Feel strongly about this letter, or any other aspects of the news? Share your views by emailing us your Letter to the Editor at [email protected] or filling in this Google form. Submissions should not exceed 400 words, and must include your full name and address, plus a phone number for verification. The Wimbledon tennis championships will start with extra political intrigue this year, following the
controversial ban on Russian and Belarusian players in response to the Russia-Ukraine war. Both the ban, and the men’s and women’s tours’ subsequent move to
withdraw ranking points from the tournament, have proved divisive. Yet it is not the stripping of ranking points that delegitimises Wimbledon, but the decision to ban some of the world’s best players in the first place.
Men’s singles world No 18, American Reilly Opelka, said it best when he stated on Twitter last week that “Wimbledon 2022 will be an inferior accomplishment due to the absence of the best possible field”. He elaborated on this, writing: “When you take some of the best players out of the draw … you erode the integrity of the event. It’s about the competitive advantage given to players like myself by virtue [of] other great players not being able to play.”
Opelka is right. Russian
Daniil Medvedev became the world No 1 male tennis player last week, yet he will not be able to play. Belarusian Aryna Sabalenka ranks sixth in the women’s singles, and played a brilliant match against Karolina Pliskova in the Wimbledon semi-final last year, yet she will not be able to play. Russian Ekaterina Alexandrova demolished Sabalenka in ’s-Hertogenbosch last week to win her first grass court title, yet she will not be able to play.
Some may point out that great players have missed tournaments – take Novak Djokovic’s
vaccine fiasco in Australia – and that it does not make this year’s Wimbledon championships any less legitimate. The main difference between these cases is that Djokovic can take control of the situation (by getting vaccinated), while Russian and Belarusian players can’t. Neither Russia nor Belarus is a true democracy; citizens’ influence on these countries’ decisions is minimal, with strong crackdowns on dissenters.
When some of the world’s best players are unable to compete because of a situation beyond their control, it delegitimises a tournament. The Australian Open matches of the 1960s and 1970s are generally less well regarded than those of more recent decades because elite players from elsewhere used to rarely make the trip down under. Wimbledon 2022 may be considered the same by future tennis pundits if it continues on this path, and that would be a great shame.
