Before breaking down the bracket tomorrow, there's one issue regarding Wimbledon that I want to touch on, and it's the same issue that arose at the French Open. ESPN.com might've just published a misleading headline, but why were people giving the USTA crap after Serena wasn't seeded at the French Open? What does the USTA have to do with the French Open?! Anyway, the USTA promptly announced that it was "changing its seeding policy" for the US Open, and Wimbledon followed suit, giving her the No. 25 seed.
Now, here's my problem with the entire thing. It's special treatment. And you can't say it isn't. Victoria Azarenka came back from having a baby last year. Did they go out of their way to seed her in tournaments? When Kim Clijsters won the US Open after having her daughter, she needed a wild card to get into the tournament. Yet nobody said boo when they returned.
But now that it's Serena Williams, you've got all these people chiming in from every which direction. And the implications that she was being somehow discriminated against are downright ridiculous! The Peanut Gallery only cared because it's Serena Williams. If you think this would've been a "controversy" if it was any other player, you're kidding yourselves.
Even the players are torn on the issue. Many were OK with the idea of her being seeded, but didn't want it to affect their standing that they had earned. Petra Kvitova, for example, is No. 8 in the world. When she was asked where Serena should be seeded, she responded, "number nine."
The difference between seed lines is nearly as big as the difference between being seeded or unseeded. If Serena had been seeded No. 8 and knocked Kvitova down, that would've meant she'd potentially have to play one of the top seeds in the round of 16 instead of the quarterfinals. Ditto with the difference between the 16 and 17 seeds. That was part of the reason it was such a big deal at last year's US Open when second-seeded Andy Murray withdrew after the draw was already made and they moved the No. 5 seed into his spot and left No. 3 Federer on the same side as No. 1 Nadal, promptly leading everyone to ask "Why?"
Speaking of Andy Murray, he hasn't played since last year's Wimbledon because of that hip injury. This is his first tournament back. Was he seeded? No. He's a two-time champ and a hometown favorite, yet nobody's up in arms because of his lack of a seed. Since Wimbledon is the only Grand Slam that doesn't go strictly by the rankings, they had the power to do so, and it would've been justified. Yet Andy Murray's unseeded. Where's the uproar?
I can't help but feel for Dominikia Cibulkova, too. She's ranked 32nd, so she would've been in line for a seed (with the women, they generally keep pretty close to the world rankings, if not exact). But since Serena was seeded, Cibulkova was the odd-woman out, which seems a little unfair. So, instead of waiting until the third round to face another seed, she was able to face anybody in the first round. And she ended up with 42nd-ranked Alize Cornet, a tough first-round match, after which she'll have to face hometown favorite Johanna Konta, the No. 22 seed. Serena, meanwhile, gets a cushy draw as the No. 25 seed.
Based on her body of work, is she deserving of a seed? Of course! She's won Wimbledon seven times, including the last two times she's played (2015-16). And is she one of the top 32 players in the world? Without a doubt. So, in that regard, it makes sense that Wimbledon decided to seed Serena Williams. And their rationale that seeding her balanced out the bracket better made complete sense, too. From a competitive sense, it's definitely the right thing to do. I just wish they'd gone about it a little better.
Ultimately this was a situation the WTA was going to have to deal with sooner or later, so it might actually be a good thing that this happened. Being pregnant and being injured are not the same thing, so I understand the thought process in considering them differently. But they shouldn't just be making up a policy mid-year because people got all bent out of shape when a top player returned and had to work her way back the same way every other player who's missed time due to pregnancy did before.
It's also worth noting that Serena Williams said nothing about it one way or the other. The uproar about her being unseeded at the French Open all came from the outside. When she wasn't seeded, she didn't complain. She just went with it. Just like I'm sure it would've been the same thing at Wimbledon or the US Open or any other tournament she enters. And I'm sure the higher-ranked players are happy she's seeded, too. They don't want to see her in the early rounds anymore than she wants to see them.
My only problem with her being seeded is that she's blatantly being given special treatment. Whether it's warranted or not is irrelevant. She was seeded at Wimbledon (and will be at the US Open) because the French Open got bad press for not seeding her. And I'm having a hard time believing there was any other reason why.
There's no official WTA policy regarding players returning from pregnancy, though. There needs to be one moving forward. Especially after this situation. Because they've already set the precedent. And if whoever the next top player that has a baby and returns to the tour wants the same treatment, she'd better get it. Otherwise, it'll be even more clear that Serena Williams is being given special treatment.
No comments:
Post a Comment