Weekend Wimbledon Blogging

My Tivo was set to record the Wimbledon men's final today. To be on the safe side, I'd told it to go seven hours. But ah, the event took place in England, natch, a land where sports organizers have yet to discover the advantages of a retractable roof (I'm told they're "working on it"), as well as the thrill that electricity can provide, especially when applied to lightbulbs.

I hear the fifth set was especially exciting. Didn't see the end of it, though. Remind me to instruct the Tivo to record for 24 hours straight next year, to improve my chances of being able to watch the match start to finish.

The final started late due to rain, then was interrupted twice more for showers. The whole event thus took more than the seven hours of recording time I had allotted to it (most men's matches are easily over in three to four hours. Five is excessive).

Darkness was also a factor — not in my interrupted viewing, but in how well the players were able to perform. Defending champ Roger Federer may very well have missed out on a record-setting sixth consecutive victory due to the fact that it was past nine p.m. when the final few games were played — but both players were affected by the fast-dwindling visibility on the Wimbledon lawn. "In the last game, I didn't see nothing," Federer's victorious opponent, Rafael Nadal, said afterwards. "It was unbelievable."

It sure was. Many thousands of sports venues around the world — almost all with much lower viewer numbers, and way smaller sponsor amounts at stake — are properly illuminated, a feat that involves a technology developed 150 years ago. And quite a lot of those places have also found a way to keep the rain out. Very advanced, that.

Wimbledon, it seems, is organized with all the world-class aplomb that goes into putting together a floor show in your local titty bar (except that those tend to have better lights). Only when it comes to kowtowing to sponsors are the tournament directors prepared to demonstrate their commitment to excellence — for instance, by removing paying visitors from the audience who are caught drinking anything other than an "official" Wimbledon beverage.

As for the players, and the ticket holders, and the hundreds of millions of TV-watching tennis fans around the world — well, they are simply left to wonder whether the organizers will enter the 21st 20th century anytime soon.

Comments

[PrimalFest]

One of the things the British commentators mentioned (during the fifth set, as I recall) is that the retractable roof will be ready for Wimbledon 2010. Not a moment too soon...

One other farce to bear in mind is that the poor saps who paid a small fortune to watch the Men's Singles Final yesterday would have lost their money if it had been rained off until Monday - their Sunday tickets would simply be invalid and they wouldn't get priority over people who turn up at the door for Monday. They'd have to queue up for a chance to buy a new ticket like everyone else. Maybe THAT'S why the officials have dragged their heels about weatherproofing Centre Court.

Still, it was nice to see Tim Henman at the Wimbledon final, even if he was just in the commentary box.

[Sphairistike]

Yes, they could lay a tarmac surface, build a permanent roof, add a gigawatt of lighting, decorate the place with yet more BigCorp logos for health-giving foods such as McDonald's and Coca Cola, add some cheerleaders, get rid of the general public and just have high-priced seats filled with BigCorp's customers and in the process completely lose all the charm of being Wimbledon. Weather and light add extra dimensions to any great sport and are part of the deal. Would you like cricket, football and rugby played indoors too. Golf? Tour de France?

Wimbledon is the best tennis tournament and always will be.

[Rogier]

Charm? Really? Odd, I wasn't charmed when seven hours of recording time were insufficient to capture the entire match. Neither Federer nor Nadal were charmed when they had to play the tail end of a critically important Grand Slam final in the creeping darkness.

This year, I also noticed the dust swirling around players' footfalls because the area around the baseline had been become bald and barren. Wow -- the Brits can't even keep their precious grass in decent shape.

Wimbledon is an anachronism in too many ways to count. Yes, it badly -- BADLY -- needs an overhaul, and the organizers might take some cues from the always-terrific Australian Open.

[Sphairistike]

@ Rogier

May I suggest a little perspective here? It's a tennis match. It's not something of world importance. It's not a cure for cancer. It ain't going to solve global poverty. It won't feed the starving. It's just a tennis match, that's all. The world isn't going to stop turning just because you missed it and doubtless Federer wouldn't have whinged if he had won. And there's always the option of staying up all night to watch it live, as I did. Live sport is always better than watching a recording as it means you don't have to avoid the news media until after you've seen it.

By the way, Wimbledon is run by the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club. Note: l-a-w-n. The surface is bound to degrade during the course of the event because that's the nature of the beast. Wimbledon is unique and it's the home of tennis.

Lastly, any fool can run a rain-free tournament in a drought-affected country like Australia; I should know, I live there. I'm sure any of the Saharan countries could also do a fine job in this respect.