Live & train in USA, but play for other countries?

[AtomicForehand]

Jon Wertheim tweeted something today that got me thinking:

"Among Sharapova (Cal), Lisicki (Fla.) and Azarenka (Az.) you could claim American tennis is doing fine - residential if not homegrown"

OK. Let's take a look at this.

If pros both reside in and have trained most of their pro and pre-pro lives in the USA (in this case), why don't they play for the USA? Should it be "allowed" for them to play for other countries? At what point would be the cutoff? "Should" someone like Sharapova, who came to the USA at the age of seven and has lived and trained there pretty much ever since, be playing for the USA? What about Lisicki--I'm not sure of the time spent in each country, but her parents are from Poland, she also trains at the Bollettieri academy in the USA like Sharapova did, and yet she plays for Germany. How is the country a player represents decided, and are there any rules that the ITF has in place?

This question does not necessarily need to focus on the USA. There are other countries (like Britain and Canada) that "take in" players from other countries...like Baltacha (who plays for the UK, not her native Ukraine) and Raonic (who plays for Canada, and not Montenegro). Seems to me that this is right and proper--these two pros have been fostered by their national tennis programs, and give any glory that they earn back to their adopted countries.

Two thoughts:

1) If you've given up residence in your country of origin to move permanently to a new country, that says something pretty strong about the new country; your preference for living there instead of your native country should mean something.

2) If the new country has given you most or all of your professional training and development, why should the old country get the glory?

 

[AtomicForehand]

Look at Seles and Navratilova. They played for the USA even though born in Serbia and Czechoslovakia.

 

[Joe Pike]

Jon Wertheim tweeted something today that got me thinking:

"Among Sharapova (Cal), Lisicki (Fla.) and Azarenka (Az.) you could claim American tennis is doing fine - residential if not homegrown"

OK. Let's take a look at this.

If pros both reside in and have trained most of their pro and pre-pro lives in the USA (in this case), why don't they play for the USA? Should it be "allowed" for them to play for other countries? At what point would be the cutoff? "Should" someone like Sharapova, who came to the USA at the age of seven and has lived and trained there pretty much ever since, be playing for the USA? What about Lisicki--I'm not sure of the time spent in each country, but her parents are from Poland, she also trains at the Bollettieri academy in the USA like Sharapova did, and yet she plays for Germany. How is the country a player represents decided, and are there any rules that the ITF has in place?

This question does not necessarily need to focus on the USA. There are other countries (like Britain and Canada) that "take in" players from other countries...like Baltacha (who plays for the UK, not her native Ukraine) and Raonic (who plays for Canada, and not Montenegro). Seems to me that this is right and proper--these two pros have been fostered by their national tennis programs, and give any glory that they earn back to their adopted countries.

Two thoughts:

1) If you've given up residence in your country of origin to move permanently to a new country, that says something pretty strong about the new country; your preference for living there instead of your native country should mean something.

2) If the new country has given you most or all of your professional training and development, why should the old country get the glory?

What a truly dumb person, this Wertheim!
Players don't play "for a country" (outside of FC), they play for themselves.
And when the WTA and the media inform us about which country's citizen those players are there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[Joe Pike]

Look at Seles and Navratilova. They played for the USA even though born in Serbia and Czechoslovakia.

Or look at McEnroe who played for the USA even though he was born in Germany.

 

[AtomicForehand]

McEnroe grew up in the USA to American parents, so it's not the same thing as Seles and Navratilova (nor Baltacha nor Raonic, for that matter).

 

[ashitaka2010]

What a truly dumb person, this Wertheim!
Players don't play "for a country" (outside of FC), they play for themselves.
And when the WTA and the media inform us about which country's citizen those players are there is nothing wrong with it.

Olympic games

 

[Douggo]

Two distinct subjects, I suppose. As far as the little flag and/or three-letter designation next to the player's name on the broadcast or the program or whatever, I'd say whichever country the player chooses to identify with is fine with me.
As far as Davis Cup/Federation Cup, I'd lean toward letting each country choose its team as it sees fit. If Russia wants to allow Sharapova to play, so be it.

Speaking of which... does Monaco have Davis Cup and Fed Cup teams? Seems like they'd be pretty good if they could convince some of its residents to play.

 

[Bud]

Love us and leave us :?

Bunches of athletes also play college tennis here, then play for their home countries

 

[bluetrain4]

"If pros both reside in and have trained most of their pro and pre-pro lives in the USA (in this case), why don't they play for the USA? Should it be "allowed" for them to play for other countries?"

I don't think you could legally not allow them to play for their home country. What country a player plays for is usually determined by their country of citizenship (there are exceptions), not their country of residency (Monaco would have some really great Davis Cup squads).

Players have been training away from their home countries for a long time. Safin and Kusnetsova trained in Spain, for example.

It's not like our taxes go to a national federation and these players are coming over to the States and using federation facilities and coaches to improve their game and then playing for someone else. They're coming here on their own accord, training at private academies and paying their own way (or their sponsors are paying).

It's a bizarre thing to get upset about.

 

[goober]

What a truly dumb person, this Wertheim!
Players don't play "for a country" (outside of FC), they play for themselves.
And when the WTA and the media inform us about which country's citizen those players are there is nothing wrong with it.

I think he is referring to Fed Cup otherwise his post makes no sense. There are some questionable practices like countries which basically buy players from other countries i.e. Yaroslava Shvedova for their fed cup team, but outside of this I don't care if Sharapova plays for Russia. Most of the flak she seems to get anyways are from her teamates that see her as not really Russian.

 

[jmverdugo]

They play for the country they feel is their home. For all those players you mention it was more like a "bussiness" decision to move the US. Then you have players like Sampras & Agassi both sons of immigrants and for them the US is their home. There are more than a few younger (and not so younger) players that are currently playing as US citizen representing the US and they were not born in the US and are actually new citizens.

 

[ATXtennisaddict]

The only time "playing for a country" matters is Davis Cup. In the tourneys/slams, it's all about the individual.

 

[AtomicForehand]

Then you have players like Sampras & Agassi both sons of immigrants and for them the US is their home.

Yeah, but Sampras & Agassi were born and raised in the USA (Agassi's mother was US-born, BTW), so their "Americanness" wouldn't be reasonably up for discussion.

I'm talking about those players who move to a country at a young age to take advantage of that country's player development opportunities, but then don't give that country its due by playing for their country of origin instead.

 

[bluetrain4]

We should probably differentiate between players who become the citizen of a "new" country and then play for that country ( I don't see how this could, under most circumstances, really be controversial), as opposed to players who maintain citizenship in one country and play for another.

 

[AtomicForehand]

If a player went to Bollettieri's for several years before turning pro, but her parents were still back in the old country, and she went home to the old country for school breaks &c., that would be something different than the whole family moving to the USA when the kid was young and living there ever since, no? More like being away at boarding school in another country than actually moving permanently there.

 

[AtomicForehand]

BTW, you can move permanently to a new country and never become a citizen there.

 

[cucio]

Countries should retire.

 

[bharat]

unless the player becomes a US citizen, I dont think they can play for US

and also, are they not paying the academy that they go to anyway

 

[sureshs]

The players have some obligation only if it is reciprocated. For example, many players who train in the US will not be granted green cards even if they stay 10 years, if indeed they wish to apply.

Again, many US senior citizens live in Mexico and other countries for various reasons, including cost of living on a fixed income. They don't need to become citizens of those countries and lose their benefits.

The only legal requirement is to follow the law of the country where you are and satisfy the tax requirements.

 

[jaggy]

Players live in Monte Carlo, Spain, London, its more convenience.

 

[woodrow1029]

Here's the Fed Cup Rule:

(b) Eligibility to Represent a Country

Any tennis player who is in good standing with her National Association in accordance with Appendix D shall be qualified to represent that country as a player or Captain if she:

i) Is a national of that country, has a current valid passport of that
country and has lived in that country for twenty-four consecutive
months at some time, and has not represented any other country
during the period of 36 months immediately preceding the event.
If a player is qualified under this sub-section to represent more than
one country and the National Association of one of those countries
wishes to nominate her to represent it, that Association shall submit an application to the ITF, with a copy to any other National Association concerned. Such application must be received by the ITF at least six months prior to the event for which the player wishes to be nominated. The Fed Cup Committee will give a ruling having taken into account all relevant matters.

ii) a) A player who has represented, or has been eligible to represent a country and such a country is divided into two or more countries, shall immediately be eligible to represent any one of those countries.​

b) A player who has represented, or has been eligible to represent a
country and such country is absorbed in whole or in part by
another country, shall immediately be eligible to represent such
other country.

iii) A player shall be deemed to have represented a country if she shall have been nominated and shall have accepted the nomination to play in the Olympic Tennis Event or in any International Team
Competition recognized by the ITF and listed in Bye-law 2.1(a).

iv) A National Association may appeal to the Board of Directors to
nominate a player who is not eligible under the above Rules and the
Board of Directors may agree the application if the full circumstances
warrant an exception being made.

v) The Fed Cup Committee has the right to ask a National Association to produce evidence to show how a player is qualified to represent that country​

 

[woodrow1029]

And the Davis Cup rule:

34. ELIGIBILITY OF PLAYERS
Any tennis player who is in good standing with his National Association in
accordance with Appendix D shall be qualified to represent that country if he:

(a) Is a national of that country, has a current valid passport of that country, has lived in that country for 24 consecutive months at some time and has not represented any other country during the period of 36 months immediately preceding the event.

If a player is qualified under this sub section to represent more than one
country and the National Association of one of those countries wishes to
nominate him to represent it, that Association shall submit an application to the ITF, with a copy to any other National Association concerned. Such application must be received by the ITF at least six months prior to the event for which the player wishes to be nominated.
The Davis Cup Committee will give a ruling having taken into account all
relevant matters.

(b) (i) A player who has represented, or has been eligible to represent a
country and such a country is divided into two or more countries, shall
immediately be eligible to represent any one of those countries.

(ii) A player who has represented, or has been eligible to represent a
country and such country is absorbed in whole or in part by another
country, shall immediately be eligible to represent such other country.

(c) A player shall be deemed to have represented a country if he shall have been nominated, and shall have accepted, the nomination to play in the Olympic Games Tennis Event or in any International Team Competition recognised by the ITF and listed in Bye-Law 2.1(a).

(d) A National Association may appeal to the Board of Directors to nominate a player who is not eligible under the above Rules and the Board of Directors may agree the application if the full circumstances warrant an exception being made. Such application must be received by the ITF at least six months prior to the event for which the player wishes to be nominated.

(e) The Davis Cup Committee has the right to ask a National Association to produce evidence to show how a player is qualified to represent that country.
​

 

[JumpSmash]

I wonder how these players can live in the US without being citizens? What type of visas are they on? It makes me think they are illegal aliens and should be kicked out! :twisted:

 

[AtomicForehand]

Thanks, Woodrow. That's interesting info.

 

[gsharma]

I wonder how these players can live in the US without being citizens? What type of visas are they on? It makes me think they are illegal aliens and should be kicked out! :twisted:

Great job moron! First of all, these players are not sponsored by USTA or anyone. Their families are paying their expenses, which are often exorbitant. These players owe nothing to the country.

Moreover, imagine how much revenue the government is collecting from these players and their families. Through these visitors, government makes money through income tax and sales tax. Not to mention, the general spending by these players and their families boosts economic spending, which is about 70% of economic activity in this country.

These players are not free-loaders. They pay their dues.

 

[li0scc0]

In cycling, many Americans live in Europe for the best training and competitive conditions (as well as Doctors, perhaps ). So different sports have different training locales.

 

[jamesblakefan#1]

The only time "playing for a country" matters is Davis Cup. In the tourneys/slams, it's all about the individual.

Yeah, but it sucks to see people talking about 'American tennis' struggling when Lisicki and Sharapova were both trained here in the US, Fish as well. It's not like we've lost the ability to make great players, just none of these players are born in America, so we don't get the credit for it. (Well Fish was, but ppl still say US is struggling.)

 

[bms2011]

Or look at McEnroe who played for the USA even though he was born in Germany.

McEnroe was born in a US military based in Germany. That means that he was born a US and German citizen.

 

[Chris182]

why they move to the us? better weather than in northern europe, better training conditions AND: if you are a rich guy (which all of them without a doubt are) your life is much more comfortable and so on in the US. i know some guys uncle who made a fortune with his biz and moved to the US...for above mentioned reasons (leave out the training ). And i would do the same no? living in northern germany i can only dream of SoCal with sun sun sun and its beautiful...if u have the money !

 

[Emet74]

Well Andy Murray trained in Spain.

Should a match between him and Rafa be considered "all-spanish"?

 

[mctennis]

Here's another issue I have with foreign players coming here and playing in the USA. When a STATE college gets a foreign tennis player to come here and play for that college while getting a free education. That gets me rubbed raw because I , as a state taxpayer, am paying for that foreign students education while they take scholarship monies away from a state student. It just doesn't seem right, nor should it be allowed. If a student from another state comes into that states school system they have to pay a non state rate even for that student to get an education yet they give away scholarships to non US citizens. Don't give me this " diversity" crap as an excuse. If the foreign student comes over here and pays ( out of state rates) to be at that college I have no issue with that. That is as long as they go through the same admissions process every other student does.
I was watching Big 10 tennis finals yesterday. I noticed an awful lot of tennis playing students not from the USA. I'm sure they are all on a free educational ride from that school.
I'll also put this in the College section as well. It just goes from college to the pro transgression is all for some of these players.

 

[Tammo]

Raonic was born in Montenegro, but plays for Canada.

 

[cucio]

Here's another issue I have with foreign players coming here and playing in the USA. When a STATE college gets a foreign tennis player to come here and play for that college while getting a free education.

Can't you see any benefits for that college?

1) The local guys get better hitting partners, think of them as foreign assistant coaches.
2) Better results for the college in tournaments, think of them as foreign PR workers.

All in all, I'd say they probably earn their scholarships fair and square.

 

[jmverdugo]

You seem to think that the players "own" something (tennis wise) to the country because they are training and living on the country. This is not the case, as I wrote before it is a business decision, they come here and pay their expenses and of course if they have accounts in the US they probably pay taxes too, so that is, the US is not giving them anything for free, it is a business transaction.

 

[soyizgood]

Players live in Monte Carlo, Spain, London, its more convenience.

It's called evading taxes.

 

[jmverdugo]

^^ they are still paying taxes, just lower rates.

 

[Lefty5]

Countries should retire.

lol, good one

 

[Migelowsky]

The US doesn´t have right now a bunch of good players like old times, usually they complain about immigrants ( legal or illegal ) taking jobs from the US born citizens but this time is special, the other way around.
If they had 2 or 3 top ten, and a foreign becomes american and gains a place on the Davis Cup for example, there are always sour feelings towards them, at least that happens a lot on another countries when immigrants make national football teams.
They were ok with Navratilova, but imagine Lendl on the Davis Cup Team?
This time you want them on your side

 

[goober]

Yeah, but it sucks to see people talking about 'American tennis' struggling when Lisicki and Sharapova were both trained here in the US, Fish as well. It's not like we've lost the ability to make great players, just none of these players are born in America, so we don't get the credit for it. (Well Fish was, but ppl still say US is struggling.)

America is getting credit because people know they trained in the US. That is ALL the credit it deserves. Beyond that, it is up to the players to decide who they want to represent in DC/FC or how they wanted to be listed.

If an American went over to Japan to learn and train in Judo as a kid, and then when he is an adult represented the US in international competition, would you say he should represent Japan instead? The argument is absurd.

 

[Joe Pike]

McEnroe was born in a US military based in Germany. That means that he was born a US and German citizen.

No. He wasn't born a German citizen.

 

[mctennis]

Can't you see any benefits for that college?

1) The local guys get better hitting partners, think of them as foreign assistant coaches.
2) Better results for the college in tournaments, think of them as foreign PR workers.

All in all, I'd say they probably earn their scholarships fair and square.

Nope, I see no benefits to having my tax dollars paying for a scholarship for them. Those are really lame excuses for giving them a free college education btw. If they need a hitting partner there are plenty of other options, even a ball machine would work. There's no guarantee any sort of better results in tournaments with any foreign players. If a PRIVATE college wants to do that the I have no gripe. However, since my tax dollars are paying for this and all his expenses then YES it is a big gripe of mine. If they are that great of tennis players let their own country put them through one of their great colleges.

 

[jamesblakefan#1]

America is getting credit because people know they trained in the US. That is ALL the credit it deserves. Beyond that, it is up to the players to decide who they want to represent in DC/FC or how they wanted to be listed.

If an American went over to Japan to learn and train in Judo as a kid, and then when he is an adult represented the US in international competition, would you say he should represent Japan instead? The argument is absurd.

That's not true. The casual fan sees no Americans in the semis of Wimbledon and thinks that the American system can't develop great players anymore, when that's not the case. The systems are still in place, mainly at Bollitieri's, to develop great players, just that those players happen to come from other countries to use our facilities to better themselves.

 

[goober]

That's not true. The casual fan sees no Americans in the semis of Wimbledon and thinks that the American system can't develop great players anymore, when that's not the case. The systems are still in place, mainly at Bollitieri's, to develop great players, just that those players happen to come from other countries to use our facilities to better themselves.

Well, America has not been developing homegrown talent in tennis recently. Maybe the question should be asked is why are foreign born players suceeding in the American system and American born are not?

I still don't see how things should be changed to "give America credit". Do you want WTA/ATP to start listing players countries based on where they trained? You want an asterisk next to their countries of origin? You want to force players to play DC/FC based on what country they developed the most in? None of these things are going to happen.

 

[jamesblakefan#1]

Well, America has not been developing homegrown talent in tennis recently. Maybe the question should be asked is why are foreign born players suceeding in the American system and American born are not?

I still don't see how things should be changed to "give America credit". Do you want WTA/ATP to start listing players countries based on where they trained? You want an asterisk next to their countries of origin? You want to force players to play DC/FC based on what country they developed the most in? None of these things are going to happen.

It's obvious that American kids don't have the interest in tennis that was there 20-30 yrs ago. There's more sports like lacrosse, golf which are seeing increased participation.

No, no, and no to your questions. But hearing Lisicki be credited as the first 'German' to make a SF since Graf and Germany get the credit when she was developed mainly in the US does rub me the wrong way. Is there any perfect solution? No. In the end, players represent the country they want to, which is fine. But people act like US can't develop great players anymore when that's not the case. At the end of the day it's semantics. US still develops great players, but foreign b/c the interest from American kids isn't what it once was in tennis.

 

[migi]

Lisicki's parents are from Poland and playing in Poland she could'nt had a chance to bein Wimbledon semi ...

 

[Defcon]

Nope, I see no benefits to having my tax dollars paying for a scholarship for them. Those are really lame excuses for giving them a free college education btw. If they need a hitting partner there are plenty of other options, even a ball machine would work. There's no guarantee any sort of better results in tournaments with any foreign players. If a PRIVATE college wants to do that the I have no gripe. However, since my tax dollars are paying for this and all his expenses then YES it is a big gripe of mine. If they are that great of tennis players let their own country put them through one of their great colleges.

Don't blame the players, blame the college. The school wants results, they want the trophies and the prestige (to attract more students) and they are willing to give scholarships to the best players. The fact that the player is American or not is not at all relevant.

This is nothing different than someone good at sports getting a scholarship to a prestigious institution, while someone who is less physically gifted but much more intelligent, doesn't. These are places of higher learning, not 'how to ensure a sports career'. Most of the time the athletes suck at academics yet are protected. That is a waste of tax dollars as well.

 

[mctennis]

Don't blame the players, blame the college. The school wants results, they want the trophies and the prestige (to attract more students) and they are willing to give scholarships to the best players. The fact that the player is American or not is not at all relevant.

This is nothing different than someone good at sports getting a scholarship to a prestigious institution, while someone who is less physically gifted but much more intelligent, doesn't. These are places of higher learning, not 'how to ensure a sports career'. Most of the time the athletes suck at academics yet are protected. That is a waste of tax dollars as well.

I blame the colleges, you're right. I know the sports coaches usually get so much money or so many scholarships to give. Either full or partial. They can pick and choose as they wish, normally. Plus, like you said, the athletes normally really have a horrible GPA. They also usually have to maintain a 2.5 minimum. It is relevant if this is a state school, IMO, because these are normally state tax monies used. I can't send my child there from out of state and get state rates because I haven't paid any real estate taxes to get the reduced tuition rates. So, why should someone NOT from that state or usually any other USA state get a scholarship to be at that school? I do not think that is right to do so. That's just my opinion and I'm sure there are plenty of others that don't see an issue with that. I just contend to try doing that in their country and see if you can get a scholarship to one of their colleges. I'd almost bet you couldn't. Plus I think they'd use the " it's for our countrymen" if asked about why you can't get a scholarship from their college. Of course I can't be certain of that because I do not know any student that has gotten a full/partial scholarship from a foreign college for sports or academics.

 

[pound cat]

Players live in Monte Carlo, Spain, London, its more convenience.

I've never heard of any pro choosing to live in London. Most would avoid it like the plague for various reasons which I will let our British posters ennumerate. Spain has great Tennis Academies and Monte Carlo has big tax advantages.