Wimbledon wildcards 2017 - Women

wimdledont · Challenger level

Wimbledon wildcards 2017 - Women

indiana · Tennis legend

I would have thought that Freya would have been the beneficiary of the 9th WC rather than Katie Swan.

Katie's not had the year she would no doubt want but can easily be justified before Freya on ranking points and age.

And yes, even on current ranking after a fair dollop of grass court points have come off I agree Tara should have made it a 10th with a MD WC if the initial maximum 8 isn't in force anyway, and she did win a MD round last year. Hopefully they'll sort it.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

I hope that Tara gets a MD wildcard. It will certainly be a little weird if she doesn't. I assume/hope she hasn't ruffled any feathers???

But I will not feel that she has been shabbily treated in the way that Sam Murray, for instance, was last year.

Sam had just beaten top 200 players and could not take part in the play-offs - because she was actually winning, on grass, against top players. To not give her a Quali wild-card was a disgrace.

Tara's form on grass has been pretty dire these past few tournaments. And in general too, really. She's barely won a match over the past four/five months. And based on seeing her in Surbiton, she's quite a way off.

In some ways, there's no harm in sending out a message that form over the past 6 months DOES matter, as well as absolute ranking based on wins last autumn, say.

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Just to add, I'm particularly pleased that the doubles wildcards have been used to help the younger players, both in terms of direct Wimbledon experience and also financially.

Last year, Joss and Anna got one (as they should), and Laura, and Tara.

But not Em (!) or Sam (!!), or any of the younger players.

It was ridiculous.

At least this year, that's been changed (for the younger players, if nothing else).

Good luck to Harriet, Katy D, Katie S and Katie B.

Jaffa · Challenger level

I wonder if Tara is moving back to HK and that's why she's not been given one..........

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Jaffa wrote:
I wonder if Tara is moving back to HK and that's why she's not been given one..........

And if she wasn't before, she might well be now !

blob · All-time great

This isn't like Julie Pullin (0-9 Wimbledon on WC), or Alex Bogdanovic (0-8 on Wimbledon WC) seeking another crack at it, Tara won a round... last year!
As Laura Robson was seen deserving of one each of the last two years based on nothing performance related, but rather on nostalgia and pipe dreams, I find it impossible to conclude that Tara shouldn't get one this year. Except, she has the unfortunate disqualifying circumstance of not being Laura Robson. Or, otherwise a favourite of the powers that be.

Emblematic of the favouritism and special rules that are endemic in the administration of British Tennis as a whole, from top to bottom.
Good God! They've made me come over all sounding like Jaggy!

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

blob wrote:
This isn't like Julie Pullin (0-9 Wimbledon on WC), or Alex Bogdanovic (0-8 on Wimbledon WC) seeking another crack at it, Tara won a round... last year!
As Laura Robson was seen deserving of one each of the last two years based on nothing performance related, but rather on nostalgia and pipe dreams, I find it impossible to conclude that Tara shouldn't get one this year. Except, she has the unfortunate disqualifying circumstance of not being Laura Robson. Or, otherwise a favourite of the powers that be.

Emblematic of the favouritism and special rules that are endemic in the administration of British Tennis as a whole, from top to bottom.
Good God! They've made me come over all sounding like Jaggy!

Good man Blob!

Foot Soliders of Tennis is a good twitter account to follow that has a dig at a painting on sale of the Queens crowd. The demographic is pretty poor, evidently all middle class hat wearing Tory brigade from this image

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

Wimbledon - For the Few not the Many.....

Wakey · Junior player

blob wrote:
This isn't like Julie Pullin (0-9 Wimbledon on WC), or Alex Bogdanovic (0-8 on Wimbledon WC) seeking another crack at it, Tara won a round... last year!
As Laura Robson was seen deserving of one each of the last two years based on nothing performance related, but rather on nostalgia and pipe dreams, I find it impossible to conclude that Tara shouldn't get one this year. Except, she has the unfortunate disqualifying circumstance of not being Laura Robson. Or, otherwise a favourite of the powers that be.

Emblematic of the favouritism and special rules that are endemic in the administration of British Tennis as a whole, from top to bottom.
Good God! They've made me come over all sounding like Jaggy!

Maybe they are just thinking that she may benefit from going through qualies based on her form. If she is likely to struggle if thrown right in on forum and she doesn't really have a history of being renowned for stepping up on the bigger stage unlike say Laura or Heather then it's certainly worth delaying the decision to make sure it is the one with the highest chance of success

indiana · Tennis legend

Well done to Katie B too on her MD WC, she's moving up the rankings nicely, albeit still a fair bit behind Tara and by much of the indications the LTA gives in such as funding hardly still a breaking through youngster at 20 ( though of course the LTA are often far too ageist ). I hope and expect Katie to continue to move up, and nothing against her MD WC in isolation.

Tara's not had a great year but on ranking ( yes, 12 month ) and Wimbledon just last year she comparatively deserves* more.

* - yes I know "deserves" can be argued with for WCs, including by me on occasions, which is why I added comparatively and could have added "with the WC system as it is". At least be unfair fairly !

skibbarriz · Strong Club Player

This British wildcard system always presents an opportunity for onlookers to disagree. It continually sends mixed messages re selection, the merits on which players deserve to be selected are very much up in the air and open to be argued. Some players receive them based on their tennis form, others not on their tennis form. Then there's how much you believe a player deserves one based on your personal views on how you'd grant them, against an appraisal based off the perceived historical modus operandi of the wildcard committee for players in that position.

So no one can be right or wrong, we can only feel a certain way about things. And just because a player in position x was previously granted a wc doesn't mean it should happen again. That event didn't establish it as the proper or correct approach moving forward. What other countries do with their wildcards, with their circumstances being widely different to ours, isn't a factor.

If Tara Moore had been favoured by the committee she would have received a WC. But no player is entitled to one, and no player 'deserves' one. At best we can consider they have a compelling case to receive special favour. To me Tara Moore doesn't fall into that category. And if she got a MDWC previously, or if a player with the same ranking and career history in France would get one, that doesn't change it.

She has been in poor form for several months. She is not a young prospect. She is not returning from injury. In terms of the non-tennis factor of profile, she is not a James Ward or Laura Robson. Tara and Marcus Willis had the same Wimbledon last year, in that they both won one round. But no one in the general public cares or remembers Tara Moore. That's the tough truth which influences the decisions and WC's by TD's.

Tara has spent over half a decade in ITF's and that is her level until she demonstrates something otherwise. Not a compelling case for a MDWC. That situation doesn't amount to 'deserving' for me. Play qualies and see if she can begin to find something. If she falls in qualies, there's no way giving her a MDWC would have been the right move. And if she wins qualies, her playing them was the right call.

indiana · Tennis legend

skibbarriz wrote:
This British wildcard system always presents an opportunity for onlookers to disagree. It continually sends mixed messages re selection, the merits on which players deserve to be selected are very much up in the air and open to be argued. Some players receive them based on their tennis form, others not on their tennis form. Then there's how much you believe a player deserves one based on your personal views on how you'd grant them, against an appraisal based off the perceived historical modus operandi of the wildcard committee for players in that position.

So no one can be right or wrong, we can only feel a certain way about things. And just because a player in position x was previously granted a wc doesn't mean it should happen again. That event didn't establish it as the proper or correct approach moving forward. What other countries do with their wildcards, with their circumstances being widely different to ours, isn't a factor.

If Tara Moore had been favoured by the committee she would have received a WC. But no player is entitled to one, and no player 'deserves' one. At best we can consider they have a compelling case to receive special favour. To me Tara Moore doesn't fall into that category. And if she got a MDWC previously, or if a player with the same ranking and career history in France would get one, that doesn't change it.

She has been in poor form for several months. She is not a young prospect. She is not returning from injury. In terms of the non-tennis factor of profile, she is not a James Ward or Laura Robson. Tara and Marcus Willis had the same Wimbledon last year, in that they both won one round. But no one in the general public cares or remembers Tara Moore. That's the tough truth which influences the decisions and WC's by TD's.

Tara has spent over half a decade in ITF's and that is her level until she demonstrates something otherwise. Not a compelling case for a MDWC. That situation doesn't amount to 'deserving' for me. Play qualies and see if she can begin to find something. If she falls in qualies, there's no way giving her a MDWC would have been the right move. And if she wins qualies, her playing them was the right call.

And many might feel that for a Slam that stinks. And I do differentiate Slams.

I agree that her recent form has been far from convincing so to that extent Tara has certainly not helped herself by making an indisputable case. But maybe a fair part of the problem is that she isn't Laura or maybe even Katie B.

Jaggy1876 · Grand Slam Champion

The Tara not getting a WC and Katie Boulter getting one (which I agree she deserves and has done well) has made me think as I'm sure others have about other possible reasons why not.....

Given that right of centre old fashioned attitudes that perhaps still hang around.

skibbarriz · Strong Club Player

indiana wrote:
skibbarriz wrote:
This British wildcard system always presents an opportunity for onlookers to disagree. It continually sends mixed messages re selection, the merits on which players deserve to be selected are very much up in the air and open to be argued. Some players receive them based on their tennis form, others not on their tennis form. Then there's how much you believe a player deserves one based on your personal views on how you'd grant them, against an appraisal based off the perceived historical modus operandi of the wildcard committee for players in that position.

So no one can be right or wrong, we can only feel a certain way about things. And just because a player in position x was previously granted a wc doesn't mean it should happen again. That event didn't establish it as the proper or correct approach moving forward. What other countries do with their wildcards, with their circumstances being widely different to ours, isn't a factor.

If Tara Moore had been favoured by the committee she would have received a WC. But no player is entitled to one, and no player 'deserves' one. At best we can consider they have a compelling case to receive special favour. To me Tara Moore doesn't fall into that category. And if she got a MDWC previously, or if a player with the same ranking and career history in France would get one, that doesn't change it.

She has been in poor form for several months. She is not a young prospect. She is not returning from injury. In terms of the non-tennis factor of profile, she is not a James Ward or Laura Robson. Tara and Marcus Willis had the same Wimbledon last year, in that they both won one round. But no one in the general public cares or remembers Tara Moore. That's the tough truth which influences the decisions and WC's by TD's.

Tara has spent over half a decade in ITF's and that is her level until she demonstrates something otherwise. Not a compelling case for a MDWC. That situation doesn't amount to 'deserving' for me. Play qualies and see if she can begin to find something. If she falls in qualies, there's no way giving her a MDWC would have been the right move. And if she wins qualies, her playing them was the right call.

And many might feel that for a Slam that stinks. And I do differentiate Slams.
I agree that her recent form has been far from convincing so to that extent Tara has certainly not helped herself by making an indisputable case. But maybe a fair part of the problem is that she isn't Laura or maybe even Katie B.

But even above that, what stinks is a player not getting into a slam MD on ranking because the wildcard system exists. That is if we are concerning ourselves with natural justice on this matter.