The only reason I know Aranxta Sanchez-Vicario is getting inducted into the Tennis Hall of Fame this year is because I read feminist blogs. In fact I knew about her induction long before I found out Pete Sampras was getting inducted, too.
Problem is that most are reporting Sampras's honor first and Sanchez-Vicario's as an afterthought--if at all.
During coverage of the Australian Open last night, Sampras gave a live interview which was boring, drawn-out and filled with inane questions like the oft-repeated: who would win Wimbledon if you and Federer were playing in the final, both at your prime? [Sampras is not the most articulate man, either. Lot of stock responses; lot of repetition.]
Oh, yeah, by the way--Arantxa Sanchez-Vicario is being inducted in the recent player category too, we hear after the interview ends.
At least Cliffie and Patrick gave mention to her honor. On the ESPN ticker last night under tennis: "Pete Sampras to be inducted into Hall of Fame."
That's it.
My other Australian Open annoyance: Cliff Drysdale. It's clear he is supposed to be the guy who does the fluffier commentary which is interspersed with the allegedly expert observations of people like McEnroe and Pam Shriver and Mary Jo Fernandez. But really, something a little more provoking than "tennis is just so different from every other sport. Take golf for example. Very different."
Indeed, Cliff, indeed.
1 comment:
I've never thought that Drysdale was there as a fluff backup for the others; he had a very fine tennis career and knows a lot. But if he is indeed serving that role, perhaps he needs to be more assertive. I usually like him, except when he is on with MJF and they do everything but kneel before a likeness of Sharapova.
The other night I saw a super on the ESPN screen that said "Pete Sampras, others, elected to Hall of Fame." So now the Barcelona Bumblebee has been relegated to the ranks of "others." It makes me angry.
Post a Comment