|
OUT OF LEFT FIELD |
 |
 Don't laugh: This is how Rafael Nadal decided to celebrate after defeating Roger Federer at Wimbledon on Sunday. He just lay right down on the grass and let the crowd cheers wash over him. |
It Seems Like One Epic Drama After Another
By STAN ISAACS
of TheColumnists.com
Sports fans, even
casual lookers-on, enjoy the greatest arena of
all--television. It brings us the stirring dramas of sport, and
we have
been particularly blessed of late. This past Sunday it was the
gripping
five-set, marathon Wimbledon final won by Rafael Nadal over
Roger
Federer. A few weeks ago it was the dramatic shot-making despite
a bad
knee that enabled Tiger Wodos to survive and win the U.S. Golf
Open.
Tennis is the most grueling of all sports. There is no sport that puts the players in jeopardy of losing time and time again. A baseball pitcher having to make a good pitch in a 3-2 situation, a football place kicker having to kick a winning field goal, a golfer needing to make a crucial putt--none of them has to do it as often as tennis players.
It’s hard to count the number of times Nadal and Federer on this day had to make shots to survive. When they faulted on a first serve, they had the pressure of having to get the second serve in or lose a crucial point. By my count in the hours I was watching, only Federer double-faulted, but just once.
As are many epic tennis matches, this was excruciating to watch, because there were so many times when it looked as if the man you were rooting for was going to lose--or when your man failed to hit the shot needed to win.
When an ace was needed on serve, Federer came though. When it seemed as if a great passing shot was needed, Nadal hit it.
It was the kind of sports event that had
even casual sports fans telling people afterward, “Did you
see that tennis match!” Just as people talked for days afterward
about Tiger Woods’ heroics winning the Open.
Nadal broke Federer’s attempt to win a sixth straight Wimbledon.
You never can tell, but it looks as if he will be good enough
to win some more--and join the great ones: Tilden, Perry, Budge,
Laver, Newcombe, Sampras, McEnroe, Sampras and Federer.
So Federer is no longer the king on grass. Alas.
For Roger Federer the best thing was winning
the Wimbledon final. For Roger Federer the next best thing was
losing the Wimbledon final.
|
|
On another less-exalted score, it was obvious from the moment Federer and Nadal walked onto the Wimbledon court who would be the winner. It was Nike and its ever-present swoosh symbol.
The swoosh chalked up an awesome 18 on the huckster board, nine for each of the players so handsomely rewarded by the sportswear kingpin. Federer and Nadal each had (we’ll count them) a swoosh on a headband (that makes one), one on a shirt (two) one on each sweatband (four); one on shorts (five) one on each sock (seven) and one on each sneaker (nine). I am not keen enough reporter to have found out what was on their underwear.
Once upon a time people looked down on bowlers as low class yokels for sporting commercial chazerazi on their shirts. Along came racecar drivers as billboards in motion. And golf, another so-called classy endeavor, has long featured players wearing labels on caps and bags.
(The July 7-14 New Yorker Magazine had a juicy take on this with a cartoon by Paul Noth in which a doctor treating a patient wears a suit resplendent with the logos of all the pharmaceutical companies to which he is indebted for funding and samples).
|
|
After a diet of the raggedy and garish colored outfits worn by players at most tennis tournaments, it was a pleasure to see the neat white garb at Wimbledon. The Wimbledon people can be stuffy about adopting innovations, but they are right-on insisting on white, which shows up so well against the green of the grass, or the almost green grass rounds of the tournament.
Wimbledon was slow to adopt yellow balls-which show up better than white balls on television. But I think most devoted tennis fans appreciate Wimbledon’s policy of eliminating tie-breaks for deciding fifth sets for men or deciding third sets for women. The no-tiebreaker 9-7 Nadal-Federer fifth set Sunday underscored that.
|
|
Mary Carillo did not work the men’s final so John Yakenroe dominated the NBC commentary more than usual. He pontificates so much--at his worst when telling us what the players are thinking--that after awhile you tune him out. Three people talking about two people playing is more than enough. If I were NBC so enamored with Yakenroe, I would let him work the first set, then put Carillo on as the analyst for the second set and so on.
And it would be neat if some technician came up with a half-mute feature that allowed the viewer to turn down the announcers but hear the crowd noise.
|
|
I can’t blame Richard Williams, one of our favorite eccentrics, for leaving Wimbledon before the women’s final, unable to deal with watching his two daughters playing against each other again. It reminded me of Dr. Krickstein, the father of Aaron Krickstein, when his son played a big match against, I believe, Jimmy Connors at Flushing Meadow.
Dr. Krickstein couldn’t watch, so he roamed the last row of the stadium during play, and the TV cameras picked up his movements. You couldn’t help but sympathize with the father, particularly because his agony intensified as his son blew a big lead.
|
|
It would be nice if the NBC voices promoting “Breakfast at Wimbledon” would give a nod to Bud Collins, the tennis sage who conceived the idea. When HBO was the Wimbledon network, it showed the matches on a delayed basis only until Collins persuaded the network to do the finals live with the catchy concept “Breakfast at Wimbledon.” It has inspired strawberries-and-cream parties in our neck of the woods.
©2008 by Stan Isaacs. The Stan Isaacs
caricature is ©2001 by Jim Hummel. This column first posted
July 7, 2008.
You
can comment on this column online. Please address your message
to either "The Editors" or Stan Isaacs. To send an
email, click here and don't forget to mention Stan 's name: talkback@thecolumnists.com
|
|
|
Archives |
|
|