Aussie Open set to 'throw women under the bus' with radical overhaul
The Australian Open is set to implement a major change that experts say will be “crap for women’s tennis”.
According to a report in The Times, the Australian Open has “obtained permission” to implement a tie-break in deciding sets across all events, shortening the potential length of matches.
The Times reveals that Aussie Open organisers will look to play a “super tie-break” when the score reachers 6-6 in the final set, at which point opponents will have to win ten extra points by a margin of two.
That would be a slight variation on other tournaments, with the All England Club recently announcing it would commence a tie-break when the score reached 12-all in the final set.
The proposed overhaul comes after a string of five-set marathons in professional tennis which left players complaining of welfare issues.
Most recently South Africa’s Kevin Anderson called for changes to the rules after enduring a six-and-a-half hour slug-fest to overcome John Isner 26-24 in the fifth set at Wimbledon, incredibly that was only the second-longest match in the tournament’s history.
Following Anderson’s exhausting victory, tennis legend John McEnroe led a wave of backlash against tennis powerbrokers.
“I hope this magnificent effort by these two experienced and very fit professionals allows the powers-that-be to make a change,” McEnroe said.
“I believe that strongly, for our sport to continue to have as many people as possible watching. You can’t say playing a tie-break would not have been a magnificent end to this game. The fifth set doesn’t have to end six-all, it could be 10-all.
“This will have an effect on Anderson’s performance on Sunday. Rules should be made to benefit the players.”
However while the changes make complete sense in the context of marathon men’s matches, the same rule could be a nightmare more women’s tennis, where longer final sets in major matches have been thrilling to watch.
Tennis expert Jose Morgado was scathing of the proposal, declaring the current system already works well for women’s tennis.
👉 Four different ways to finish Grand Slam matches
👉 Two different team competitions in six weeks
👉 Women getting forgotten in both things (best of three with no tiebreak is a great format, there is no logical reason to end it).
Tennis is not helping it own product.
— José Morgado (@josemorgado) December 4, 2018
Experienced tennis writer Ben Rothenberg meanwhile argued the proposed change would “throw women under the bus”.
Gahhhhh.
Halep-Davis going 15-13 in the third was awesome, as was Kuznetsova-Schiavone going 16-14. This rule is crap for women's tennis.
Please, stop throwing the women under the bus because the men demand two sets of self-indulgent foreplay before their matches get anywhere. https://t.co/Hhrl2NZ3QD
— Ben Rothenberg (@BenRothenberg) December 4, 2018
Shortening matches is smart! But the best part of any match is the climactic end stages, not the plodding beginning. Abbreviating the best part is just so misguided.
— Ben Rothenberg (@BenRothenberg) December 4, 2018
Otherwise, there was an outcry from tennis fans, many who argued it was ridiculous to have different rules governing how matches finish in different grand slams.
NO!!!
I personally think the Wimbledon option is the best. But whatever the case, it's just ludicrous to have 4 different sets of rules! How dumb!
— Ian Harkin (@sportznut67) December 4, 2018
NO!!!
I personally think the Wimbledon option is the best. But whatever the case, it's just ludicrous to have 4 different sets of rules! How dumb!
— Ian Harkin (@sportznut67) December 4, 2018
NO!!!
I personally think the Wimbledon option is the best. But whatever the case, it's just ludicrous to have 4 different sets of rules! How dumb!
— Ian Harkin (@sportznut67) December 4, 2018
NO!!!
I personally think the Wimbledon option is the best. But whatever the case, it's just ludicrous to have 4 different sets of rules! How dumb!
— Ian Harkin (@sportznut67) December 4, 2018