the crowd booed them. The people were so angry, there wasn't much the tournament organizers could've done, other than canceling the final.

Shvedbarilescu
Sep 7th, 2008, 02:29 PM
:lol: @ "or at a later date" like at the end of the year when no one is even thinking about Indian Wells... V/S will schedule an inner city stop as part of their McDonald's tour. :haha:

:haha: That sounds just about right. :worship:

Rix643
Sep 7th, 2008, 02:44 PM
So, if I understand correctly, it is not about the sport anymore. As long as Larry can keep the top players whoring around, they won't be penalized.


Now I understand why Henin quit the tour. The WTA has become a traveling escort agency. Female sport will never be taken serious again.

dany.p
Sep 7th, 2008, 02:59 PM
What's this promoting at a "later date" business all about? How do you promote a tournament that has already finished? Do they mean promoting the tournament for the next year? If this is the case, it still a bit silly. Example, having a player promote a tournament in june when the event is actually held in febuary is not really going to do much for the tournament.

Rix643
Sep 7th, 2008, 03:03 PM
What's this promoting at a "later date" business all about? How do you promote a tournament that has already finished? Do they mean promoting the tournament for the next year? If this is the case, it still a bit silly. Example, having a player promote a tournament in june when the event is actually held in febuary is not really going to do much for the tournament.

It means they'll have to show up for the sponsors of the tournament, wine and dine them, get a picture taken. That's what I ment with whoring around.

sipnsurfMurph
Sep 7th, 2008, 03:08 PM
"good for tennis in Southern California, good for the tournament"

Both conditions have to be met or either? I seem to remember reading that the tournament had to approve the promotional appearance?

Vlover
Sep 7th, 2008, 04:55 PM
Obviously Scott has to give himself a big enough loop hole for when things start to blow up in his face.

Volcana
Sep 7th, 2008, 06:07 PM
It would have been so much easier to say that there were five 'mandatory' events, and each player had to play four of them. Given that V&S wouldn't play IW, it means they would have HAD to play Beijing, which, at the moment, is a guarantee worth something.