Listen, I don’t hold grudges. I’m the first one to accept the olive branch when it is offered and am more than willing to reset a relationship once I see a sustained willingness to change.
A SUSTAINED WILLINGNESS TO CHANGE. Gaslighting a stadium full of people into winning a toss you lost is not showing a willingness to change. Getting questioned about something you apparently did wrong – like, there’s visible evidence – and responding essentially: “Hey, I paid for that to go away. Stop asking about it?!”
A change has not been made. While I was openly bitching about Rafael Nadal having to possibly play his last match at the French Open against Alexander Zverev, a friend of mine asked why. I explained he was about to start trial for domestic abuse in Germany – a trial that would be going on during the tournament. He said, “Well, isn’t it innocent until proven guilty?”
Sure, it is. And now that he’s paid to have the case go away, he will always be presumed as such. Maybe the better question is what kind of job – I'm talking to you, average Joe/Jane -- could you have where you could be accused of assault so credibly that it’s going to trial and still have a public-facing job that’s not impacted by that? At the very least, you’d be told to take a break. And would said person still be in a leadership position in your organization, perhaps a leadership position that could ask his fellow leaders on a, oh, I don’t know, a players council about whether they should have limitations on players accused of committing crimes during their active playing career?
Those are multiple questions, I guess. Alexander Zverev can go suck a lemon until he shows some remorse and starts speaking about these accusations like an adult. Anybody can throw money at something. But are you sorry?
So, no, I didn’t watch the men’s final because I was not in the proper headspace to potentially watch this guy win a Slam. But I did catch up on it afterwards, and this moment right here
cleared my skin.
IFYKY
This, too, when Alcaraz *technically* double-faulted at possibly the very worst moment in the match:
I don’t care! I’m petty!
Carlos Alcaraz, we already know, is a unique talent. He’s great at tennis and he’s a showman. God bless him, he’s also still quite young and capable of wrapping that racquet around his neck when things get complicated. Or even when they don’t! That five-setter wasn’t the best tennis I’ve ever seen, but it shows great maturity to pull a match out the way Alcaraz did while playing below his level.
And then there was the women’s final. Which I also didn’t watch live. No offense to Iga Swiatek or Jasmine Paolini, but I had the opportunity to play that morning and something told me it wasn’t going to take long. Probably what told me that was how Swiatek has been a buzzsaw since her near-loss against Naomi Osaka. Yes, Swiatek is a beast on this surface, she’s amazing, she’s head-and-shoulders over just about everyone else, blah.
But a word about Jasmine Paolini. She has been out here on this tour working. She is probably about an inch taller than me and has been consistent for the last year or so. Just taking out the Elena Rybakinas of the world, looking all sweet and harmless. No one was looking at her when this tournament started but deep inside, Jasmine was like
And she did – runners-up in both the singles and women’s doubles.
No comments:
Post a Comment