Read on Twitter
Are journos still going on about Novak being antivaxxer?
Apart from the fact that Novak& #39;s never said anything like that, what does it matter?
Why this obsession with Novak?
If they make a COVID vaccine mandatory&he doesn& #39;t want to, he won& #39;t play.
End of story.
Who cares?
1/
Apart from the fact that Novak& #39;s never said anything like that, what does it matter?
Why this obsession with Novak?
If they make a COVID vaccine mandatory&he doesn& #39;t want to, he won& #39;t play.
End of story.
Who cares?
1/
This is a distraction, not only from his achievements this season -we& #39;re used to this, every time Novak wins, there& #39;s something negative, more important to talk about- but also from important stuff happening that should be discussed by serious journos.
Let me enumerate:
2/
Let me enumerate:
2/
1. The (unelected) Player Council, once Novak was out, voted to decrease prize-money from qualies and early rounds (lowered-ranked players) and increase it for later rounds (higher-ranked players).
This is scandalous, totally self-serving: not one question about it.
3/
This is scandalous, totally self-serving: not one question about it.
3/
2. Many players nominated Vasek&Novak to run for the council again. A last-minute rule was introduced to make it impossible. Owning a tournament and representing players in negtiations with tournaments is OK, but being interested in players& #39; rights makes a player ineligible.
4/
4/
That& #39;s also scandalous. Players are being deprived of the right to chose their representatives.
Not one question about it from tennis journos.
3. Another last-minute vote (Nov 16) changed the previously agreed changes to the ranking rules. How? Why? Who? Nothing.
5/
Not one question about it from tennis journos.
3. Another last-minute vote (Nov 16) changed the previously agreed changes to the ranking rules. How? Why? Who? Nothing.
5/
That decision was also scandalous: one does not change rules at the last minute. Players made decisions based on previous agreements. For instance: Novak played Vienna to clinch YE #1. He didn& #39;t need to, with the new rules. Too late.
The last-minute change of rules meant
6/
The last-minute change of rules meant
6/
that Rafa& #39;s #2 seed in Australia is safe. That& #39;s very important, because being #3 would have meant facing Novak or Thiem before the final, like this, Nole&Domi can land together in the other half (wanna bet?) and Rafa gets a safe path.
Again: nobody& #39;s asking the council why
7/
Again: nobody& #39;s asking the council why
7/
they changed the rules, after they had explained the rationale behind dropping the 2019 ATP Finals points.
They can do as they want. No questions asked.
4. Another plan to be voted soon involves the Masters 1000 events. They& #39;ll be given more time, smaller tournaments
8/
They can do as they want. No questions asked.
4. Another plan to be voted soon involves the Masters 1000 events. They& #39;ll be given more time, smaller tournaments
8/
will suffer. Hence lower-ranked players will have it tougher. Is anybody asking questions about it? No, of course not.
All these issues, which affect our sport and the players deeply are happening now.
How we deal with these issues will shape our sport for years to come.
9/
All these issues, which affect our sport and the players deeply are happening now.
How we deal with these issues will shape our sport for years to come.
9/
But do journos write about this? Do they discuss this?
No, of course not.
What they really want to discuss is whether Djokovic will get vaccinated or not.
Djokovic lives rent-free in their heads. A larger-than-life, intimidating, scary figure.
No time for tennis.
10/
No, of course not.
What they really want to discuss is whether Djokovic will get vaccinated or not.
Djokovic lives rent-free in their heads. A larger-than-life, intimidating, scary figure.
No time for tennis.
10/
