Clash of the sporting titans
The World Cup or Wimbledon? With two major tournaments under way, Guy Kelly asks which will win your household’s attention this week
If you’re being entirely honest with yourself, you never thought you’d have to face this decision, did you? Two weeks ago, when the World Cup rumbled back into life, you predicted that without Ireland to follow, we’d be looking at a drab tournament, and come July, you’d be able to turn your full attention to the immaculate green lawns of SW19.
This week, however, the picture is a little different. With the 141st Wimbledon championships officially underway, not only is the World Cup providing enough nightly drama to make EastEnders look like Grand Designs, but it ’s turning out to be one of the greatest tournaments we’ve ever seen.
For casual telev ision viewers, the result is a veritable sporting
Sophie’s Choice. Almost every day for the next fortnight, you will have to choose a W: Wimbledon or the World Cup. So which one will win the battle in your living room?
Hosts with the most
When committing to more than two hours of telev ision in one go, there needs to be a steady, comforting hand on the tiller to guide you through the duller moments. In Sue Barker and Gary Lineker, Wimbledon and the World Cup are blessed with two of the most reliable and experienced presenters on the box.
Barker will be cheerful and inoffensive in a single-colour trouser suit; Lineker will be dry, with a questionable goatee and shirts one size too small.
Barker will have able, vaguely articulate assistants in Boris Becker (he could do with the work, by the sounds of it), Martina Navratilova and ‘Tiger’ Tim Henman, plus Clare Balding ready for evening duty.
Lineker, on the other hand, has Frank Lampard, Rio Ferdinand and Lee Dixon insisting that “at the end of the day, the boys went out there and played for 90 minutes”. That would mean an easy victory for Wimbledon, but then you remember the clincher: John Inverdale has been invited back. We’ll call it a draw. Score: 1-1
Half-time snacks
Watching Wimbledon on TV, you can almost taste the atmosphere — which may have something to do with the commentators mentioning strawberries and cream, Pimm’s or champagne every third minute.
At home, it seems only fair to tr y and recreate thatat with your own spread. Yes, Pimm’smm’s is sickly sweet and involvesves half an hour’s fruit choppingpping before forgetting that the lemonade has to go in firstt to avoid 70pc froth, but for a fortnight a year, you might as well pretend to like it. Given the nature of the event,ent, scones, cucumberer sandwiches andd Scotch eggs are also welcome. But how does the football compare? Well, if you want to be authentic, you’ll be drinking gallons of Budweiser, the Official Beer of the FIFA World Cup™, and presumably some stodg y Russian fare. Off the stroganoff ? Perhaps a share bag of Walkers (Tay to more like) in Lineker’s honour. Either way, it’s an ace for Wimbledon. Score 2-1
Off-field action
So far in the World Cup, there’s been plenty to watch away from the pitch. Aside from the WAGs, we’ve seen German fans’ facepaint run with salty tears of disappointment, and the ever-erratic Diego Maradona — morphing more and more into a late-period Elvis Presley with every cutaway shot — indulging in all sorts up in his executive suite. But nothing can rival Wimbledon for non-sporting drama. As any experienced SW19-watcher knows, there are always two games in play: tennis and star-spotting. Is that David Beckham f lirting with Miranda Hart? Does Bradley Cooper ever leave? Does Roger Federer now have as many sets of twins as he does Grand Slams? And has Clif f forgiven the BBC enough to return this year? Crowd shots at Wimbledon enliven even the dullest tie break and this year — whisper it — we might even see Meghan Markle make her debut in the Royal Box. A victor y for the tennis. Score 3-1
Vocal support
You can make a rracquet in tennis, but not a racket. In well over a century ofWim bled onWi mb Championship Championships, the tournament has produced precisely one chant, and it goes like this: “COME ON, *insert first name of player*!!!”
The trtrouble is, no amount of gugusto can make nanames like Tim, Andy or Roger excitingx — they sosound like 1950s adadventure book ccharacters — and ththe umpire tends to ssilence the crowd bbefore any thing more substantial than a slow clap gets going. The female players (and Rafael Nadal, oddly) often have an audible quality to them, but grunting can’t be classed as a chant, and shouldn’t be replicated in the living room.
The World Cup has it, then. France sing ‘Allez Les Bleus’, the Brazilians start a mini carnival in the stands and Iceland has the thunder clap. A tap-in for the football. Score 3-2
Conversation points
Everybody understands football, by and large, and while absolutely nothing happens for long periods, it is still a game watched in near silence (besides aforementioned chanting). Try to start a conversation about anything other than a minor plot point between the whistles and you could be sent from the room.
Not so during tennis, which is a game designed for those with short attention spans. Some matches may last hours, but a set lasts about 30 minutes. The players sit down for some orange squash and half a banana every few games. Cameramen have time for close-ups on terrified pigeons and wide shots of the Shard in the distance. Rain halts play.
It’s in these breaks that viewers can have a chat, discuss Nadal’s wedgie, critique Serena Williams’ outfit, chop even more Pimm’s fruit and nip to the loo. Wimbledon — and by extension, tennis — is kind to its viewers. For better or worse, football only cares about itself. It’s a tight call, but we’ll give it to the more giving sport. Hmm, looks like a tie... Perhaps just record one and watch the other. Final score 3-3