The history of tennis and South Africa

[Dan Lobb]

I never said he didn't play. And he was a critic of the Government in South Africa prior to going there.

Ashe visa was rejected in 1969 well before any global pressure for South Africa to reform. He was rejected again in 1970. He was allowed entry in 1973-1975 and 1977 on assignment for ABC Sports. He wrote about this in books, A Portrait in Motion, Off The Court, A Hard Road to Glory-A History of the African America Athlete Since 1946 & Days of Grace.

There should be no criticism, then, of other tennis players who played in South Africa and did their best to challenge that system. The rules are the same for everyone.

 

[DariaGT]

Brad Gilbert always found a way to win Ugly on and off the court I think he was brilliant and said exactly what a pro tennis player would have felt as he wanted to make the most of his chances after so many years of training and doing what he does best.

Some years ago I watched and listened to many documentaries and podcasts from independent channels that interviewed local Black South Africans during some kind of anniversary and everyone of them confessed that opportunities and life was better during Apartheid. They said there was more money, work and benefits available than it was now and since Apartheid was disbanded. They all were happy to have their own land allocated fairly to all the different tribes according to their populations and this made communities happier since they could all keep their traditions on their land and close to each other. Most lost their homes after Apartheid was disbanded and were made homeless.

Politics has no place in sports yet would have like to seeing Brad go back to South Africa and volunteer to give lessons to all humans combined together to show that Tennis is a healthy activity for all.

 

[heftylefty]

There should be no criticism, then, of other tennis players who played in South Africa and did their best to challenge that system. The rules are the same for everyone.

I've take it you never any of Ashe Books; yet you're comfortable enough to know why we went to South Africa or his opinion on Apartheid.

 

[Dan Lobb]

I've take it you never any of Ashe Books; you you're comfortable enough to know why we went to South Africa or his opinion on Apartheid.

What are you trying to say? You cannot assume that tennis players supported apartheid simply because they played in South Africa. That is a huge leap of illogic.

 

[heftylefty]

What are you trying to say? You cannot assume that tennis players supported apartheid simply because they played in South Africa. That is a huge leap of illogic.

Actually you can assume a lot. You can't use being indifferent to evil as an excuse. Turning a blind eye is passively saying I'm okay with the atrocities. It's not like tennis players didn't know what was happening in South Africa by the '80s. And if someone as self as John McEnroe can do the right...

 

[Dan Lobb]

Actually you can assume a lot. You can't use being indifferent to evil as an excuse. Turning a blind eye is passively saying I'm okay with the atrocities. It's not like tennis players didn't know what was happening in South Africa by the '80s. And if someone as self as John McEnroe can do the right...

You are assuming that playing in South Africa represents indifference, and that is a huge assumption.

 

[heftylefty]

You are assuming that playing in South Africa represents indifference, and that is a huge assumption.

Name a player other Ashe remotely critical of the South African government at that time. Saying "I keep sports and politics separate" is a dodge, especially there is nothing "political" about oppression. Oppression is not a political issue, it's a wrong or right issue. There was no middle ground or compromise to be sought.

 

[Subway Tennis]

But you think economic pressure is acceptable. Vlad's wealth is reported to be worth over $100 billion per some estimates, plus the oligarchs' own war chest is known to be in the Bs. You think these sanctions will have much impact on them? Again this is about influencing the Russian public who in turn can influence Putin.



Let's keep this in perspective. We're not talking about punishing everyday Russians toiling at a foreign bank or in some Western orchestra, but star athletes and artists worth millions. Their likelihood of "ruin" is about as high as my being wrong. They'll be fine no matter what.

Anyhoo since you're clearly not ready to admit I'm right about everything despite a mountain of evidence here's an apropos interview with a brave countryman of yours:

Russian conductor suspended for peace speech

A day after the start of the invasion of Ukraine, Ivan Velikanov stood up for peace on stage in the Russian city of Nizhny Novgorod. That resulted in immediate consequences for the star conductor.

www.dw.com

The money quote:



Then let's make sure it affects the right people. Canning a real Vlad apologist like Valery Gergiev makes sense. Banning an entire team is iffier, but still defensible as they represent the country. But going after individual athletes is undesirable especially when they've denounced the war a la Rublev or even Med, unless they've exposed themselves otherwise.

You've given Octorok a much-needed history lesson over the course of the thread.

 

[Dan Lobb]

Name a player other Ashe remotely critical of the South African government at that time. Saying "I keep sports and politics separate" is a dodge, especially there is nothing "political" about oppression. Oppression is not a political issue, it's a wrong or right issue. There was no middle ground or compromise to be sought.

There were many, I have no doubt. Which ones did not play in South Africa and made a speech about it.

 

[NonP]

The money has to be worth something. If Europe blocks financial interactions with them, their wealth will mean nothing to Europe.

Looks like this is worth revisiting. Here's a recent verdict from an academic who does know what she's talking about:

How effective have economic sanctions been against Russia? – News Bureau

news.illinois.edu

So the jury is still out. Of course the best-case scenario is they become moot, but it's looking increasingly likely that this thing (nice euphemism to avoid the deletion ax, eh?) will drag on longer than any of us would like.

Everyday Russians are punished too, make no mistake (not that you ever do, huh? roflmao). This is a sort of indirect punishment too since sports is a nice distraction in these trying times.

Of course I understand these stars and celebs employ and support everyday Russians, whose bank account in turn affects their families, etc. Still nothing compared to the sanctions.

Correct moi if I'm wrong but I've read sports and entertainment have all but disappeared from your country's most popular TV channels. Like you I also thought they'd keep the distractions on precisely to distract from the "operation," but alas your (older) compatriots seem to prefer the substitutes. That's (one of the reasons) why I've soured on the cultural boycott.

That's a good one. Looks like he was cancelled a bit, not much but that's already too much of course. I'll be checking to see if anything else happens (hopefully not).

I'm not seeing any recent news about Velikanov so I'm guessing they let him quietly serve his suspension and get on with his life and career.

Banning individual athletes on the basis of their nationality, when they aren't state-funded and may barely spend time in Russia at all like our tennis players, would be correctly perceived as significant discrimination, and would make Russians resent the West more, even those who already resent Putin. That's what I'm talking about. Obviously, the news of banning Russian athletes in team sports has already generated a good deal of negativity, but as you said there's at least an argument for it since they receive state funding hence may be considered to represent the state. Individual performers only represent themselves and their country by association, not the state (government). Yet some sports federations have already done it. Some justice they care about, brownie "virtue" points.

To me and I'm sure millions of others the matter of state funding isn't very relevant. From an old (read: nuked) thread:

I keep seeing this distinction put forth and it still strikes me as one without a difference. No individual is completely free of state support and purview, and especially outside the West it's customary for public figures to declare that they're not only representing themselves but also their home country when they participate in any public endeavor, be it sports, the arts, business, etc.

Maybe this artificial demarcation has to do with a real difference in culture. Call it a cliche if you will but the West or at least America does tend to be more individualistic than the rest of the world. Hence our freak-out over mask wearing and vaccination, both of which are widely accepted practices in (East) Asia.

So this discussion may well be a predominately Western phenomenon. Because of the language barrier it's hard to say what some random Japanese or Indonesian layperson would say about all this, but my guess is that they'd be less inclined to think an individual athlete somehow leaves his nationality behind when he competes in any singles match or contest, or even that individual and state can be so neatly separated.

You've given Octorok a much-needed history lesson over the course of the thread.

LOL, Octorok made a series of valid point himself and as you can tell I've revised my own position over the past few weeks. It's obvious decent, reasonable people can and do disagree on this, and that's fine.

 

[AnOctorokForDinner]

Correct moi if I'm wrong but I've read sports and entertainment have all but disappeared from your country's most popular TV channels. Like you I also thought they'd keep the distractions on precisely to distract from the "operation," but alas your (older) compatriots seem to prefer the substitutes. That's (one of the reasons) why I've soured on the cultural boycott.

International sports are no longer televised indeed. This is portrayed as 'countersanctions', a matter of (tainted...) national pride: you bar our athletes from competition, then we won't even watch your pathetic tournaments. Add to that to many TV contracts did get canceled by the western side, so when it comes especially to less popular sports like tennis, they can't be shown on TV even if broadcasters would have liked to keep them. I don't think any international sporting event has been shown on TV over the last few weeks, only domestic stuff (football, hockey, basketball...). People watch online now. I've been watching tennis mostly online for years anyway so it's nothing new to me.

I'm not seeing any recent news about Velikanov so I'm guessing they let him quietly serve his suspension and get on with his life and career.

Looks like it. He hasn't said anything topical either since then. Making his position known once was excellent as it was, no one could mistake him for a Putin supporter after that.

So this discussion may well be a predominately Western phenomenon. Because of the language barrier it's hard to say what some random Japanese or Indonesian layperson would say about all this, but my guess is that they'd be less inclined to think an individual athlete somehow leaves his nationality behind when he competes in any singles match or contest, or even that individual and state can be so neatly separated.

The country vs state distinction (obviously, not a state like a US state [confusing terminology you've got there], rather the way the country is officially organised, like government, judiciary etc) sure matters in Russian culture. 'I love my country so much but hate the state' is one of Pushkin's most famous lines, and a sentiment the common Russian can certainly understand, whether he shares it or not at the moment. The concept of country includes language, culture, nature, character... anything that makes us, that defines what Russia and Russians are. The state is the country in its 'official' aspect, tied to the government first and foremost. Tennis is really an independent sport in that regard; the players who've made it on tour are not connected to the government or tennis federation (whose figureheads like to claim they contributed to the eventual success of Medvedev et al., and these claims are unanimously called out by tennis fans every time). You don't watch Rublev and feel he plays for the motherland (except in team competition, duh); his nationality is just a reminder that he represents us because he is one of us, he was born and grew up as a Russian in Russia so of course he represents Russia(ns) in tennis. The Russian players who switched to play for Kazakhstan to get better funding (the RusTenFed is quite stingy, I expect the higher-ups appropriate some money for themselves) are still Russians and I root for them just as much (read: not always - no unquestioning patriotic zeal here - but more often than not, depending on who they play). I'm sure many (though I can't tell if most) share the sentiment.

LOL, Octorok made a series of valid point himself and as you can tell I've revised my own position over the past few weeks. It's obvious decent, reasonable people can and do disagree on this, and that's fine.

Ha, you can be nice if you put your mind to it, after all.

 

[NonP]

International sports are no longer televised indeed. This is portrayed as 'countersanctions', a matter of (tainted...) national pride: you bar our athletes from competition, then we won't even watch your pathetic tournaments. Add to that to many TV contracts did get canceled by the western side, so when it comes especially to less popular sports like tennis, they can't be shown on TV even if broadcasters would have liked to keep them. I don't think any international sporting event has been shown on TV over the last few weeks, only domestic stuff (football, hockey, basketball...). People watch online now. I've been watching tennis mostly online for years anyway so it's nothing new to me.

I was wondering if even (legal) online streaming had been canceled. Good to know you guys have that option at least.

The country vs state distinction (obviously, not a state like a US state [confusing terminology you've got there], rather the way the country is officially organised, like government, judiciary etc) sure matters in Russian culture. 'I love my country so much but hate the state' is one of Pushkin's most famous lines, and a sentiment the common Russian can certainly understand, whether he shares it or not at the moment. The concept of country includes language, culture, nature, character... anything that makes us, that defines what Russia and Russians are. The state is the country in its 'official' aspect, tied to the government first and foremost. Tennis is really an independent sport in that regard; the players who've made it on tour are not connected to the government or tennis federation (whose figureheads like to claim they contributed to the eventual success of Medvedev et al., and these claims are unanimously called out by tennis fans every time). You don't watch Rublev and feel he plays for the motherland (except in team competition, duh); his nationality is just a reminder that he represents us because he is one of us, he was born and grew up as a Russian in Russia so of course he represents Russia(ns) in tennis. The Russian players who switched to play for Kazakhstan to get better funding (the RusTenFed is quite stingy, I expect the higher-ups appropriate some money for themselves) are still Russians and I root for them just as much (read: not always - no unquestioning patriotic zeal here - but more often than not, depending on who they play). I'm sure many (though I can't tell if most) share the sentiment.

FYI when English speakers contrast the individual and the state they invariably mean nation-state. But yeah, I often forget you're a native Russian after all. Consider that a compliment if you wish.

Country vs. state (vs. nation) is a classic brainteaser and the definitions and parameters no doubt depend much on one's culture and background, which is actually what I was getting at. It's obvious people have very different notions of when and where a person's nationality begins and ends and also about how and why. During the Winter Os I followed the convo around Eileen Gu's decision to play for China and found none of it (including her own rationale) very satisfying. We're seeing more of the same conflicting ideas, interests and allegiances today, with obviously far higher stakes.

I still remember some of your countrymen (or women in this case, from another forum) telling moi about Shvedova and other Russian players switching to Kazakhstan for better funding, and given the more recent exodus it doesn't look like RTF has gotten less stingy. Of course the sanctions ain't helping.

Ha, you can be nice if you put your mind to it, after all.

LOL y'all would be surprised at how mellow I am IRL. I'm perfectly pleasant... most of the time.

 

[Dane_is_Finnish_OJ]

You are assuming that playing in South Africa represents indifference, and that is a huge assumption.

Would you have played?

 

[Dan Lobb]

Would you have played?

That would depend on how much of a celebrity I was. The more celebrated, the more clout.

 

[Dane_is_Finnish_OJ]

That would depend on how much of a celebrity I was. The more celebrated, the more clout.

I you were global superstar, Brad Gilbert?

 

[Dan Lobb]

I you were global superstar, Brad Gilbert?

You talking to me?