Can’t defend the indefensible
TWO people were wronged amid the tumult of Saturday night’s US Open final — and neither was called Serena Williams.
The 36-year- old American was left nursing a $17,000 fine after the outbursts that led to her losing a game, but new champion Naomi Osaka and Portuguese umpire Carlos Ramos also suffered.
Some of the sheen was taken off the remarkable triumph of Osaka, whose display of extraordinary maturity to win her first major ought to have been this tournament’s enduring memory.
Then there was Ramos, a decent man and excellent umpire. He had his good name traduced by people who should know better after the wildest night at Flushing Meadows since the last time Williams lost the plot here.
What should have been a celebration as women’s tennis added potentially the shiniest new star
to its firmament in years, ended in embarrassment.
It was embarrassing not just for Williams and her coach Patrick Mouratoglou, but also ex-players like Andy Roddick who rushed to defend the indefensible and condemn the officials for applying long-established rules.
It is said that no individual is bigger than the game itself, but tennis challenges this truism more than any other.
Williams was already trailing by two breaks in the first set and severely rattled by her young opponent, when she got into her first spat with Ramos.
He had spotted her coach, Mouratoglou, making illegal gesticulations from the support box
and called her for a time violation, igniting her indignation.
When broken back for 2-3 in the second set she smashed her racket, incurring a second violation and point penalty. At 3-4, Ramos finally lost patience after being called a liar and a thief, so he gave a third warningg and an automatic game me penalty.
Even the most determined Serena groupie, seemingly including most former players in commentary boxes, should have acknowledged that he was following established d procedures.
In her packed press conference later Williams was taken aback when informed that Mouratoglou had already admitted coaching, despite her on- court insistence that this never happens with her and that she could not have seen it.
She was to depart with a flourish
when she broadened the argument with allegations of sexism which, pathetically, was met with a round of applause from many in this supposedly impartial assembly. American legend Billie Jean King took to social media to support her — calling out double standards ards a and ignoring her behaviour iourT towards the umpire. The inference was that t male players could c have got away with more than this, but such was the sustained nature of the tirades t there is no evidence d to support that. Then T came a cringeworthy wort statement of support port from fro ex-player and now president of the US Tennis Association, Katrina Adams, praising Williams despite the example she had set to anyone watching. As she plots her way forward, from the hugely impressive achievement of making two Grand Slam finals within barely a year of
giving birth, there will be speculation about the future of Williams’ successful collaboration with Mouratoglou.
Not only was there a jarring contradiction in their accounts of events, there seemed to be a failure of preparation from both ahead of Saturday’s final.
They should have noted Ramos has a long record of censoring players, whatever their stature or gender. He has clashed with Rafael Nadal, Andy Murray and Novak Djokovic over regulations.
Where it is possible to have more sympathy with Serena and Mouratoglou is in the sport’s selective enforcement of its rulebook.
An example is the haphazard introduction of heat rules, which so enraged Murray in the first week.
In her innocence, Osaka considered how she had halted Williams’ dream narrative — winning the US Open as a parent at nearly 37.
‘She really wanted to have the 24th Grand Slam, right? It’s on the commercials, it’s everywhere.’