Called off - err due to Nadal's ankle injury.

How fortunate that they didn't need to make a principled stand.

I think Tom T it was the timing as much as anything - it was initially announced just after the whole Turkish embassy murder story broke as the outrage was high. A few weeks earlier and the upset at them doing this match may not have been as evident. But as it was, the backlash was very high.

You're right, many other places have situations we all disagree with and get brushed over. I for one refused a business trip / opportunity in Saudi around 5 years back along with several of my colleagues (a client of my firm needed someone to do a small project out there) but at the same time we did various similar pieces of work in Qatar without question. So, yes, we are often all guilty of hypocrisy.

I think
(a) I do expect tennis players to have SOME ethical considerations - everybody makes choices and you have to draw a line somewhere
(b) I expect the richer ones to have more - they can 'afford' them better
(c) I expect the very top ones to have even more - not only can they afford their principles (in spades) but they are public figures and their actions send a message
(d) I expect them even more for an exhibition event that is not part of the circuit
(e) I don't think Spain is the same as Saudi Arabia
(f) It is not hypocrisy to draw a line, say, with Saudi on one side and Poland on the other - one of my American friends refused to come to the UK during the 1970s and 80s because of the government's actions in Northern Ireland but that's what drawing a line means, not that Poland is perfect.
(g) my opinion of Rafa and Novak has gone down

thing is tho that none of these are rules just opinions and all are based in hypocrisy

why are sports people or singers or actors held higherer standards than business?
bae still pushing arms deals with saudi and give the history of al-yammah scandal that seem worse - is all that some excuse by our defence secretery missing one saudi sponsured function?
these business ceo boards got as much money as rafa nole but still do business and get it signed of garanteed by uk taxpayer through ecgd finance why pick on tennis?
everyone gotta be held to the same morals surely

an exo is a just business opportuinity for tennis players to maximise there earning power - why deny them the chance to capitalise when man city funded by a repressive regime and arsenal sponsored by one etc and all business allowed to just keep coining it in regardles of ethic in these countries?
surely the larger body should be the leaders and the ones held to most scrutiny

on yemen us is spoonsoring the war and providing intel so the saudis to bomb
you got mainstream us politicians and policy bodies saying that because saudi bought $20B and a further $200B of arms to come that the murder of 1 journalist is just the price for that and you have to let it go - be all bluster up as a show up front but do the deal first and fourmost - see what pat robertson had to say
so we should boycot us to? they in every war every conflict they explicit say they will murder any regime and ignore any soverineity they chose at any time if they think it in they best interest and they do this regular for 50 years they do it. so we boycot indian wells if not why not? civilian deaths in us strikes increased 170% since 2016 coz they say they defy geneva convention and you gotta kill families to send hard message
uae also in yemen war despite have no border and being at closest 300 mile away amnesty show they operete torture camps there so all thoses emirates sponsorships gotta go right all those dubai based funds gotta be stop right?

china just disappeared 100s of dissidents and detain the head of interpol werent no boycot on them during the asian swing
putin routine has oponnents murderred but all went for kremlin cup we went to fifa world cup and spun the putin party propaganda about how lovely it all was

you can easy argue what spain is doing to catalonia affect way more lives and supress far more democracy than the murder of 1 journo
you may draw a line at one journo but others will draw the line at the subversion of the will of a hole region

your line may be drawn here but thats an anecdoteal thing personal not an obvious rule why is it here and not to those examples above that worse afect more people and do more damage what is this moral equivalency

i dont understand
tennis player or singers etc just the easy target - individuals easy to hold to account rather than business or goverments

do i think they should go no
but that not the point
adresing this rather than the real problem of our utter hypocrisy towards usa or business or others just keeps argue for status quo where murderous regime is ok when we can proffit from it we turn blindest of eyes when it suit us - look at the premier league no one bat an eye if they keep buy big name players with their murderous regime cash

this episode of yes minister is 34 year old now but recent repeated and bear listening to as it strip this isue bare and doesnt pretend there is some obvios write or wrong answer and that the real is depresingly grey https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007k14t (you need the standard free bbc account to listen to it)

Short-term, yes, would make them richer.
Longer term maybe not - image is important and they would have lost a lot (and still have a bit, in my view).
I wouldn't have gone but that's for a mixture of reasons.

I also wondered why djoko isn't playing someone else since Nadal pulled out, presumably it provides a convenient excuse to call it all off