Tennis thrives on oddballs, not bullies

in ,

WIMBLEDON, England — You want a sport of oddballs, characters, there’s baseball, Jim Piersall running the bases backwards. Or there’s tennis. Ilie Nastase was known as “Nasty” for more reasons than his given name.

Both games are virtually timeless. And what is tennis but hitting a ball back and forth across a net? Yawn.

Which is where Nick Kyrgios enters, and apparently from the comments, also entered Stefanos Tsitsipas’ head.

There was history the past 24 hours, although maybe not the sort you would expect at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club.

Alas, it was the official termination or Middle Sunday. Yes, there have been rounds on four other Sundays since the club was created in the 1870s (and I was here for all four), but they were makeup calls, as it were, replacements for rainouts.

The Middle Sunday break gives a day off to both the grass courts, already turning a bit yellow, and the residents of Wimbledon, Borough of Merton, who live full-time in the area. It was a glorious tradition. But as is the case with so many other traditions, it fell victim to television revenue.

On this Sunday, Frances Tiafoe, the 24-year-old from Maryland, fell victim to the Belgian David Goffin, 7-6 (3), 5-7, 5-7, 6-4, 7-5.

The match went 4 hours, 36 minutes, the first set 70 minutes. Unlike Kyrgios’ win over Tsitsipas 24 hours earlier, there was respect and high praise from both sides.

“It was an unbelievable match,” said Tiafoe. “We both definitely left it out there.”

Contrast those comments with those from Tsitsipas, who condemned his opponent as a bully.

Wow. We’ve heard Kyrgios described as a jokester. As a goofball. As an entertainer. Even as a pest. But a bully? What did he do to take a couple of backhand swipes at his Greek foe, rather than the ball?

“It’s constant bullying,” was the Tsitspas contention. That sounds like something you’d hear in a third-grade class, not from a first-class tennis player.

He said Kyrgios had an evil side. “He was probably the bully in school. I don’t like bullies.”

He doesn’t like losing either, and a third-round defeat in what some say is the biggest tournament of any year must have been particularly disappointing. But griping is unneeded.

“I’m not sure how I bullied him,” said Kyrgios. “He was the one hitting balls at me.”

That’s a longtime tactic in tennis. But it goes with the territory, doesn’t it? You have to place shots where the other guy can’t handle them.

Tennis thrives on controversy. John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors, Serena Williams hollered and played their way into our thoughts. Serena’s blowup with the chair umpire in the 2018 U.S. Open lives on. Of course, screaming doesn’t equal or surpass winning.

That’s part of the reason for the outbursts from McEnroe.

Connors and Serena received so much attention. They won Grand Slam tournaments, Williams all four. Kyrgios still is trying to win one. But if nothing else, he did outlast Tsitsipas.

“Apart from me just going back and forth to the umpire,” Kyrgios said, “I did nothing against Steph.

“But I’d be pretty upset too if I lost to someone two weeks in a row. Maybe he should figure out how to beat me a couple more times and then we can talk.”

Bully that.

Plaque still at Wimbledon, and so is Isner

in ,

WIMBLEDON, England — The plaque remains at Wimbledon, and three rounds into this year’s tournament so does John Isner. Not that he won’t always have a presence here, as much in myth as memory.

He is 37 now. Isner, nearing the end of a career that has produced highlights — that plaque? Wimbledon doesn’t celebrate the ordinary — but never a Grand Slam championship.

That glorious reward remained a possibility, albeit a distant one. But if you’re in the draw, and Isner definitely is, facing the young Italian Jannik Sinner on Friday, anything can happen.

After all, on Wednesday Isner, as always his billed cap turned backwards like he was a baseball catcher, stunned both Andy Murray and an almost obnoxiously but understandably one-sided crowd at Centre Court with a 6-4, 7-6, 6-7, 6-4 victory.

“I did some good things,” Isner said in summary. One of those was defeating Murray for the first time in nine matches.

As pointed out, in a sport where it’s one person against another head to head and shots that normally clear the net miss it by inches, anything can happen.

So much of life is timing. As is so much of tennis. Isner is 6-foot-9, as one might suppose able to angle and power serves (as much as 157 mph, they say) out of sight.

If he had arrived at Wimbledon in the early 1980s, when grass court tennis was a serve-and-volley competition, when Boris Becker and Stefan Edberg were boring and impressing us, who knows how many titles he might have won?

But the pooh-bahs decided there had to be an ace and a reason for ground strokes. So the famed lawns at Wimbledon and the balls both were redone. Sure, there still are aces, but there also are drop shots, and when the guy on the other side of the net is as tall as an NBA center, you hit low and keep your hopes high.

Isner, who grew up in North Carolina where basketball reigns, went to Georgia to play tennis, and could hit the serves and overheads, if never the jackpot, although he was a Wimbledon semifinalist in 2018.

Not that his victory over Murray wasn’t important. Isner called it the top of the list. Murray achieved godlike status in 2012 when he became the first Brit (Murray is a Scot) to win Wimbledon in 77 years. Then he won it again.

“I’m not the player he is,” Isner said of Murray. Whatever, he was enough of a player against Murray, who admittedly has been fighting his way back after hip surgery.

“Yeah, I played in my mind incredibly well,” said Isner. “Of course I served well, but I was thinking outside of my serve I did some good things. Of course, I didn’t win many baseline rallies with Andy, but I think I did what I needed to get a (service) break in the first and fourth set.

“My serve carried me from there.”

It was the 2010 Wimbledon in which Isner had his greatest effect on the game and event in an affair of fate, fable and exhaustion. He faced Nicolas Mahut, another spectacular server.

Play started on a Monday (opening day) and ended on Wednesday. Serve. Ace. Serve. No return. Ad infinitum. But fascinating and historical. A 6-4, 3-6, 6-7, 7-6, 70-68 win. A plaque on the brick wall, “The longest match was played on court 18…”

A plaque removed and replaced. A revision in the rules of fifth-set tie-breakers. A disenchantment.

“That’s all I ever get asked about,” said Isner.

Of course.

For Federer and his fans, disappointment and doubt

in ,

When the Open Championship was held at Royal St. George’s in 1949 a golfer named Harry Bradshaw found his ball inside a broken beer bottle on the fifth fairway. He tried to play it. He could have had a free drop,


When the Open was held at St. George’s in 2011, a golfer named Tiger Woods couldn’t find his ball off the first fairway after the opening shot of the tournament. Woods only wished he could have had a free drop instead of a lost-ball penalty.


The Open starting Thursday returns to St. George’s where you can see France some 20 miles across the Channel but when in competition, you’re thrashing around in the rough you can’t see a way to make par.


And, no, Bradshaw didn’t win in ’49, It was the legendary Bobby Locke. Nor did Tiger win in ’11, It was the not-so-legendary Ben Curtis.


The last Open at the course named for the patron saint of England was in 2011 and won by Darren Clarke, whose celebration after years of trying included his obligatory cigars and some optional pints.


Clarke, a Northern Irishman, who’s as popular as the game he still plays on the Champions (seniors) Tour.


Phil Mickelson was second that ‘11 Open, and now 10 years later, in May, having taken the PGA at 50 to become the oldest man ever to win a major, he’s still a factor.


The favorites, however, are the usual suspects; Jon Rahm, who won the U, S. Open, at Torrey Pines in June; the feuding friends, Bruce Koepka, and Bryson DeChambeau; Rory McIlroy, despite his unsteady driving; and Justin Thomas.


But so often at the Open—this is the 149th--the story’s the course, scraped and molded from the linksland of the British Isles,


St. George’s is a place where off the fourth tee there’s a bunker big enough to hide the whole lot of the Queen’s fusiliers and where canines and human females used to be treated with contempt.


It’s nestled among dunes on which Caesar’s army set foot but Hitler’s army never was able.


Ian Fleming, a member, picked up many of his story ideas behind the bar. He carried a handicap of 007—well 7.


When the wind blows (when doesn’t it blow?) St. George’s might be the toughest course in the Open rotation. Unquestionably it is the southernmost.


In the 1981 Open (won by the Texan, Bill Rogers) Jack Nicklaus shot an 83 in the second round and still made the cut. In the ’85 Open there (won by Sandy Lyle) Peter Jacobsen tackled a streaker on the 18th green. In1993 Greg Norman played so well the final round he proclaimed, “I’m not one to brag, but I was in awe of myself.”


There are several courses squeezed in the area known for decades as Cinque Ports, not far from the White Cliffs of Dover, One, Prince’s, is alongside St. George’s, only a small stone wall separating the two.


The third round of the ’93 Open, the late Payne Stewart saw several sportswriters he knew, playing Prince’s, stopped next to the wall and asked, “Anybody see my ball, a Pink Lady?”


He wasn’t serious.


But Bernard Darwin, the London Times golf writer, in the 1920s and ‘30s, was serious when he wrote about St. George’s, “The sun shines on the waters of Pegwell Bay and lighting up the white cliffs in the distance; this is nearly my idea of heaven as it is to be attained on any earthly links.”


Others may have disagreed. Once, outside St. George’s there was a sign, “No dogs, no women.” Ladies now are able to play although only by themselves.


Wonder what James Bond would say?In the old cartoons, Bugs Bunny, Elmer Fudd, the message scrolled on the screen. “The end,” it said, and so it was time to leave.

If only it could be that clear in sports.

If only Roger Federer and his fans wouldn’t have to endure the disappointment and doubt.

If only we wouldn’t be wondering whether one of the great careers in tennis was headed to a finish.

Which it certainly seemed to be Wednesday, when Federer was defeated — in truth, overwhelmed — 6-3, 7-6 (4), 6-0, by Hubert Hurkacz of Poland, who except to tennis purists probably is as obscure as Federer is famous.

Or was obscure until his Wimbledon quarterfinal rout of Federer.

What a sad, jarring few days for two of the game’s stars. Venus Williams, age 41, couldn’t win a game in the final set she played. Federer, age 39 (a week away from 40), also couldn’t win a game the final set he played.

It’s not supposed to be that way. Or is it? The world, we were told poetically by T.S. Eliot, ends with a whimper. An appropriate description of Federer’s play the last game or the last set.

Chris Clarey wrote in the New York Times that Federer was “shanking forehands and misjudging volleys.” Roger Federer, eight-time Wimbledon singles champion, so graceful and mobile, shanking and misjudging?

This could not be. But it was.

Like Willie Mays in the season he was with the Mets, dropping flies and striking out, Federer was a victim of time as much as he was of the opposing players.

He’s not going to retire. Tennis is his life as well as his profession. “The goal is to play, of course,” he said.

But even he was uncertain about a return to Wimbledon in 2022. “I don’t know,” he said. “I don’t really know. I’ve got to regroup.”

What he does know, what we all know, is that age is the ultimate winner in every sport.

Our games are for the young, as Federer was when at 19 he knocked off Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. As is Hurkacz at 24 when he knocked off Federer. 

The days keep moving, the forehands keep flying. Don’t look over your shoulder. Everyone may be gaining on you.

Federer had a decent tournament, all things considered. Until the third game against Hurkacz.

Roger underwent a knee operation a year ago and weeks of rehabilitation. That he even was able to advance to the quarters this Wimbledon could be considered a victory. 

Unfortunately, there was that third game, Hurkacz pitching the shutout as it were, only the third incurred by Federer in 429 Grand Slam matches.

“The last few games,” Federer admitted in his media conference, “obviously you can feel that you’re not coming back from it.

“I’m not used to that kind of situation, obviously, very much, especially not here.”  

Yet assuming he returns to Wimbledon — and the guess is he will, if only to revise the last impression; who wants to remember Roger getting skunked? — he may have to get used to it.

The older you get, the younger — and stronger — are the people on the other side of the net.

Of course, young or old, how many tennis players were as brilliant or elegant as Federer, the 20 Wimbledon titles, the 103 ATP singles wins?

Although he is Swiss, Federer came to be idolized by the British fans, probably because of his classy style as well as his success at their tournament.

“I’m actually very happy I made it as far as I did here,” he said diplomatically, “and I actually was able to play at the level that I did after everything I went through.”

What he went through in that final game was awful. For him and his many fans.

Venus wants more matches, not more questions

in ,

Venus Williams always was the quiet one, the protective one, the classic older sister. Serena Williams could give us some great comments as well as great tennis, but Venus was measured in her remarks.

We’ll never really know what she thinks about her slide from the top.

At age 41, what Venus wants is another match, not another question about growing old. However, she can’t have one without the other.

Serena is a five-part drama. She shouts at chair umpires, swears at linespeople and even unintentionally becomes the prima donna, as she did on Tuesday, when in her Wimbledon first-round match she slipped, injured a hamstring and was forced to withdraw.

A day later, almost unnoticed, in part because of her personality, in part because of the decline of her game, Venus was defeated — crushed actually — 7-5, 6-0, by the rising young Tunisian, Ons Jabeur.

Bageled in the second set, as the tennis people say about getting blanked. How depressing. At least to us, if not to Venus.

“She has nothing to prove,” was the observation that Chris Evert made on ESPN about Williams. Quite true, and quite historical. In an earlier era, it was Evert who dropped from the top — and when asked why she continued on tour said something like, there’s nothing wrong with being third.

Not at all, but these days, Venus Williams isn’t third. Or 13th. When she won her Wimbledon opener on Monday, it was the first time in a year she’s made it to the second round of a Grand Slam.

You rarely know what a great athlete is thinking as the end nears, especially in an individual sport such as tennis where there’s no GM or coach to push you out the door.

A champion tennis player may not hurt herself by continuing to compete, but she will hurt her fans. And her image.  

They were involved in different sports, but Willie Mays, Joe Namath and Johnny Unitas were almost embarrassments in their final seasons. You hated to suffer through games.

You wonder if it bothers the athlete as much as it does the people who watch him or her?

Indeed, it’s often a group of sportswriters or announcers — who never retire — calling on the athlete to step away.

Once I asked Joe Montana why he kept playing, “You can retire and return to your work,” he replied. “When I retire, it’s over.”

Besides, sports are what they know and where they made their living and reputation. You’ve heard athletes, football players particularly, say that nothing replaced the feeling of playing the game.

More athletes are staying longer, and please don’t pester them. Even when somewhat surprisingly, as was the situation with Venus for ESPN, they consent to talk. And not say much.

“I’ve done a thousand interviews,” Williams insisted, “and now only the truth comes out.”

Venus was a 14-year-old when in October 1994, at what then was called Oakland Coliseum Arena, she played her first pro match, defeating Shaun Stafford. There have been dozens of other victories, seven in Grand Slams, through the years. Also, as Venus noted, dozens of questions.

Which is why, as is the case with her tennis, she goes through a well-practiced routine, full of cliches such as “You can’t win them all.”

In the ESPN bit, when Chris McKendry asked, “What’s the key to your longevity?” Venus replied, “I’m tired of talking about it.”

Chris Evert interrupted and joked, “How’s your love life?” “I’m very single,” said Venus. “I might be available, actually.”

Evert added, “You and me both.”

Venus is very available as a player and apparently will be for some time, despite the losses and age.

Wimbledon loses out to the coronavirus

in ,

By Art Spander

Another announcement. Another disappointment. No Wimbledon. No tennis on the lawns of the All-England Club.

No kidding.

The coronavirus was the winner this year, in straight sets. John McEnroe would have shouted, “You can’t be serious.” Oh, but we are. Sadly.

Ask anyone hunkered down, waiting, hoping, unsure of what will happen next — in sports, in life — worrying about a protein molecule that has hospitals overflowing and our world a mess.

No Wimbledon. No Final Four. Probably no U.S. Open or Masters. Maybe no British Open. The NBA perhaps running into August, if it restarts — and suddenly the optimism of Mavericks owner Mark Cuban, who was talking about mid-May, has been dimmed.

Major League baseball perhaps running into Decemeber. If it starts at all.

Hard to complain about what’s not happening in sport when you read and hear what is happening in society.

In normal times, the predictions would be about Roger Federer’s chance for another title. Now they’re about how many people will fall victim to the coronavirus.

Our patterns have been altered, our template shattered.

George Vecsey, the retired New York Times sports columnist, had a book, “A Year in the Sun,” a title that, if not literally accurate, described our sports writing culture. From event to event, across the calendar.

So many places, so many games, and so few that through tradition and location stand out — the Rose Bowl, the Super Bowl, the Masters and, because it’s very name is so instantly recognizable, Wimbledon.

“Devastated,” was Federer’s one-word tweet, when the 2020 tournament, as the British say, was abandoned. His sentiment is understood. For more than a decade, Wimbledon was Roger’s tournament. He won it eight times and believed he could add another.

However, Federer is growing older. At the next Wimbledon, 2021, he’ll be a month from his 40th birthday. His time is ebbing away. The same for Serena Williams, who has won the tournament seven times. She’ll be 40 in September 2021.

So unfortunate for Roger. For Serena. For the kid who didn’t get to play in the NCAA tournament. For all the athletes whose careers have been affected by something beyond their control, beyond our control.

How barren the sports landscape. No basketball, baseball, soccer, golf. Now, nothing.

Two months ago, they held the Super Bowl, which was followed by the AT&T Pebble Beach Pro-Am, which was followed by the Genesis L.A. Open. Spring training was underway, just like always. We were loving it.

Then what didn’t come to a halt became a sad apology.

"It is with great regret that the Main Board of the All-England Club (AELTC) and the Committee of Management of The Championships have today decided that The Championships 2020 will be cancelled due to public health concerns linked to the coronavirus epidemic," Wimbledon said on Wednesday, in a statement on its website.

"Uppermost in our mind has been the health and safety of all of those who come together to make Wimbledon happen — the public in the UK and visitors from around the world, our players, guests, members, staff, volunteers, partners, contractors, and local residents — as well as our broader responsibility to society's efforts to tackle this global challenge to our way of life."

There had been talk about holding the tournament without spectators, as there have been suggestions that NBA games end English Premier League games and baseball games be held without fans, in empty stadiums or arenas. But why?

The people who watch, who cheer, who queue for seats at Wimbledon, who wait to give high fives to Steph Curry as he leaves the court, are as much a part of a sport as those who play. Think Rafael Nadal would scramble up the seats after a win at Wimbledon if there were nobody waiting to hug him?

The virus won this time, in straight sets. Wimbledon never had a chance. It was unfair. But as have been reminded of late, so is life.

Newsday (N.Y.): Halep wins Wimbledon, stops Williams' bid for 24th Slam

in ,

By Art Spander
Special to Newsday

WIMBLEDON, England — Simona Halep needed less than an hour to stun Serena Williams — and maybe the entire tennis world — while winning the Wimbledon women’s final, 6-2, 6-2, Saturday on Centre Court.

Read the full story here.

Copyright © 2019 Newsday. All rights reserved.

Another Federer masterpiece at the theater of Wimbledon

in ,

By Art Spander

WIMBLEDON, England — This is his stage, if not quite his masterpiece theater then his theater of masterpieces, Wimbledon, Centre Court.

Others have made appearances, but somehow as Friday, invariably the place is Roger Federer’s.

Rafael Nadal, a bit younger, seemingly a bit stronger, was supposed to win that semifinal, wasn’t he? But when the guy on the other side of the net is Roger Federer, and the match is at Wimbledon, as we learned again, predictions go wrong.

Federer took Nadal out of his game and with a 7-6 (3), 1-6, 6-3, 6-4 victory took himself into a Wimbledon final for a 12th time. He’s won eight of those finals and Sunday has the opportunity make it nine.

His opponent will be Novak Djokovic, the defending champion, the top player in the ATP rankings and a 6-2, 4-6, 6-3, 6-2 winner over Roberto Bautista Agut in the other semi.

“It will be difficult,” said Federer. “He’s not No. 1 by chance. But I’m very excited.”

As were the screaming fans at Wimbledon, whether in the high-priced seats where, like Lakers and Warriors games back in the states, royalty gathers — there figurative, here genuine — and up on “Henman Hill,” where the masses watch on giant screen TV, the action happening a few yards away.

Federer may be Swiss, but the Brits have come to embrace him because of the classy, graceful way he’s performed at the their tournament, the world’s oldest, the All-England Lawn Tennis championships.

He is 37, almost 38, but the elegantly way he plays, those one-handed backhands, those huge serves — he opened with an ace — is ageless. “I’m exhausted,” he told the BBC, moments after leaving the court.

Just four sets and just 3 hours and 2 minutes, compared to that five-set, 4 hour and 48 minute epic final between Roger and Rafa in 2008, but he was 11 years younger.

And of course, he had 11 fewer years experience.

“It was tough at the end,” said Federer of Nadal almost forcing a fifth set. “He played some unbelievable shots in the match. I think the match was played at a very high level.”

Which one would suppose when the two of the three players acknowledged to be the best of their era go at it, Federer with his 20 Grand Slam victories, the 33-year-old Nadal with his 18.

“The first set was huge,” said Federer. Indeed, Federer had won only two of the previous 18 matches when Nadal took the first set. Now, overall, against each other, Nadal has 25 wins, Federer 16.

To Nadal, the outcome could be explained easily. “I think his return (game) was better than my one,” he said.

As you know, Rafa, a Spaniard who came to English after he came to the tennis tour, sometimes has problems with the language. That bothers him less than the problems he had with Federer. And with his own game. “I didn’t receive well,” said Nadal, meaning returning serve, not going out for a sideline pass.

“When that happens,” Nadal said, “(Federer’s) at an advantage. He’s in control of the match because you feel a little bit more under pressure than him.”

Rafa had problems with his own backhand. Those could be overcome against most players, but not against the other members of the Big Three, Federer or Djokovic.

“I was a little bit too worried about the backhand,” said Nadal, sounding very much like a weekend muni court player, “so I was not able to move with the freedom in the forehand. When that happens against a player like him, is so difficult.”

As the years pass, to Federer and to the public, each victory in a Grand Slam becomes bigger and bigger. When he didn’t even make the semis in 2018, the talk was he was in full decline. So much for talk.

"Yeah, I mean, obviously extremely high,” Federer said when asked where the win ranks among the dozens he’s earned. “It's always very, very cool to play against Rafa here, especially when I haven't played in so long. It lived up to the hype, especially from coming out of the gates; we were both playing very well. Then the climax at the end with the crazy last game, some tough rallies there.

“But it's definitely, definitely going to go down as one of my favorite matches to look back at, again, because it's Rafa, it's at Wimbledon, the crowds were into it, great weather.”

What else need be said?

Wins for tennis's Big Three and farewell to Andy and Serena

in ,

By Art Spander
For Maven Sports

WIMBLEDON, England — It’s their tournament, isn’t it? I mean, they do call it the All-England Lawn Tennis Championships. So if a Brit who isn’t even entered in the singles gets the same attention as Roger, Novak and Rafa — please, you don’t need last names — then fine.

Read the full story here.

Copyright 2019 The Maven 

Newsday (N.Y.): Serena Williams beats Julia Goerges, reaches fourth round at Wimbledon

in ,

By Art Spander
Special to Newsday

WIMBLEDON, England — Serena Williams scored a quick, tidy third-round victory Saturday, leaving plenty of time in her post-match interview to discuss playing mixed doubles with Andy Murray — seemingly all that Britain cares about — and the stunning success of 15-year-old American Cori “Coco” Gauff.

Read the full story here.

Copyright © 2019 Newsday. All rights reserved. 

Gauff’s Wimbledon tale could have ended — but it didn’t

in ,

By Art Spander
For Maven Sports

WIMBLEDON, England — She has what all great athletes have, no matter their sport, no matter their age, the belief that even when even you’re making the bad shots, getting the bad breaks, somehow you’ll find a way to win — which is exactly what Cori Gauff did.

Read the full story here.

Copyright 2019 The Maven

Serena rallies — and now it’s mixed doubles with Andy

in ,

By Art Spander
For Maven Sports

WIMBLEDON, England — The defending champion, Angelique Kerber, had been beaten an hour earlier. And now Serena Williams was getting pummeled in the first set of her match by an 18-year-old qualifier. You wondered if this Wimbledon, having already lost Naomi Osaka and Venus Williams, was about to go off the rails.

Read the full story here.

Copyright 2019 The Maven 

A 7-footer wins big at Wimbledon

in ,

WIMBLEDON, England — Stan Wawrinka, a Grand Slam winner, took his tennis defeat by an American with grace. Unlike the way The Sun, the tabloid, took England’s soccer defeat by America.

This was the day after, some 24 hours of regret for England’s team, beaten Tuesday night, 2-1 — or as The Sun printed it, 1-2 — by the United States in the semifinal of the Women’s World Cup.

This also was the day of success, Reilly Opelka of Florida upsetting Wawrinka, 7-5. 3-6. 4-6. 6-4, 8-6, Wednesday in a Wimbledon second-round match.

“He went bigger than me,” Wawrinka said, a statement that, since Opelka is 6-foot-11, could be taken literally. “And he deserved to win.”

So did the U.S. women’s team, albeit the way at least one American player, Alex Morgan, celebrated after her goal, America’s second, mimicking someone sipping tea, was unneeded.

In the United Kingdom they call instant replay VAR, or video assistant referee, and it was a replay that showed England was offside when scoring the apparent tying goal with eight minutes remained in regulation time.

Then the low penalty kick by England’s Steph Houghton was grabbed by goalie Alyssa Naeher to preserve the victory.

Or as the headline in The Sun put it, “LIONESSES LOSE TO V.A.R.MERICA”

Some clever people there, if some disenchanted ones. In The Sun, Martin Lipton called Houghton’s penalty kick “awful.” Hey, they did get to the semis, interestingly the same stage the men’s team reached in the 2018 men’s World Cup.

How far Opelka can go in this Wimbledon debut is problematical, especially because in the next round he faces Milos Raonic, who also has a huge serve and was also a finalist here three years ago.

Still, an another American male who actually can win tennis matches — the way American women win soccer matches — is to be appreciated.

Not that you expect to see him on a tennis court instead of a basketball court. And so Opelka, an inch shorter than 7 feet, was asked quickly enough, “Why are you here and not in the NBA?”

Without hesitation, Opelka responded, “Good question.” 

To which the 21-year-old could only answer, “I wish I was. I regret it every day. And yeah, that’s pretty much all I’m going to say.”

Other than basketball is his favorite sport, other than tennis, which now is his profession. “I don’t play (basketball) much anymore," he said. "When I’m home I shoot every day. I go to the court and play all the time. But like I never played serious or anything.”

The 6-foot-9 John Isner, who’s been on the tennis tour more than a decade, was a Wimbledon semifinalist last year; he’s often said if as a kid he knew how tall he'd become, his choice would have been hoops. Opelka beat Isner in the first round of this year’s Australian Open.

The man has an advantage serving and a disadvantage returning. It was Isner who was locked into that 11-hour, three-day match against Nicolas Mahut at Wimbledon in 2010, Isner winning 70-68 in the fifth set, when each player hit serves that couldn’t be returned.

Wawrinka, an even 6 feet, who has won the Australian, French and U.S. Opens, was asked if tennis would become the domain of the really big guy, such as the one who whipped him, Opelka.

“Against the big server, you’re not going to have a lot of chances,” said Wawrinka, “but no I don’t think. We’ve been thinking that for 10 years. But no, I don’t think we’re going in that direction.”

Who knows what direction Opelka is going, but beating a Grand Slam champ, even though Wawrinka is now 34, is hardly unimpressive. 

“I had to adjust a lot,” said Opelka. "My mind was always thinking, especially after I lost the third set. He was in every return game.

“I played the big points really well on my serve, and that’s what good players do. They find other ways to win that you’re not always comfortable with.” 

Comfortable and uncomfortable, as Opelka pointed out, don’t matter. 

As they say in golf, it isn’t how; it’s how many or how much. Opelka had as much as he needed. Just as the night before, the U.S. women soccer team had as much as it needed.

Venus loses; passing shots or passing of the years?

in ,

By Art Spander

WIMBLEDON, England — The question is whether the difference was the passing shots or the passing of the years.

If there is anything that sport emphasizes, it’s that an athlete’s days are limited, that in the end, no matter the talent, no matter the sport, Father Time — or Mother Time — always wins.

Read the full story here.

Copyright 2019 The Maven

Wimbledon’s last act: An anticlimax starring Djokovic

in ,

By Art Spander

WMBLEDON, England — In this land where Shakespeare wrote, “This blessed plot, this realm, this England,” Wimbledon 2018 went against the basic rule of theatre and fiction.

After a fantastic build-up, hours of suspense and history, the conclusion to the tale was anti-climatic.

Not because Novak Djokovic triumphed — he’s a one-man show full of subplots — but that his 6-2, 6-2, 7-6 (3) victory over a weary Kevin Anderson in the final Sunday was hardly what we had hoped.

Although it’s probably what many expected.

It was flat and lifeless, a dreary contrast to the semifinals, which were wonderfully competitive if, in this modern age of instant gratification, a bit too long — well, more than a bit.

Anderson needed 6 hours, 36 minutes for his win over John Isner in one semi, finishing 26-24 in the fifth set; Djokovic needed 5 hours 16 minutes (and two days) to get past Rafael Nadal, finishing 10-8 in the fifth set. How do you top that?

You don’t. You get too overly tired players, if one, Djokovic, now a four-time Wimbledon winner and 13-time Grand Slam winner, has the pedigree and the better all-around game. And no less significantly, as he mentioned, the experience in Wimbledon finals.

It’s not fair, perhaps, to describe the game of the 6-foot-8 Anderson, a South African who played for the University of Illinois and lives in Florida, as the tennis version of a one-note samba. But his strength is his serve. And against Djokovic, one of best returners ever, Anderson’s strength was a weakness.

Serving to open the match on yet another glorious 85-degree afternoon, Anderson was broken. You sensed his opportunity was, too. “Novak beat up on me pretty bad,” said Anderson. He now has been in two Slam finals, losing in the 2017 U.S Open to Nadal.

From 2013 through early 2016, Djokovic, now 31, owned men’s tennis, Of the 16 Grand Slams over that period he won seven and was in five other finals. He won four in a row, starting with the 2015 U.S. Open through the 2016 French.

Then at the 2016 Wimbledon, he hurt his elbow. That, along with some coaching changes — Boris Becker out, Andre Agassi out — and rumored family problems, dropped him into a void.

Djokovic finally underwent surgery on the elbow in February.

“After that, I had a really good recovery,” he said. “I thought maybe too fast. I wasn’t ready to compete ... It took me several months to regain the confidence, go back to basics. I had to trust the process ... Playing against Nadal in the semifinals here was the biggest test that I could have, specifically for that, just to see if I could prevail.”

Djokovic is from Serbia, and while he speaks English well he tends to sound as if the words were linked together by, no, not Shakespeare, but a government employee — if one with the great ability to cover every inch of a tennis court.

He was aware of his opponent’s tactics — and tiredness, although Djokovic had fewer than 24 hours to recover from the Nadal semi.

“I knew Kevin spent plenty of time on the court in the quarters (a five-set win over Roger Federer) and semis, marathon wins. I did too. He had a day to recover. But at the same time, I knew it was his first Wimbledon finals, and it really is a different sensation when you’re in the finals.

“It was my fifth, and I tried to use that experience, that mental edge that I have, to start off the right way. The first game, I made a break of serve that was a perfect possible start. After that, I cruised for two sets.”

Anderson, 32, conceded he was nervous. And he said his body “didn’t feel great.”

Nor did the match, which required only 2 hours, 19 minutes (Anderson’s fifth set against Isner alone was some three hours).

“I didn’t play great tennis in the beginning,” said Anderson. “I definitely felt much better in the third set. I thought I had quite a few opportunities to win that third set.

“I would have loved to push it to another set, but obviously it wasn’t meant to be.”