Tweet
Savages
lol @ 1.26 : The guy is like: "wtf, why it doesn't break"
Closed-door Davis Cup decision defies logic
Friday, February 20, 2009 | Feedback | Print Entry
Posted by Tom Perrotta, TENNIS.com
It's been a political, and difficult, week in the world of tennis. First, the United Arab Emirates denied a visa to Shahar Peer, an Israeli who had hoped to play in Dubai this week. Then the UAE, which has no diplomatic relations with Israel, seemed on the verge of denying a visa to doubles player Andy Ram (also from Israel), until an outcry forced the government to change course. The Dubai tournament still faces sanctions and might lose its tournaments altogether without adequate assurances that there won't be a repeat of this fiasco next year.
Peer and Ram have attracted the most attention this week, but still another injustice has befallen Israeli tennis, this time in Sweden. The Israeli team, which has qualified for its second World Group tie in 15 years, will travel to Malmo, Sweden, next month. Only a few journalists, and fellow players, will watch now that the local government in Malmo, Sweden's third-largest city, has decided that security concerns are too great to allow fans into the arena.
Malmo has a substantial immigrant population, including many Muslims, and its citizens plan to protest against Israel during the match (you can learn more here, even if your only language is English -- you'll get the idea). While I question the effectiveness of picketing an Israeli tennis team to bring attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the folks in Malmo can do as they please. But are they so dangerous that not one of them can be allowed into the stadium? How is it that local authorities can ensure the safe arrival and departure of the Israeli players, yet not ensure that dangerous fans, or fans carrying weapons of some kind, don't enter the building?
Perhaps I'm naïve about Sweden or the Malmo locals, but I can't imagine that a significant percentage of protesters would have any interest in harming the players. It shouldn't be difficult to secure the court and the players from those few protesters who might be dangerous. The Malmo arena holds a mere 4,000 fans. We're not talking about a World Cup soccer match or the Super Bowl. If I'm one of the Israeli players, I'm wondering if I should attend this tie at all. How is that I'll be safe in Malmo, but the government can't guarantee my safety in a 4,000-seat arena? It defies all logic.
The International Tennis Federation has "reluctantly," to quote the organization's statement, gone along with the determination of the local government, calling it "very unfortunate" and saying the decision is "not in the long-term interests of Davis Cup." The ITF is correct, this decision goes against everything Davis Cup stands for. It's supposed to be an open competition between nations, an event that promotes healthy nationalism, rather than gives into fear, bigotry or anti-nationalism. Only one time in the past has a Davis Cup tie been played behind closed doors, and that also happened in Sweden (when the Swedes took on Chile in Bastad in 1975). If Malmo officials don't believe they can police this event, then fine, that's their decision. But the ITF doesn't have to go along with it. It would have done better to postpone the tie, demand that it be played in another city, or cancel it altogether and force Sweden to forfeit the match. For Davis Cup, one closed-door match is enough.
Friday, February 20, 2009 | Feedback | Print Entry
Posted by Tom Perrotta, TENNIS.com
It's been a political, and difficult, week in the world of tennis. First, the United Arab Emirates denied a visa to Shahar Peer, an Israeli who had hoped to play in Dubai this week. Then the UAE, which has no diplomatic relations with Israel, seemed on the verge of denying a visa to doubles player Andy Ram (also from Israel), until an outcry forced the government to change course. The Dubai tournament still faces sanctions and might lose its tournaments altogether without adequate assurances that there won't be a repeat of this fiasco next year.
Peer and Ram have attracted the most attention this week, but still another injustice has befallen Israeli tennis, this time in Sweden. The Israeli team, which has qualified for its second World Group tie in 15 years, will travel to Malmo, Sweden, next month. Only a few journalists, and fellow players, will watch now that the local government in Malmo, Sweden's third-largest city, has decided that security concerns are too great to allow fans into the arena.
Malmo has a substantial immigrant population, including many Muslims, and its citizens plan to protest against Israel during the match (you can learn more here, even if your only language is English -- you'll get the idea). While I question the effectiveness of picketing an Israeli tennis team to bring attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the folks in Malmo can do as they please. But are they so dangerous that not one of them can be allowed into the stadium? How is it that local authorities can ensure the safe arrival and departure of the Israeli players, yet not ensure that dangerous fans, or fans carrying weapons of some kind, don't enter the building?
Perhaps I'm naïve about Sweden or the Malmo locals, but I can't imagine that a significant percentage of protesters would have any interest in harming the players. It shouldn't be difficult to secure the court and the players from those few protesters who might be dangerous. The Malmo arena holds a mere 4,000 fans. We're not talking about a World Cup soccer match or the Super Bowl. If I'm one of the Israeli players, I'm wondering if I should attend this tie at all. How is that I'll be safe in Malmo, but the government can't guarantee my safety in a 4,000-seat arena? It defies all logic.
The International Tennis Federation has "reluctantly," to quote the organization's statement, gone along with the determination of the local government, calling it "very unfortunate" and saying the decision is "not in the long-term interests of Davis Cup." The ITF is correct, this decision goes against everything Davis Cup stands for. It's supposed to be an open competition between nations, an event that promotes healthy nationalism, rather than gives into fear, bigotry or anti-nationalism. Only one time in the past has a Davis Cup tie been played behind closed doors, and that also happened in Sweden (when the Swedes took on Chile in Bastad in 1975). If Malmo officials don't believe they can police this event, then fine, that's their decision. But the ITF doesn't have to go along with it. It would have done better to postpone the tie, demand that it be played in another city, or cancel it altogether and force Sweden to forfeit the match. For Davis Cup, one closed-door match is enough.
Comment