+0
01-06-2022 15:30
01-06-2022 15:27
+1
14-04-2022 16:38
11-04-2022 19:44
11-04-2022 06:26
09-04-2022 19:57
+0
bitsmckinley444
There are multiple discordant elements to the situation: 1. Tradition, prestige & loyalty 2. Economics affecting the tournament itself, for Wimbledon is a business and the means for projected income for working players. This should imply responsibility. 3. Ethics is involved in the premises from which both Wimbledon and the player organisations made their decisions. 4. Politics are entirely evident from the onset and will likely be the element that ends the matter. Since there has been no evidence presented that forced Wimbledon’s hand, only Wimbledon can take responsibility for dissension among players and fans alike, inside and out of the UK and other sports. Two sides will not unify. Wimbledon has said its position is to take a political stand against the Russian invasion. As far as I know, Wimbledon is a private concern. I don’t think it has to involve anybody or other factors unless there would be some discrimination action coming from somewhere or possibly something in agreements made with ATP/WTA that might be influential. The outcome of that would surely be long after this year’s event. It appears that a substantial majority do not think that Russian and Belarussian players should be discriminated against. Yet, this perspective may not carry any weight, nor will the majority of players organise in such a way to influence those who represent them. They will play for both the trophy and money. Perhaps some will boycott without any fanfare. The potential lack of resolution will inevitably lead to other conflicts or dissatisfaction. If Wimbledon stood down, would there really be any repercussions there? Is there anything at all that would give Wimbledon heart to reverse their action? What would WTA/ATP gain by stripping points if Wimbledon did not reverse its action? Would they lose anything by dropping their own decision? It seems the only immediate solution with Wimbledon drawing near.01-06-2022 15:30
+0
bitsmckinley444
There are multiple discordant elements to the situation: 1. Tradition, prestige & loyalty 2. Economics affecting the tournament itself, for Wimbledon is a business and the means for projected income for working players. This should imply responsibility. 3. Ethics is involved in the premises from which both Wimbledon and the player organisations made their decisions. 4. Politics are entirely evident from the onset and will likely be the element that ends the matter. Since there has been no evidence presented that forced Wimbledon’s hand, only Wimbledon can take responsibility for dissension among players and fans alike, inside and out of the UK and other sports. Two sides will not unify. Wimbledon has said its position is to take a political stand against the Russian invasion. As far as I know, Wimbledon is a private concern. I don’t think it has to involve anybody or other factors unless there would be some discrimination action coming from somewhere or possibly something in agreements made with ATP/WTA that might be influential. The outcome of that would surely be long after this year’s event. It appears that a substantial majority do not think that Russian and Belarussian players should be discriminated against. Yet, this perspective may not carry any weight, nor will the majority of players organise in such a way to influence those who represent them. They will play for both the trophy and money. Perhaps some will boycott without any fanfare. The potential lack of resolution will inevitably lead to other conflicts or dissatisfaction. If Wimbledon stood down, would there really be any repercussions there? Is there anything at all that would give Wimbledon heart to reverse their action? What would WTA/ATP gain by stripping points if Wimbledon did not reverse its action? Would they lose anything by dropping their own decision?01-06-2022 15:27
+1
bitsmckinley444
Musetti’s comments are encouraging. Speaking with one’s psychologist may even point to opening up conversations with peers who are also engaged in sports psychology. For the most, all elite athletes share the same issues. Whether or not conversation becomes normalized and widely accepted has yet to be seen clearly. The extreme discomfort of being perceived as weak or in trouble is an illusionary competitor when it comes to mental health. Underdevelopment in this area is a type of sports injury that may encourage compensation by over-training and being unrealistic about competitive pressure.14-04-2022 16:38
+0
bitsmckinley444
I agree with your take, R1108, on unacceptable behavior and enforcement 100%. I'd go as far as to say that non-violent behavior in the form of quiet emotions, crying, walking out, and excessive talking about emotional issues is unacceptable, as well. That is not to say mental health issues shouldn't have a part in all of it. Right time, right place is key when possible along with good public information. (Just in passing, I was gobsmacked when I learned that Osaka did not receive professional help until a year after she took a break, yet promoted mental health.)11-04-2022 19:44
+0
bitsmckinley444
Nick could find another way, yet can you imagine how shocking it would be if the umpire said he didn't know? :-)11-04-2022 06:26
+1
bitsmckinley444
“Why are they (players - ed,) breaking down on the court emotionally? It’s something that needs to be addressed.” - Chris Evert As the structure, pressures, and evolution of the sport become more demanding, the emotional and psychological responses will appear as a form of adaptation to meet the requirements of the game's current system. For example, Hawk-eye is the solution for the angst and acting out that players have dealt with ineptitude, bias, or simple mistakes. Identifying other behavioral issues and developing solutions has occurred in many areas, but not quite as objectively. Perhaps psychotherapy will be the appropriate solution for many if we can identify where emotional underdevelopment appears. Some people simply do not understand what is going on with themselves, nor do they have a repertoire of adequate responses. In other instances, some athletes will target players and spectators to gain dominance. It seems nothing more than manipulation and very negative while leaving everybody dissatisfied. It can be premeditated after weaknesses are detected in the field of players, or it can be provoked at the moment as a tactic to gain control. It seems that “what the market will bear” will be significant here. Peer pressure, media, and fans will let players know what is acceptable. Already, hefty fines and condemnation are taking a giant leap forward. We also see it in other fields to avoid chaos while supporting integrity and common decency, the Academy of Motion Pictures being a relevant example. It goes on, and identifying the problems may be lop-sided, leaving teams to experiment with solutions. Solutions targeting the game system require the responsibility of the powers that be to take pressure off of players and teams. What we see more of recently involves COVID, of course, but COVID has allowed people to reveal how they would or wouldn’t like to work. Players need to travel a sure way to reduce stress, not necessarily how tournaments and earnings are set up. There is nothing so revealing and breathtaking as a player who will walk away from $1,000,000 for some peace of mind and living one’s best life. Also, some coaches simply don’t want to tour with their players; this may be swept under the rug by neverending speculation about why changes are being made to the extent that a player may get dumped on for making changes. Developing teams becomes an emotional problem in this category. In contrast, traits such as expertise, productivity, compatibility, and loyalty would seem the simple route to go if personal preferences weren’t so detailed. What is already in place for the elite, or for those who aspire to elite tennis, is a path toward what seems the perfect athlete. The super of the super athletes are on a mission, which is along the lines of, say, something like Formula Medicine. One keeps the responsibility of shortcomings in one’s camp and maybe even tries to override all of the other categories belonging to the human condition resulting in breakdowns. The sciences of being human are on a roll. Competition is no longer just about talent and hard work but about awareness of what one can expect from the human being as an instrument. This will inevitably cause other issues, breakdowns, dropouts, and a few lost rackets because not all are ready for it, nor can it be afforded. But, oh! What a way to go! As for what needs to be addressed in terms of current breakdowns, as Evert suggests we pay attention to, there are obvious priorities. No violence on the court seems doable and is being demanded. Sports psychology and specialized psychotherapy seem up and running. Identification of behavioral health categories could be standardized to some extent and removed from tabloid culture into workshops directed by athletes, specialists, and organizations.09-04-2022 19:57