“Wimbledon” and “controversy” don’t mix. The word that is most associated with the tournament is “tradition”. If you can get a hot ticket, you’ll taste the typical dessert – strawberries with cream – watching tennis players in white, in a classy place in a wealthy suburb of London. If you’re lucky, you’ll come across a member of the Royal Family.
This is Wimbledon. Controversy is an athlete breaking the dress protocol.
The tournament has been around since 1877, it’s a solid British institution and it knows it. I remember how he ignored the World Cup in 2018, played on the same date. It didn’t change the calendar and refused to show football matches, even those from England.
Last week, organizers announced a ban on Russian and Belarusian athletes in the edition starting at the end of June. It was the first major tennis tournament to do so. Russian journalists are also barred. Now it has returned to the headlines by allowing unvaccinated tennis players to participate. It may sound confusing, and it is. But I always say that we need to understand the context of certain decisions, even if we don’t agree with them.
Tennis players from both countries participate in ATP and WTA tournaments under a neutral flag – which is not a de facto ban. Wimbledon’s justification is to be in line with government guidance for sports organizations to limit Russian influence at events in the country. UK, public opinion and the press are against Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. War is relatively close to us, it is shown all the time on television, and we already see economic consequences in our daily lives.
Leaving out the likes of world number two Daniil Medvedev, number eight Andrey Rublev, ranked fourth Aryna Sabalenka and former number one Victoria Azarenka, the All England Tennis Club said Vladimir Putin cannot benefit from the participation of Russians and Belarusians. The so-called soft power.
Those who defend say that sport cannot be omitted. Critics, that the decision punishes individuals for actions taken by governments; that tennis players, with exceptions such as the Davis Cup and the Olympics, play for themselves, not for their countries. Rublev wrote “no war please” on the camera lens at the ATP Dubai, and Azarenka condemned the conflict in a tweet. It’s worth remembering that when Medvedev won the US Open, Putin publicly congratulated him, saying that “this is how real champions play”. Soft power.
I also don’t understand who thinks it’s right to ban Russian teams, but not individuals, a position adopted by Martina Lavratilova, nine Wimbledon singles titles. If a team is made up of several individuals, isn’t it the same thing?
What about the unvaccinated Novak Djokovic, who will now be able to play in the tournament? The explanation seems simple. He is still wrong in deciding not to immunize himself, priorities have changed here in the UK. The vaccination campaign was a success, travel and circulation restrictions are over, Covid-19 is treated more normally. That’s the only reason the Serb will participate.
After World War II, Wimbledon banned Japanese and Germans from the tournament. The current case may end up in court, but it would avoid a fair trial. What if a Belarusian has to play against a Ukrainian? Or imagine Duchess Kate Middleton handing the champion trophy to Medvedev in front of the British public? It’s like the one who crashes a gala inside her house.
I have worked in the news industry for over 10 years. I have a vast amount of experience in covering health news. I am also an author at News Bulletin 247. I am highly experienced and knowledgeable in this field. I am a hard worker and always deliver quality work. I am a reliable source of information and always provide accurate information.
