Today begins the 137th edition of the Wimbledon tournament, the most legendary and oldest Grand Slam competition that has been held since 1877 at the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club. We have 13 representatives between both teams, but, as it cannot be otherwise, we will place our maximum attention on Carlos Alcaraz, current defender of the title and one of the favorites to lift the trophy along with the other great contender, the current number one of the world, Jannik Sinner.
Both one and the other arrive in great shape and with morale high enough to harbor the highest hopes. The Italian, who has had an impeccable season, has won four titles, the last of them on the grass of the ATP 500 in Halle. This fact and the fact that last year he played in the semi-finals of the great London show that he is a player who adapts very well to this type of surface. For his part, after his great triumph at Roland Garros and already knowing how to win here, the Spaniard will surely face the tournament with an extra dose of confidence. It is true that unlike the Italian, Carlos was defeated in the quarterfinals in the last tournament, on the grass of Queen’s. But this fact seems not very relevant to me and I don’t think it will affect his spirit in any way.
As I understand it, at this last tournament Carlos complained, and rightly so, about the suggestion of a new rule whereby chair umpires must press the 25-second countdown button on the clock invariably before the three seconds of completion have elapsed since the last point. For the time being, we can enjoy Wimbledon without this inflexible rule, as he does not apply it, as I hope he will not do in the future.
It is well known that fans, especially young ones, are finding it increasingly difficult to keep their attention on any activity, whether their own or not, and that is why tennis managers are trying to adapt to the new times. The measure has, in my opinion, a whole series of negative consequences (which are not relevant here) that cannot be compensated for by those seconds between points.
The work of referees is being reduced to that of mere point counters, which must once again undermine their sense of usefulness. This feeling will probably end up being felt by many of us due to the incessant technological harassment, but in the case of judges, if their work has already been altered or ignored with the appearance of the Hawk Eye (Hawk-Eye), this new measure would already be the final blow. Until the application of the new rule, their main responsibility was to allow more or less seconds of recovery to the tennis players, depending on the intensity and duration of the previous point. It makes little sense for players to have the same amount of time after a point. ace that after a long and intense rally.
The leaders have the mission and responsibility of directing the paths that their sport must follow so as not to lose its essence, adapt to new times and maintain, if not increase, its spectacular nature. And the popularity of our sport often depends on the success of their decisions. I think that what they should try is to increase the percentage of time in which the ball is in play (currently it is 15-20%) and that the points are long exchanges in which the tennis players must use different stratagems and skills to write them down, for there is a reason they are the type of rallies that arouse long applause from the public.
Fortunately, the chair umpires will continue to allow this at this year’s Wimbledon, managing with their good work and judgment that not-so-long period of time in which the fans celebrate a point and the tennis players recover to continue contributing to the beautiful spectacle.
You can follow The USA Print in Facebook and Xor sign up here to receive our weekly newsletter.
_
