Ranking Roger

Tennis at war with itself, plus sport in the dock

The irony! The logos of the four tennis grand slams, the men’s and women’s tours and tennis’ governing body sit united under a Tennis Plays for Peace banner with Ukrainian colours. Just when the sport is threatening to tear itself apart over Wimbledon’s ban on Russians and Belarusians.

The argument between the All England Club (organisers of the Wimbledon Championships) and the two tours, and in turn within the community of players themselves, surrounds ranking points. The tours have stripped Wimbledon of them in solidarity with their banned members. In effect they have countered a minor distortion to their rankings - there are only a handful of barred players - with a much greater one. All are now impacted.

I was a little churlish a few weeks back in suggesting in Sport inc. that only agents would really care about players’ rankings as they strive to monetise their clients’ efforts on court. I stand by my claim that most fans couldn’t give two hoots. It’s the tennis itself they are interested in, not ladder positions. But on further reflection I recognise that rankings can equate to entries into tournaments - a major factor in a player’s earning potential.

At the very top of the rankings, places at the end of season ATP and WTA Finals are at stake. Further down, a few rungs on the ladder either way can make the difference between automatic entry into tournaments and having to pray for a wild card.

Listen to the carping of the disgruntled since the two tours sanctioned Wimbledon and you’ll hear much talk of players needing to ‘defend’ their points. To understand the dynamic, think of a bath with the tap running and its plug missing. Points won in competition expire after a year (leaving aside protection granted for ‘approved’ injuries). So, as each competition comes round in the calendar, a player needs to do at least as well this year as they did last year to maintain their points total, and so - give or take - their position in the rankings.

Way down in the depths of tennis’ professional circuit, male players can earn a single ranking point by winning a first round contest in an ITF ‘futures’ event. Win one of the grand slams and they garner 2,000 points. Such is the steepness of the sport’s pyramid.

Playing frequently and well can take a player to the number one rung without them ever winning one of the four premier competitions. Belarus’ Aryna Sabalenka finished 2021 in second spot but has yet to make a major final. She was a semi finalist at Wimbledon, earning 780 points. That equates to 20% of her current total, so a lot of points to find elsewhere to keep her bath topped up. She’s currently #7 in the rankings.

Forty-seventh in the world and slipping week-by-week is one Roger Federer, who hasn’t picked up a racket in anger since last year’s Wimbledon quarter finals. Such is the effect of a prolonged absence from competition. It is now four years since he was last #1.

The Swiss superstar, in the injured twilight of his glittering career, is a million miles from the anxious grind of those at the base of the tennis pyramid, trying to scratch a living on the circuit. Their’s is an existence of net negative income. Understandable then as they cadge a bed, scrape money for a flight and fret over tournament entry, that every possible ranking point matters. Wimbledon is a good way above this racket-to-mouth life, but many competing in SW19 later this month will be acutely aware of where they have come from and could so easily slip back to.

The current strife over ranking points is tarnishing the collective image of tennis players who stand accused of greedy self-interest at the expense of the people of Ukraine. Not helped by those dismissing Wimbledon this year as no more than an exhibition event, or contemplating skipping it altogether.

“For me it’s tough. Having a home slam and not gaining any ranking points from that. You’re not really playing for anything. You’re playing this almost like an exhibition." Cameron Norrie, world #11

The solution, surely, is simple. Just protect the points the banned players won in the 2021 Championships for a further twelve months. That way, the All England Club and UK government achieve their ban, the Russians and Belarusians miss out on the lucrative prize money on offer at Wimbledon, but their rankings - with all that these imply - remain intact.

In the meantime, the All England is threatening to take the two tours to court in an attempt to have Wimbledon’s points restored. This can only mean it has genuine fears of a player boycott. But I’d say that the public will side with the tournament organisers if that is the case. Better surely to push ahead with preparations for a stellar event - whoever competes - than risk losing the current moral advantage in the eyes of the local populace by litigating. The All England chairman, it might be noted, is a retired lawyer.

In the (court)room where it happened

And on the subject of sports law, last week I attended the launch of the memoirs of Michael Beloff, widely regarded as one of the most accomplished lawyers in this field. MJBQC has as its centrepiece a colourful, breakneck tour through Beloff’s interactions with a huge number of leading sportspeople and administrators around the world in a wide range of sports. Many of these encounters were in courtrooms, arbitrations or tribunal hearings, but others at airports, bars, restaurants and in sports arenas.

Read the book and you come away with the impression - not entirely fanciful - that this eminent QC was in the room shortly after every major sporting scandal or controversy over the past fifty or so years. And not shy to seek photos with and autographs of the sporting greats either. He concludes:

“Although sports law was for most of my career only a fraction of my practice, it has given me more pure delight (as well as free tickets) than the rest of it put together.”

I’ve sat in various athletics stadiums with Beloff - although not as many as his old friend Jeffrey Archer it would seem - and have leaned on his legal advice in athlete appeals against non-selection for Olympics and championships. Throughout I’ve marvelled at his ability to remain a true lover of sport in spite of the extensive exposure he’s had to its ugly underbelly. The remarkable resilience of his fandom shines through in MJBQC. Highly recommended.

Writing a new future

I found myself halfway through Val McDermid’s latest novel 1979 this weekend when The Observer published an uplifting colour piece on the McDermid Ladies. This is the team that’s broken away from Raith Rovers with the backing of the crime writer after the Scottish club controversially signed a player who’d been found guilty of rape in a civil court. Well worth a read here: McDermid Ladies