It has only been a few days since Serena's absolute meltdown at the U.S. Open, and still, it continues to make all sorts of headlines.
There is an Australian cartoonist, Mark Knight, who published a cartoon that was almost immediately vilified as racist. It received a lot of attention, and was criticized for effectively dehumanizing Serena Williams, and essentially playing on racial stereotypes, with masculine features and exaggerated lips, in particular. Some even suggested that it was eerily similar to racist cartoons from the early 20th century, or even 19th century depictions. Clearly, this was not helpful.
However, that does not absolve Serena from taking responsibility for what I personally believe more and more to have been a ridiculous outburst. I read a couple of articles on the subject that really helped to put this all into perspective.
Think about it; here we are, four days after the event, and by now, almost no one is talking about Osaka's performance. Everybody who has any interest in tennis is still talking about Serena, though, and I think that is the point. It's always, always, always about Serena, win or lose, because she seems somehow incapable of making it otherwise. There she was, playing the part of victim, and claiming that she was out there fighting for women's rights, invoking her daughter's name in claiming that she was not cheating, that she had not received any coaching and that he had merely been giving her the thumbs up sign (which is an insult to the chair umpire's intelligence to even make such a claim, frankly), even though her own coach contradicted these claims.
Now, I understand that many people who are defending Serena Williams are saying that the no coaching rule is a ridiculous one, and makes tennis stand apart in a kind of dubious way. Perhaps that is true, for that matter. However, that does not change the fact that, as of right now, it is a rule, and players are not supposed to receive coaching. Professional tennis players understand that and must comply with that, knowing that if they are caught receiving coaching, they will be penalized. Also, I agree that there are double-standards when it comes to how men and women are treated in sports, and in life more generally. But the championship match is not the time that anyone would expect Serena to suddenly grow angry about it and protest it, and this seems especially dubious given that she was losing, and has a history of these kinds of outbursts when things are not going well for her on the tennis court.
Also, let's face it: I think there is some legitimacy to the notion that the chair umpire, Carlos Ramos, seemed to be making a point of penalizing Serena Williams, and that he also took things too far. He played too much of a role in the final match, and that detracted from it. He seemed almost to make it into a kind of high profile pissing contest, although in that, he was not alone. But Serena at least is a player, and her actions, both on the court and off the court, are supposed to determine the outcome of a match. The chair umpire is supposed to make sure that this happens, and not so much get involved in affecting the match. He went too far, as well.
Frankly, both were in the wrong, it seemed to me. But prior to this match, at least, Ramos had a stellar reputation as a chair umpire. Meanwhile, prior to this match, Serena Williams had a well-documented history of similar such incidents. So, while it was a bit of a shock to see her have one in such an important, obviously highly anticipated match, it also was not exactly the most shocking thing that most of us saw in sports.
Now, I understand that many people who are defending Serena Williams are saying that the no coaching rule is a ridiculous one, and makes tennis stand apart in a kind of dubious way. Perhaps that is true, for that matter. However, that does not change the fact that, as of right now, it is a rule, and players are not supposed to receive coaching. Professional tennis players understand that and must comply with that, knowing that if they are caught receiving coaching, they will be penalized. Also, I agree that there are double-standards when it comes to how men and women are treated in sports, and in life more generally. But the championship match is not the time that anyone would expect Serena to suddenly grow angry about it and protest it, and this seems especially dubious given that she was losing, and has a history of these kinds of outbursts when things are not going well for her on the tennis court.
Also, let's face it: I think there is some legitimacy to the notion that the chair umpire, Carlos Ramos, seemed to be making a point of penalizing Serena Williams, and that he also took things too far. He played too much of a role in the final match, and that detracted from it. He seemed almost to make it into a kind of high profile pissing contest, although in that, he was not alone. But Serena at least is a player, and her actions, both on the court and off the court, are supposed to determine the outcome of a match. The chair umpire is supposed to make sure that this happens, and not so much get involved in affecting the match. He went too far, as well.
Frankly, both were in the wrong, it seemed to me. But prior to this match, at least, Ramos had a stellar reputation as a chair umpire. Meanwhile, prior to this match, Serena Williams had a well-documented history of similar such incidents. So, while it was a bit of a shock to see her have one in such an important, obviously highly anticipated match, it also was not exactly the most shocking thing that most of us saw in sports.
Infamously, she alleged that the chair umpire was attacking her character when he gave her a verbal warning about receiving coaching, and things just went downhill from there. But one thing that one author noticed was that her rants seem to come when she is losing. Always, they seem to come when things are going badly for her on the court. And the bigger the stakes, the worse these tantrums seem to be. This one was really bad, and may actually affect her legacy. It has reached a point where some chair umpire are actually considering boycotting matches involving Serena Williams until she apologizes, which is exactly what she demanded of Ramos, the chair umpire in the final match. Here is some of that story:
The source tells The Times that some umpires believe that Ramos was “thrown to the wolves for simply doing his job and was not willing to be abused for it” and that they are considering “to refuse any match assignments involving Williams until she apologizes for vilifying Ramos and calling him a ‘liar’ and a ‘thief.'”
Frankly, it would serve her right, if somehow, she were not even able to compete because chair umpires refused to do any matches involving her. I know that she received the apparently unconditional support of the obviously mostly pro-American crowd at the U.S. Open, but she was in the wrong. That means that the crowd was in the wrong, too. Even Serena herself seemed to recognize this, and seemed to also recognize that her childish tantrum had created a monster, when the clearly partisan crowd started booing loudly and ruining a trophy ceremony that should have been all about how well Osaka played, and how the newly crowned champion reached such a wonderful and huge accomplishment in winning her first ever Grand Slam title by convincingly defeating one of the most decorated tennis stars in history. It really should not be anything goes, and the crowd also has to grow up and realize that their hero should not automatically get the title. She is not entitled to any emotional outburst - and this one came before an international television audience - simply because she is frustrated by the match not going her way. Because indeed, it seems that her worst tantrums come, not all that surprisingly, during matches in which things are not going her way. Adam Rubinstein wrote a piece about this for the Weekly Standard, and I think he has a point. Here is what he wrote about it:
"There’s some merit to the claim of unequal application of code standards. Nadal, Djokovic, among others, have been cited for violations in the past sometimes, but so has Serena. To say that male players get away with the same violations all of the time because they’re male isn’t exactly right. Sure, the rules could be more equally applied. But it does seem awfully foolish to act in a certain way, year after year, as she concedes in her protest, and to be warned each time, and to still think the rules shouldn’t apply to you. But that’s Serena’s game; when you’re down, make a fuss, make it about something larger than yourself: the referees, the system, gender, whatever it may be. Then, you never have to accept defeat — it’s always someone else’s fault."
Yes, that pretty much sums it up. Whenever Serena loses, it is someone else's fault. She was losing - convincingly losing - when her tantrum really stepped up a few notches. Sure, we can understand her clear frustrations. She is a professional playing at the highest levels, and she is trying to win a 24th Grand Slam title, which would tie the record. Things are not going her way. She dropped the first set, and then, after taking a 3-1 lead in the second set, she was broken back and found herself down, 4-3. Obviously, that is frustrating. I get it. But that does not mean anything goes.
And let's face it: American fans of tennis need to get over themselves, as well. Again, Serena is one of the most successful tennis players, even athletes, in all of history. She has a list of accomplishments that dwarf those of almost every other athlete. But her conduct has, at times, made her appear smaller as a person, and if anything, her antics have detracted from her on court success. For the audience to give her their unconditional support, even when she is quite clearly in the wrong and taking things just way too far, was more than a little disappointing, and speaks to the sense of entitlement that too many Americans seem to themselves be guilty of simply not accepting it when the assumed outcome of their American star winning yet another title and adding another notable accomplishment suddenly goes off script. Frankly, for a country that still seems to be wrestling with the demons from the 2016 election, when millions of Americans clearly reacted or overreacted - to things not going precisely the way they want them to and electing a moron and a pig that literally disgusts the world into our highest office, this sense of entitlement by American tennis fans will reinforce the notion that Americans feel justified in expressing their outrage, and loudly at that, whenever things do not go their way.
Serena was wrong on Saturday, period. Stop making her into some kind of a martyr. If she wants to talk about how unfair it is that there is a double-standard - as there likely is - between men and women, then fine. Have that discussion. Just don't have it on the tennis court during a championship match at a Grand Slam event when you happen to be losing pretty badly, and calling the chair umpire a "liar" and a "thief" and suggesting that he is probably sexist, too. Serena was not championing the cause of women on Saturday, as much as she was trying - unsuccessfully - to win another major title and receive her big payday, and add to her legacy. It was not going well, but that does not mean that she should be allowed to have what can only be described as a personal meltdown. And it not only did not do the cause of greater equality between men and women's tennis any good, but actively detracted from it. Kevin Mitchell of the Guardian made some very valid points in this regard:
"Sadly, she did her cause no good at all. Williams, while understandably upset, was wrong. Ramos, doing no more than his job demanded, was right. Intentionally or not, she accused him of bias that simply was not there – in these circumstances, at least.
By conflating her own dilemma with a wider issue and claiming to champion the cause of women in sport, she not only detracted from the extraordinary achievement of the 20-year-old winner, Naomi Osaka, who was appearing in her first grand slam final, but she shifted the blame for her own misdemeanours, and their consequences, on to an official who was powerless to reply."
It is not enough to say that Serena could have handled things better. Closer to the truth is to state outright that she could hardly have handled it worse. Again, if you watch the whole video of what happened - and I have watched it more than once now - her anger clearly rises as her own situation in the match itself gets worse. She is entitled to grow angry and frustrated, as athletes clearly will. Hell, she is even entitled to show that frustration. But she is not entitled to go off on tantrums like a child, and to name call the official, also like a child. And this is also important, even though many Americans seem to have conveniently overlooked this: the audience is not entitled to simply give her their unconditional support come what may while all of this is happening. The fact that that crowd at Flushing Meadows booed when she was going off like that made it seem like she was in the right, when she was not. Her frustrations on Saturday, I think, were not about some kind of inequality between men and women in the game. Her frustrations were with how badly things were going on the court, and she used this sense of unfairness in order to vent out her frustrations, to take them out on someone who did not deserve them. And once the chair umpire got sick of being verbally abused - which he was - she added his reaction to her list of perceived slights, or crimes, or prejudices, or whatever it was that she was claiming he had against her.
Again, here is how Mitchell puts it (and please read the article yourself by clicking on the link below, because it is a good one):
"But none of that excuses what Williams did in the Arthur Ashe Stadium on Saturday night – which was to manipulate sentiment to her advantage, regardless of the effect it would have on a wholly innocent opponent who showed admirable discipline and understanding on the biggest night of her life. Osaka adores Williams, and the American abused that love.
"To simplify a sporting controversy that has been elevated to another level: over the final half hour of an emotional and otherwise excellent match, Williams received three code violations that resulted in her forfeiting a game and virtually handing the title to Osaka."
That, I think, is the bottom line. Serena has won enough times that you would assume she understands that it requires maintaining composure during adversity to win a championship, as Serena was trying to do on Saturday. It is all too clear that she did not do that. In fact, I think that she employed this strategy, like many men infamously have done in the past, in order to break the momentum that an opponent has. John McEnroe used to do that. So did Jimmy Connors. So have some others, with mixed and, frankly, unpredictable levels of success. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it does not.
Serena took it too far. Way too far. To call the chair umpire a "liar" and a "thief" and to suggest - possibly even threaten - that he will never work one of her matches again (and why would he want to?), is losing any semblance of composure. Watch how Serena seems to try and overcompensate with her giddy love and support for a clearly shaken and sad Osaka during the trophy ceremony seemed to suggest that Serena recognized, and by then felt bad, with just how extreme she had allowed herself to go. Perhaps the unconditional support that she received from the crowd encouraged her.
Whatever it was that made her just keep going and going, she should have responded another way. Frankly, she should have responded like a champion, which would likely have meant keeping quiet and getting focused, and really putting all of her energies into a match at precisely the point when it was needed most. She did not do that and, as Mitchell suggests, she virtually threw the match to Osaka in the process, almost assuring that her own chances of mounting some serious comeback were effectively ended.
What happened on Saturday was that Serena became the face, at least for one afternoon, of the ugly American with a greatly exaggerated sense of entitlement. Unfortunately, the obviously pro-American audience not only allowed it, but encouraged her in that regard. She was wrong, and simply took things way too far. The audience there did also, by virtue of their own very loud support of Serena, even when she was clearly in the wrong. That is why the story now, in the aftermath of the women's final, is not about how amazing Osaka played, but about Serena. Always Serena, even when she clearly did not play her best.
The story, instead, was about Serena not acting her best, and the assembled audience of her fellow Americans who decided not to act their best, either. That is what made the final so cringe-worthy on Saturday, and that is why we are still discussing these events many days later. The sad truth is that Osaka's brilliant play clearly takes second place to all of that, and that was all because of Serena making it about herself, and her very vocal supporters encouraging her to steal the thunder from Osaka, who deserved her moment in the sun, but was denied despite her brilliant achievement.
Here are the articles that I used, and employed quotes from, in writing this particular blog entry:
Reports: Umpires consider boycott of Serena Williams matches, fearful of being 'the next Ramos' by Jason Owens,Yahoo Sports, September 12, 2018:
Funny How Serena Has Trouble With Referees Only When She's Losing ADAM RUBENSTEIN 3 MIN READ
Serena Williams was right about women’s treatment but wrong on Saturday by Kevin Mitchell at Flushing Meadows,10 Sep 2018.
No comments:
Post a Comment