Weeks 22 & 23 - French Open (Roland-Garros) - Paris, France (clay) - main draw

Armchair · County player

RE: Weeks 22 & 23 - French Open (Roland-Garros) - Paris, France (clay) - main draw

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

It's good we don't always agree, Andy P.

I think the public obviously like the post-match interviews (I wonder how many people here NEVER watch them.....)

So, even if they're giving monosyllabic answers, there's still some appeal and people want to watch.

And that's their covenant with the sport - to get the benefits and provide the interest to the public.

As to exempting those who've lost, it's only a tennis match they've lost - they lose plenty every year. It's not at all like a rare and traumatic event. And, by practice, they get a lot better at it (Andy Murray being a prime example).

Maybe the WTA/ATP should lay on development courses to give tips and pointers with how to deal with them. Maybe Naomi should organise her own personal development coach to help her.

But just because they (or Naomi) doesn't like them, it doesn't mean they should be cancelled. And, short of not being rude or offensive, of course, I have no problem with questions being pointed. In fact, they should be.

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Sunday 30th of May 2021 04:44:31 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

Coup Droit wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
Slam statement regarding Osaka:

www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka
If Naomi has to relent and go and give press interviews, because she's now being threated (quite rightly in my opinion) with being defaulted here, or at Wimbledon (the next GS), THEN she'll know what it's like to have a pretty antsy press interview !

Has Naomi been particularly vocal on the interviews issue before and /or seriously tried to create a wider discussion?

If not particulatly, then sorry but to me even moreso she deserves everything that comes to her for not abiding by the clear rules. Generally quite reasonable rukes IMO, other than I agree about possibly delayed intetviews, but that is almost by the way - thete ia no excuse for this unilateral stance.

Relent just now Naomi but perhaps seek that wider discussion going forward.

-- Edited by indiana on Sunday 30th of May 2021 05:06:35 PM

emmsie69 · ATP level

indiana wrote:
Coup Droit wrote:
Ace Ventura wrote:
Slam statement regarding Osaka:

www.rolandgarros.com/en-us/article/statement-from-grand-slam-tournaments-regarding-naomi-osaka
If Naomi has to relent and go and give press interviews, because she's now being threated (quite rightly in my opinion) with being defaulted here, or at Wimbledon (the next GS), THEN she'll know what it's like to have a pretty antsy press interview !
Has Naomi been particularly vocal on the interviews issue before and /or seriously tried to create a wider discussion?
If not particulatly, then sorry but to me even moreso she deserves everything that comes to her for not abiding by the clear rules. Quite reasonable rukes IMO but that is almost by the way - thete ia no excuse for this unilateral stance.
Relent just now Naomi but perhaps seek that wider discussion going forward.

Precisely, there is a Players Council, has she raised it there. Athletes get interviewed straight off the track, they have to work their way down the line, it's part of the deal and I for one was really pleased when Liz McColgan frankly mentioned why she was **** in one race, stuff like that can really help to normalise reproductive cycles and the issues they cause, not just in sport but general day to day activities. Certainly there is a conversation to be had about the qualty of the interviews and questions raised but this isn't the way to do it.

Shhh · Challenger level

Just to join the debate, I do think when having lost it is hard to face questions. It is a very tough sport mentally, a player may need to "come down" before being asked the sort of thing they get asked. Maybe through debate it could be agreed that this could be delayed more than its is perhaps?

To just come out and say "I'm not doing it" though comes over as a little arrogant or even immature(?) Players at the highest level earn an extreme amount and their profile is essential for this to happen. There are cases in most sports of players perhaps losing touch with "the real world" and I find it hard to see it beyond those terms.

emmsie69 · ATP level

Shhh wrote:
Just to join the debate, I do think when having lost it is hard to face questions. It is a very tough sport mentally, a player may need to "come down" before being asked the sort of thing they get asked. Maybe through debate it could be agreed that this could be delayed more than its is perhaps?

To just come out and say "I'm not doing it" though comes over as a little arrogant or even immature(?) Players at the highest level earn an extreme amount and their profile is essential for this to happen. There are cases in most sports of players perhaps losing touch with "the real world" and I find it hard to see it beyond those terms.

You've just got to see someone like Usain and how he embraced his role as the face of Athletics. As time goes on I just appreciate him more and more.

GAMEOVER · Pro player

Ace Ventura wrote:
Jo generally doesn't have the best of reputations on TennisForum, and I'm sure that'll will have played a part, but there's one of those 'who will win' poll threads on there, one where you can't see the results without voting, nor can you change your vote, 52 people have votes thus far, and a massive 47 are going with Cirstea (32 of those in straight sets). Now that really is extreme.

It's even more extreme now as 8 further votes have gone to Cirstea so it is Cirstea 55 Jo 5 ( one vote assumes a Cirstea retirement) .

Andy Parker · Strong Club Player

Some players find interviews cathartic and others embrace themselves as role models, but lots don't, and would like to be sad and down on their own after losing, and not have the scrutiny of journalists, who sometimes just want to wind them up and get a great quote from someone who is distressed and up tight.

Age is a factor on how players handle interviews, but so is how the player is mentally. Katie S has talked about her mental struggles to simply go out on court and feel she is an OK human being, and others have really struggled with the mental side of things - I think for those of us who are older, we should remember back to when we were in our teenage years and ask how we would feel if some dumb ass journalist asks how we are feeling when we have been thrashed, or for those with kids or grandkids, how would you feel if your teenage son or daughter was subjected to a media grilling after a heavy defeat.

I know that people love to watch the pain of others in defeat - to see the anguish and misery as as players try to explain why it all went wrong, but for the player it is sometimes a very harsh experience; a punishment on top of losing, and no media training will really change that reality.

Ace Ventura · Tennis legend

Crazy stuff indeed, GAMEOVER

emmsie69 · ATP level

Andy Parker wrote:
Some players find interviews cathartic and others embrace themselves as role models, but lots don't, and would like to be sad and down on their own after losing, and not have the scrutiny of journalists, who sometimes just want to wind them up and get a great quote from someone who is distressed and up tight.

Age is a factor on how players handle interviews, but so is how the player is mentally. Katie S has talked about her mental struggles to simply go out on court and feel she is an OK human being, and others have really struggled with the mental side of things - I think for those of us who are older, we should remember back to when we were in our teenage years and ask how we would feel if some dumb ass journalist asks how we are feeling when we have been thrashed, or for those with kids or grandkids, how would you feel if your teenage son or daughter was subjected to a media grilling after a heavy defeat.

I know that people love to watch the pain of others in defeat - to see the anguish and misery as as players try to explain why it all went wrong, but for the player it is sometimes a very harsh experience; a punishment on top of losing, and no media training will really change that reality.

I work on the Railway, when control cancels a train I'd rather be anywhere else but on the platform surrounded by angry passengers yelling and occasionally abusing me, when I see someone at the end of the platform and a fast train is coming through or I get a call from control asking me to approach someone standing on a bridge , I really don't want to have that conversation but that's my job, I don't whine about it, I just do it, every job has aspects that we don't like and most of us are getting paid a hell of a lot less for far more stress.

Armchair · County player

emmsie you have my unconditional respect. Tough job.

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
brendan wrote:
Stircrazy wrote:
Only one representative in the women's doubles - dear old Hev - so no justification for a separate thread. Arguably, it's a rotten draw:
L64: (9) Sharon Fichman & Giuliana Olmos (CAN/MEX) UNR (0+444) vs Anna Blinkova (RUS) & Heather Watson CR 178 (58+120)
Why would WR 444 and an unranked player be seeded?
Those are actually these two's singles rankings. Their doubles rankings are Fichman WR 32 and Olmos WR 30.

In which case I was totally misled by the WTA's stupid bloody web site, which doesn't make it clear which is which! furious Will amend my original post.

emmsie69 · ATP level

Armchair wrote:
emmsie you have my unconditional respect. Tough job.

Thanks but I'm just grateful I'm not the poor bugger that has to clean up after someone has managed to jump, now that really is a horrible job and sadly it happens all too often despite our best efforts to prevent it.

-- Edited by emmsie69 on Sunday 30th of May 2021 06:11:20 PM

Stircrazy · Tennis legend

Andy Parker wrote:
Some players find interviews cathartic and others embrace themselves as role models, but lots don't, and would like to be sad and down on their own after losing, and not have the scrutiny of journalists, who sometimes just want to wind them up and get a great quote from someone who is distressed and up tight.

Age is a factor on how players handle interviews, but so is how the player is mentally. Katie S has talked about her mental struggles to simply go out on court and feel she is an OK human being, and others have really struggled with the mental side of things - I think for those of us who are older, we should remember back to when we were in our teenage years and ask how we would feel if some dumb ass journalist asks how we are feeling when we have been thrashed, or for those with kids or grandkids, how would you feel if your teenage son or daughter was subjected to a media grilling after a heavy defeat.

I know that people love to watch the pain of others in defeat - to see the anguish and misery as as players try to explain why it all went wrong, but for the player it is sometimes a very harsh experience; a punishment on top of losing, and no media training will really change that reality.

The Beeb has waded in to the argument, with quotes from Laura Robson, Naomi Broady & Naomo Cavaday.

telstar · Strong Club Player

Andy Parker wrote:
I think it is ridiculous to force any player to do post match conferences, especially if they have lost. The players have the upper hand here - they can just sit there, give monosyllabic answers and then they will have fulfilled the tick box for having been in attendance.

Lots of sports interview the winners, and in a final both winner and loser are rightly interviewed in recognition that it is an achievement to have reached a final, and in the hope that they will say something nice about their opponent; normally with the crowd watching how the interviewer handles the situation, the interviewer is kind and on their best behaviour to whoever has lost.

Outside of finals though, the losing players should have the chance to lick their wounds, assess what has gone wrong and then go public if they want, at a time of their choosing.

The pre-match interviews are a joke - no player wants to reveal their game plan or state of mind, and nor should they have to - and normally you learn nothing from them, other than that the players really hate being asked intrusive questions about what they intend to do in a match.

Going forward I would like to see the mandatory interviews purely restricted to winners. Journalists can play their part by asking open and intelligent questions when asking those who have agreed to be interviewed after losing - asking a player how they feel having lost is likely to simply elicit some version of them feeling down or rubbish, and it is far better to ask an open ended question to a player as to why they feel they came off worse on the day, and then the player can talk about what went wrong in their strategy or right for their opponents.

Anyway I am right behind Naomi on this one - I don't think most players are traumatised from post-match defeat interviews, but on the other hand I am sure lots regret saying things afterward and wish they had had time to reflect and come up with more measured answers, and sometimes it feels like the interviewer is simply enjoying wallowing in someone else's pain and distress..

-- Edited by Andy Parker on Sunday 30th of May 2021 04:11:17 PM

100 per cent agree with Andy. I hope Naomi now attends these stupid events and answers 'No comment' to every question!