STEVE DILBECK, Los Angeles Daily News
Published: 23 hours ago
Now wasn’t that just so pleasant? Really, terrific tennis.
Two outstanding players in a truly dramatic Wimbledon final.
And they were just so polite, so sportsmanlike, so respectful.
Made me want to puke.
If I wanted to watch a love-in, I’d catch some old John Lennon and Yoko Ono footage. Would watch the classic Beyond the Valley of the Dolls.
Anyone who truly believes the Rafael Nadal-Roger Federer final on Sunday harkens the beginning of a new golden age for tennis needs to lay off the sauce.
Tennis was at its peak in the 1970s and early 1980s. People watched, people cared, people were enthralled. Not just people who actually picked up a racquet, but the general sports fan.
The players were feisty. They had attitude and panache. Emotions streamed from their pores.
Jimmy Connors didn’t want to just beat you, he played like he wanted to rip your throat out. Ilie Nastase was a character nicknamed “Nasty” – by other players. Bjorn Borg was a European jet-setter who would crush you. John McEnroe was a volcano who could volley like no one alive.
They dated models and Playmates, started fashion lines, gave the bird to linesmen, invigorated crowds. They weren’t just players, they were revolutionaries.
They raged war on the court, not love. Mavericks who rocked the Country Club game and expanded the tennis audience. They played against type.
Nadal and Federer have watched the Lion King too many times. They’re Magic Johnson and Isiah Thomas giving each other a sweet kiss at centre court.
Oh, please, stop. Are a couple of punches at the net really too much to ask? Can’t we get some honest cross-court venting, some semblance of demonstrative play, some ‘my supermodel is hotter than your supermodel’ battles?
I miss the crazies, the long-haired, volatile characters born of the ’60s who took tennis to a new level, who made it compelling for the Average Joe.
Then followed the numbing Boris Becker-Ivan Lendl-Pete Sampras-Federer period that succeeded in reducing tennis to a niche sport.
This is not progress, though I’d like to thank them all for freeing up the community courts.
This latest wave of champions has returned tennis to its genteel roots, which is not exactly called swelling your market place. Very classy, very aristocratic, very foreign.
Can we get a little edge back to our tennis? Some controlled rage? Some spark of individuality? One decent snarl?
Now, McEnroe sits in a television booth, so nice it feels gooey. Words must stick to him. It screams sellout.
His eyes used to almost explode from his face when he played. Now, he watches Sunday’s well-mannered cliffhanger and declares it the greatest match he’s ever seen.
Say what?
Better than his five-set thriller over Borg in the finals of the 1980 U.S. Open or his Wimbledon loss to Connors in ‘82 and to Borg in ‘80? I don’t think so.
Great tennis is more than just repeatedly making tremendous shots, which Nadal and Federer both did with amazing consistency Sunday. Their talent is unmistakable.
Sunday was a marathon, with two tennis artisans going at it until twilight. Very admirable.
They have all my respect, just not the corresponding interest. I don’t think a couple of polite Europeans are at the vanguard of a new tennis explosion.
Let’s get real, tennis is not going to return to the sporting masses behind Federer and Nadal. They’re great tennis players, but not the kind of guys you’d like to hang with. I know more interesting rocks.
Nadal, the Grunt King, has some glimmer of personality and he’s so young there’s always a chance he may develop into something interesting.
I long for a little attitude. Long for matchups intriguing beyond the double vs. the single backhand.
If I want to watch a demonstration of civility, I’ll take in an etiquette class. It’d be the polite thing to do.
Source: http://www.canada.com