I am really baffled by the women's USOPEN final controversy. Not by what happened -- which is understandable. I play tennis, I usually get pretty pissed of, I almost broke my own nose once with a self inflicted punch, so I am the last person to judge someone who lost her temper.
Having said that, the things I read about this issue, for me are beyond apaling. Either people are letting their emotions get the better of them just like a player on court (but now, with far less justification), or they are profoundly dumb, or extremely ill intended.
I have zero doubt that the umpire is 100% right. He enforced the rules, period. He was polite to the player. At any decision he took, he had no other possible correct choice available.
The first decision, about coaching, is so obvious that is unbelievably tiresome to defend it. What else can one say? The common arguments against it are:
1) Everybody does it.
Answer: Not true, not true by a long shot. But, yes, others do that too. So maybe more players should be penalized. That's up to any umpire -- and governing entities -- to decide. On that match, do anyone who is complaining was watching the whole time to be sure of what was going on? Do anyone who is complaining was doing the umpire's job to question his call? How many times could have him caught the coach doing what he admitedly did, which was even caught on camera? Do we have all to believe that it was, oh, just that very time? Sorry, it does not work that way.
And, hell, it was A WARNING!
Also, about that. Serena Williams did on court what most debating this issue are doing, she diverted the subject. She said the umpire attacked her character. No, he enforced the rules. He did not spoke a single word about her character. He spotted non-allowed behavior and acted within his premises. If Williams never saw, never asked for it, if it was some gut reaction from the coach, if it was all in good faith, IT DOES NOT MATTER. Just like when you make a foot-fault, the rules make you lose your serve. It does not necessarily mean you were consciously wanting to cheat and win like Dick Dastardly. It is just not allowed, whatever the reason behind it. It is beyond me how can someone even think that to turn a rule debate on a tennis court a debate about character is reasonable.
2) It is sexism.
Answer: Who was on the other side of the net, a man? No. If a male player is allowed more coaching than a female counterpart, who is on the other side of the net to pay the price and be in disadvantage, a woman? No, a man. So, different matches, different tournaments, different tours, different organizations, and NO ADVANTAGE given to a man in detriment of a woman because of that.
Actually, it is precisely the other way around. If women were supposed to follow higher standards just because they are women, it means that this is sexism towards men! It is equivalent as saying "men are just this bunch of savages, they cannot follow any rules, they cannot behave properly, just let them do their things, as they are helpless anyway". If tennis had no rules, if people were allowed to curse all the time, to abuse their gear, to insult umpires, do whatever shit they wanted to do, in no time it would lose a good bit of its audience -- or at least it would be a very different game altogether. Even if the standards were different -- which I strongly doubt they are, it has zero sense to call it sexism.
3) The umpire should have warned Williams before the game penalty.
Answer: This is ultimately wrong, but at least is one argument that does not offend my inteliggence neither my dignity as an honest human being. The umpire was calmly and politely talking to Williams the whole time, even when she was yelling at him, being absurdly disrespectful to him. She was giving him the classical "I am the star, you are just a peasant" treatment. But the guy kept his cool. As he is talking in a lower tone, it is much harder to hear what he says, but he is actually trying to calm her down and explain his reasons (which he does not need to do). Then, out of the blue, she calls him a thief. He could have "warned" her again here? First, by the rules, the warning was already given. Second, THIS IS HIS CALL. He considered she went too far, and, hell, she was ranting for minutes. HE WAS giving her every chance to calm down and stop. She didn't. By the way, the game penalty worked, as she called for the tournament director (which is something within her rights), he came, she explained her point, came back to the match and stopped her show.
4) This is racism.
Answer: I am sorry, but this is outrageous. The only reason I can think for someone to say this is that the person is not thinking about what he or she is saying. First, there was no blue eyed blonde on the other side of the net. Second -- and this is the important part -- given that racism is something abominable, horrific, and a stain that could never leave a person if once attached to him -- I find absurd, despicable, even criminal to so quickly label one person a racist because of a call that he or she had to do in the heat of the moment, in front of millions around the world. Even if he had made a mistake (which he didn't), it would be yet giantly unfair to call the guy (which is a public figure and his face and name are known to people) a racist.
I put this on this thread because , but it has all the fingerprints of PC bullshit:
1) It changes the subject of the conversation. What should be about the rules suddenly is about deeper, more important things that -- obviously -- the accusers can spot and tell for sure. In this world, whoever screams louder that she is a mother and that never cheated in his life, is the one with reason.
2) It falls back on an authoritarian speech. "I demand an apology". Everything has to bow down to the way I see the world, if not, I scream.
3) Everything is about race and gender. Sometimes, it simply isn't. Actually, people who REALLY care about race and gender -- and have real reasons to complain -- should be torn ripping out their hair from their heads. A black woman who is unfairly treated by her white boss due to prejudice, who earns just what is barely needed for living and is in a fragile position to defend her rights, that is a victim. A black woman who is a star, who has millions of fans, millions of dollars, and was basically the reason why most people were watching, and was treated ACCORDING TO THE RULE BOOK, in front of millions of witnesses, is far, far from a victim. Of course things are not binary, of course those are two extremes and there are grey areas in between. But, as I put, this is an extreme, and as I always say, nothing does more damage to fighting prejudice at its roots than to evoke it in vain.
So, in a sense, I agree that Serena Williams was a victim. A victim of a way of thinking which is stupid, illogic, and a great cause of harm. Again, watching the video sometimes I can feel sympathy for her (and sometimes don't, when she treats the umpire like shit).
And I write this not the denigrate her. The few who ever payed attention to what I write know that I really don't care to what players actually are, personally. I watch them play, I don't care one bit who they are. But, if someone wants to see them as heroes, it is all good. Here is the point: heroes, real human heroes, are NOT perfect. I can appreciate all the difficulties that someone like Williams had to overcome to get where she did. This seems to be more than enough to elevate someone to "hero" status. But she is human, she can make mistakes and crack down like everyone else. Maybe less than most, but still. Given what she does for a living, the stakes were high and the world was watching. Simply admiting that she does not have a point here does not make her a "lesser hero". It just makes her a more human one.
