When Jo announced she wasn't playing in the Fed Cup this year, Mike Dickson in the Daily Mail wrote that tennis would be better promoted if she did. However the Fed Cup  match will hardly be on most peoples radar because it is not shown on channels likely to be watched by the British public. What it needs is BBC2 to show the tie like the bowls that is on this afternoon. Today Mike Dickson is critical saying to may play in St Petersburg in the same week as the Fed Cup tie would not be a good look for Jo.. Apart from the fact St Petersburg starts on the Monday following the Fed Cup, Jo latterly has entered tournaments she has withdrawn from.Based on form this year the likes of Heather,Harriet and Katie B. would be better singles choices. Yet at the same time Mike Dickson admitted that Jo was not in the form of last years US Open. Picking somebody who is not 100 % fit or not played much recently is not a good idea. I seem to remember Elena Baltacha having to play a vital rubber against Argentina when she hadn't played for 6 months. 

Probably what I'd have gone for in a team of 5, if Katie B was ruled out. You'd assume Heather and Harriet would be 1 and 2. Quite exciting that Emma is there. If it's 3-0 either way and they play the 4th singles then I hope she gets on, although I'd personally have her as my number 3 regardless.

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Probably what I'd have gone for in a team of 5, if Katie B was ruled out. You'd assume Heather and Harriet would be 1 and 2. Quite exciting that Emma is there. If it's 3-0 either way and they play the 4th singles then I hope she gets on, although I'd personally have her as my number 3 regardless.

---

On next week's rankings Sam is ahead of Naiktha and significantly ahead of Katie S, and 150 places ahead of Emma R. You don't feel current ranking incumbents should get a look in?

Mind you the Fed Cup has been the kiss of death for a few of players in recent years so maybe she is better off out of it. 

Michael D wrote:

---

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Probably what I'd have gone for in a team of 5, if Katie B was ruled out. You'd assume Heather and Harriet would be 1 and 2. Quite exciting that Emma is there. If it's 3-0 either way and they play the 4th singles then I hope she gets on, although I'd personally have her as my number 3 regardless.

---

On next week's rankings Sam is ahead of Naiktha and significantly ahead of Katie S, and 150 places ahead of Emma R. You don't feel current ranking incumbents should get a look in?

Mind you the Fed Cup has been the kiss of death for a few of players in recent years so maybe she is better off out of it. 

---

You're assuming that Sam was interested....

I've no idea but it's well possible that someone of her age may feel she has been shabbily treated by the LTA in the past (and would be right), and has worked out a detailed schedule of rest and training and competition, which also might be tied in with that of her husband's, and therefore isn't interested in messing it all up for a Fed Cup appearance where it'd be well possible that she wouldn't even play. 

Michael D wrote:

---

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Probably what I'd have gone for in a team of 5, if Katie B was ruled out. You'd assume Heather and Harriet would be 1 and 2. Quite exciting that Emma is there. If it's 3-0 either way and they play the 4th singles then I hope she gets on, although I'd personally have her as my number 3 regardless.

---

On next week's rankings Sam is ahead of Naiktha and significantly ahead of Katie S, and 150 places ahead of Emma R. You don't feel current ranking incumbents should get a look in?

Mind you the Fed Cup has been the kiss of death for a few of players in recent years so maybe she is better off out of it. 

---

It should certainly be considered, but not necessarily the defining factor IMO, and that's even if Sam did want to play. All things well, these are going to be your 3rd, 4th and 5th players, and it's not ideal anyway if we were relying on any of them to win key matches. So when there's not a hugely significant difference (IMO) in level, I'd personally rather look to the future, especially when 2 of them have a choice to play for multiple countries if they wanted to.

 

Had this have been for the #2 spot, or if Sam had an obvious doubles pedigree then I might have had a different opinion, but as it is, I'm fine with the squad picked.

 

Michael D wrote:

---

Ace Ventura wrote:

---

Probably what I'd have gone for in a team of 5, if Katie B was ruled out. You'd assume Heather and Harriet would be 1 and 2. Quite exciting that Emma is there. If it's 3-0 either way and they play the 4th singles then I hope she gets on, although I'd personally have her as my number 3 regardless.

---

On next week's rankings Sam is ahead of Naiktha and significantly ahead of Katie S, and 150 places ahead of Emma R. You don't feel current ranking incumbents should get a look in?

Mind you the Fed Cup has been the kiss of death for a few of players in recent years so maybe she is better off out of it. 

---

 There are 2 players who come to mind in this category. Most recently in 2018 is Gabi Taylor who should have  maybe played the singles match against Nara but didn't. . She's gone very rapidly  downhill since then. Further back in 2014, Tara Moore won the only Fed Cup  singles match she ever  played against Paszek of Austria and  was never selected again. 

On a more general note, it's great to see a lot of the big names all currently scheduled to be involved - Serena, Andreescu (for now), Osaka, Bencic, Bertens, and Sabalenka, not too many notable omissions. I guess some of those will have Olympic commitments on their mind, but it should lead to some interesting matches. From a neutral perspective, the Slovakia vs GB tie will be one of the least high profile clashes with Cibulkova retired and Konta absent.

I still don't think any TV company has picked it up yet - I'll be a bit annoyed if it just behind a paywall on the ITF website and I'm reliant on a Bet365 stream.