THE SERENA WILLIAMS FIRESTORM: INJUSTICE, INSOLENCE, OR PRECURSOR TO MORE GREATNESS?

Two of us (Henry and Rob) are tennis players and fans.  One of us (Woodson) is not.  It probably shouldn’t surprise, therefore, we had somewhat different reactions to the Serena Williams controversy that overshadowed Naomi Osaka’s 6-2, 6-4 defeat of Williams in the women’s final of the United States Open.

What Happened

Even those who missed (by accident or design) the match have probably heard about what happened. With Williams down a set, trying to mount a comeback and send the match into a deciding third set, umpire Carlos Ramos assessed Williams a code violation for receiving instruction from her coach, Patrick Mouratoglou, who was sitting in the stands.

Williams demanded an apology from Ramos, shouting she would “rather lose” than cheat. Williams had already smashed a racket at the end of a previous game, another “code” violation. The “verbal abuse” Williams hurled at Ramos resulted in a third violation and a one game penalty, leaving Osaka in position to claim her first grand slam title. Tennis officials fined Williams $17,000.

he aftermath has been all about whether this incident illustrated sexism in the sport.  More than one observer noted male players, like John McEnroe, made tirades against umpires their stock in trade, all the while avoiding penalties of the sort Ramos handed Williams. Former American star Andy Roddick tweeted that he did things much worse than Williams and never received a game penalty.

Many commentators, especially women, defended Williams, arguing everyone ignores the coaching rule, smashed rackets happen in tennis, and penalizing a player an entire game in a grand slam final really amounts to an official making the match about him, not the players.  Suggestions of racism abounded, including concerns about “angry black woman” stereotypes. Osaka’s Haitian—Japanese heritage, however, seemingly made arguing Ramos targeted a woman of color more difficult.

Henry & Rob’s Take

The incident raised questions about player behavior and institutional issues concerning how the sport treats different players. Just what is the place of outward displays of negative emotions in tennis matches?  Is Billie Jean King right in saying women who stand up to umpires get viewed negatively when men who do the same thing don’t. Although we subscribe to the Spock philosophy of restraint, we recognize releasing pent up emotions generated at the highest level of a sport as intense as professional tennis might enhance performance, McEnroe perhaps being a prime example.

Then there’s the matter of “coaching,” the rule that resulted in the first code violation. Williams claimed she didn’t get coaching from the stands. The television coverage suggested she didn’t even see the motions her coach admittedly made.  Did that justify her subsequent outbursts? Must players limit expression of their disappointments and disagreements, no matter the stakes or the stage?

 

Williams was thoughtful and caring toward Osaka after the

match, pulling us both to admiration for Williams. She understood her outburst, even if justified,   dimmed the luster of what should have been Osaka’s moment in the sun. In fact, it’s entirely possible real tennis fans will soon forget the disappointment of how this match, a classic confrontation between an unmatched champion – Serena Williams has won 23 grand slam titles – and a rising star, ended. The nearly 37-year old Williams may not have much time left at the top, but she’s already signaled she’s planning on playing next year. Remember, she’s only a year clear of giving birth, then fighting for her life due to blood clots. This U.S. Open debacle will only fuel her intense competitive fire. She and Osaka will battle again.  As tennis fans, we can hardly wait.

Woodson’s View

I am not a tennis fan. I almost never watch the game. I first learned of what happened in the championship match the next day.  A church elder alluded to Serena’s behavior in arguing church leaders must maintain their composure, even in the face of difficulties and disappointment. He said church leaders shouldn’t behave as Serena did when pressure arrives. I am not convinced the analogy works. Church leaders are, by definition, leaders. Though well known, at the end of the day, Serena Williams is an athlete.

I have long admired Serena and her family for their

dedication to each other and to their craft as a means of escaping the mean streets of Compton, California.  But, I have never viewed Serena as anything more than a great athlete and, as far as I know, a great person with many of the flaws most of the rest of us suffer with, including the capacity to  lose our cool from time to time. Serena proved the obvious. She is not perfect. The umpire did the same. He is not perfect. So what else is new?

Was this evidence of sexism or racism in our society? Is Ramos representative of a culture of sexism or racism in tennis? Perhaps, but we don’t have to go to these lengths to find indications of either in society. Plenty of evidence of both exists that’s much less subject to dispute.

To both players, I say “great game.” Getting to the finals of a grand slam tournament required a level of excellence most people only dream of achieving in their chosen professions.  Let the rest of us work as hard at our craft as these two women have at theirs.