Wimbledon is one of the sporting events that symbolizes summer. Once a year at the All England Club the best male and female tennis players in the world come together to battle it out on the lawns of the famed venue, to crown the champions of the sport.
It's also an event that symbolizes -- in this era -- inclusivity, equality and fairness. Back in 1968, Wimbledon dragged tennis, into a dynamic new way of thinking by becoming the first Grand Slam tournament to welcome all qualified players, including previously barred professionals, to compete in the event.
54 years later, Wimbledon became the first Grand Slam tournament to lock out qualified players from Russia and Belarus, in response to Russian president Vladimir Putin’s unprovoked and barbaric invasion of Ukraine.
Daniil Medvedev, the No. 2 player in the world, can’t play, and neither can No. 8 Andrey Rublev. If that last name sounds familiar, he’s the guy who, in the first days after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, wrote on a camera, “No War Please.”
The ban will also exclude top women's players from Wimbledon. Belarusian stars Victoria Azarenka and Aryna Sabalenka won't be allowed to compete this year.
Let’s begin with what we can all agree on. The majority of people are all outraged by Russia’s act of aggression. We are supportive of Ukraine. We all find Putin to be a mass-murdering dictator leading an unjust war. No one is arguing in support of the country of Russia.
Just about everyone else in the tennis world opposes Wimbledon’s ban, including the governing bodies, ATP to the WTA. Other legends have spoken out against it, such as Billie Jean King, Martina Navratilova, and Novak Djokovic. No other tournament has followed suit, though the U.S Open has not yet explicitly ruled it out.
Perhaps that’s because this isn’t really about sending a message to Russia. It seems to be more about UK political optics. The Times of London reported Wimbledon was terrified that, if a Russian player were to win, the photo that would be taken with Kate Middleton afterward could be used as propaganda. “Wimbledon were certainly aware that whatever they did would be framed as a sports-washing moment for Putin,” a source told the Times.
Banning some of the top athletes in the world -- athletes who mostly have little connection with the Russian government and have in fact been living and working overseas with their families for many years -- over the fear that it will negatively affect the public perception of the royal-family, is the most Wimbledon thing ever.
Not to mention that prohibiting individual athletes is a fundamentally different proposition than taking action against state-sanctioned teams, as FIFA did when it banned the Russian soccer team from playing in the World Cup. The athletes who compete individual sport don't need the funding from the state to travel, receive coaching, etc.
The issue gets even scarier. UK sports minister Nigel Huddleston recently said, “We need some potential assurance that they are not supporters of Putin, and we are considering what requirements we may need to try and get some assurances along those lines.”
That sounds a lot like a pledge of loyalty. Requiring players to maintain the “correct” political position of a host country is a pretty slippery slope, no?
Wimbledon was clearly getting pressure from the British government to ban Russian athletes. There were reports that the UK told the AELTC (All England Lawn and Tennis Club) that they could not guarantee Russian athletes would be granted entrance into the country.
My question would be, why wouldn't Wimbledon avoid criticism, and still take the high road. Something along the lines of, 'As we oppose Russia’s action, we are not prepared to take action against individual players. However, we cannot guarantee that Russian players will be permitted entry into the country, due to the government's policy on Russian nationals at this moment in time.' That would make more sense for a non-political organization, no?
Wimbledon also confirmed this week that players will not need to be vaccinated to play at Wimbledon, which means world No. 1 Novak Djokovic will be permitted to defend his title. The Joker has dealt with his own issues, as he was banned from defending his Australian Open title in January, due to his refusal to receive vaccination for Covid-19.
"I will always be the first one to condemn the war. As a child of war, I know what kind of emotional trauma a war leaves. Us in Serbia, we know what was happening here in 1999. Ordinary people always suffer – we've had lots of wars in the Balkans. That being said, I cannot support the Wimbledon decision, I think it's crazy. It's not the athletes' fault. When politics interfere with sport, it usually doesn't turn out well."
