Deuces Riled

By Tripp Andre [@arandomgamer02 on #TennisTwitter] What exactly  is  a network executive? For people not in the business, like myself, we see the network executive as persnickety, greedy, ignorant, dull, and generally mediocre, because we only look behind the camera when we are unhappy.  M any network executives   have overseen fabulous content  and generated  enormous revenue s . A network executive’s job is to drive content, create numbers, and make money for the company, and the job can be done in a variety of ways  ranging  from hard journalism to sensationalism. Hard-nosed reporting in the Trump era is now selling  subscriptions . On the flip side, Colin Cowherd wasn’t rating in  Washington,  D.C., so he started ragging on John Wall – problem solved. If the people are consuming your product, good or bad, the network executive has done  his or her   job.   We must be respectful when singling out an in...

-By Trenton Jocz -Was this always the plan? No one knows but my guess is yes, for one reason. Yes, Rafa is the massive favorite for Paris, but he's the only favorite right now. I think if Roger was ever serious about RG, he'd have waited to see if Rafa self-destructed in Rome (I see no reason why he's playing when he's such a big favorite for La Decima). Nadal has overplayed himself before and Fed had until next Friday to withdraw. If something were to happen to Rafa (God forbid), Roger might be the favorite, which makes me think he knew he didn't have a great chance whether Rafa was there or not. Nadal playing Rome and Fed calling it a day on May 15th seems more indicative for Fed's thought process than Rafa establishing himself by winning MC/Barca/Madrid. -How does this change the tournament? Federer was a top 5 contender, more threatening than the Thiem/Goffin types IMO, but he was an all-or-nothing type. We'll just never know if Fed could have rea...

Is it fair that Maria Sharapova was allowed back to the WTA Tour on Wednesday in Stuttgart, Germany? Is it fair that Maria Sharapova was allowed back to the tour without having to serve a longer suspension? Is it fair that Sharapova got a wild card to the main draw of the Porsche Grand Prix, in which she defeated an error-plagued Roberta Vinci to move into Thursday's round of 16? Will it be fair if Sharapova receives a main-draw wild card to future tournaments she enters before cracking the top 90 or 50 or 20 (assuming she hits each of those markers at some not-too-distant point in time)? Those are all valid questions. They're the questions everyone who follows women's tennis is asking this week. Everyone has an opinion on these matters. I have mine... but my opinion isn't worth anything, in the sense that no governing-body bigshot, nationally-known tennis commentator, or top-five WTA player cares one whit what I think. (For the record: I think a qualifying ...

Roger Federer’s first tennis match in Seattle represents a fusion of sports and philanthropy. It is the product of an athlete’s rise to the status of a global figure, someone notable enough to join Bill Gates in raising money for children’s education in Africa. The everybody-wins nature of the event on April 29 is impossible to ignore: Tennis fans in the Pacific Northwest – whose best chance at seeing Federer live has been to travel to Southern California for the Indian Wells event every March – will finally welcome Federer to their neck of the woods. They will gladly pay decent money for a light exhibition, as Federer spends downtime before the French Open and Wimbledon. The point is not to watch a high-level display of tennis, but to raise money for a great cause. The Roger Federer Foundation has proved itself worthy of Bill Gates’ support, becoming an example of an athlete-supported philanthropic structure which elicits trust. In this tennis exhibition, a simple but pow...

Saturday, April, 22, 2017, became an explosive tennis day for many of the wrong reasons, and while Cedric Mourier's terrible call cast a pall over the Rafael Nadal-David Goffin match in Monte Carlo, that was the least of the turbulent instances which disrupted a sports-filled Saturday. Ilie Nastase, one of the better tennis players of the 1970s and a Romanian tennis icon, created news which wasn't merely negative in nature, but appalling, humiliating and -- worst of all -- harmful to other persons. A good nuts-and-bolts summary of the full day's events comes from Simon Briggs of The Telegraph. Start there. That's a lot to take in, most of it disgusting, some of it deeply sad, and much of it very complicated for Simona Halep and Sorana Cirstea, the Romanian players left to deal with the fallout, some of which Cirstea added to. Where to go from here? Ben Rothenberg of The New York Times helpfully tweeted out this archived New Yorker commentary from Martin A...

The devil is in the details, mon ami. Hercule Poirot, being a good Belgian, certainly appreciated that pearl of wisdom in his detective work. One can only wonder how he would litigate the call which sabotaged fellow Belgian David Goffin's attempt to make his first Masters 1000 final on Saturday in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, France. Let's cut right to the chase: Up 3-2 and serving at game point in the first set, Goffin won the point on a ball from Nadal that was multiple inches behind the baseline. The crowd applauded Goffin winning the point and the game. Then, several seconds later, umpire Cedric Mourier checked a mark and said the shot was good. Replay showed the ball was well beyond the baseline, removed from any "margin of error" discussion which sometimes clouds the issue of correct calls on clay. (More on that shortly.) Nevertheless, the point was replayed, Goffin lost it. The aftermath: Following a prolonged battle in that sixth game, Nadal broke Goffin for 3...