DreddyTennis45
Hall of Fame
Any implications?
What does #Brexit mean for tennis?
- Thread starter DreddyTennis45
- Start date
tennis_pro
Bionic Poster
Murray will now beat Djokovic at Wimbledon to "make up for it".
J
JRAJ1988
Guest
I asked the same style of question on Odds and Ends, I'm guessing Brexit will effect Football, as say if Arsenal singed Buffon from Juventus which will never happen lol, he'd need a work permit to play in the UK I'm guessing.
Chicharito
Hall of Fame
Well it means Scottish independence is almost certain. So Murray may play the the very end of his career as a Scot and not a Brit.
too late to make a difference but all that history he made for British tennis could have been gone.
The Wimbledon prize money is worth about 10% less due to the pound's plummet.
too late to make a difference but all that history he made for British tennis could have been gone.
The Wimbledon prize money is worth about 10% less due to the pound's plummet.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
Djokovic will need more time to cross Fed in prize money earned in real terms
chacmool
Rookie
he wont have any reason to win then
he will be Scottish either way
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
He'll be winning it for Scotland though (who will unilaterally declare independence the day before the final).
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
The history will still be there, you can't retrospectively say that Murray represented Scotland when he won the Olympic Gold, US Open, Wimbledon and Davis Cup. Just like Lendl's triumphs are (for the vast majority of his career) counted as successes by a Czech player.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
He could apply for dual citizenship when Scotland becomes independent (which now seems inevitable) presuming there will be a similar arrangement as for dual British/Irish citizenship. Either way, I will still be supporting him!
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Exactly. You can't retroactively alter history to make it fit with present day realities. Murray won Wimbledon as a British player and that will always be the case no matter whether he will remain British in the future or not.
Chicharito
Hall of Fame
yes that is why I said it won't make a difference to the history he created.
Phoenix1983
G.O.A.T.
Sorry, misread what you said ("could have been gone" rather than "will be gone").
joe sch
Legend
Thanks for stating that history can Not be changed.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Shrinking talent pool.
Bhagi Katbamna
Legend
Honestly surprised that a vote for self governance would be so close.
BreakPoint
Bionic Poster
Players from other EU countries will not be allowed into the U.K. to compete at Wimbledon. 
kalyan4fedever
Legend
Things are looking good , Britain is paying for the crimes and atrocities it has committed against India and looting trillions of dollars of wealth making it a poor nation to start all over.......I hope scotland calls for another referendum and we can watch the filthy british empire collapse
, Britain is paying for the crimes and atrocities it has committed against India and looting trillions of dollars of wealth making it a poor nation to start all over.......I hope scotland calls for another referendum and we can watch the filthy british empire collapse
jm1980
Talk Tennis Guru
When did India ever have "trillions of dollars of wealth"?Things are looking good
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Things are looking good
Don't forget, many of them were Scots!
Skol Gophers
New User
Once Scotland becomes independent then the British Davis Cup team will lose its top talent.
newpball
Legend
Mainad
Bionic Poster
British tennis in general would lose its top talent. Let's hope the Murrays opt for dual nationality (just as I am about to do)!
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
The colonies were generally full of resources and wealth but there's no way to realistically measure how much they were worth because the measures were completely different to what is known today. Obviously the documented wealth taken away from India is by itself considerable but I doubt it's worth trillions.When did India ever have "trillions of dollars of wealth"?
kalyan4fedever
Legend
Scots are much better in my opinion, they came in contact with the power and money hungry jealous britishers(not current) and some qualities might've rubbed offDon't forget, many of them were Scots!
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Don't be naive. Why do you think they agreed to the union with England in the first place? Because they wanted a piece of the action!
C
Chadillac
Guest
Murrays taxes in scatland will double, moves in next to djok in monte carlo
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
Never mess with The Boss.
Boris Becker will show up Monday at SW19 and find Boris Johnson's bicycle in his parking spot.
Antonio Puente
Hall of Fame
About 70 years too late on that one.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
You won't see me post insults about the Japanese for things that happened seventy years ago, so how this ironically bigoted pillock is still posting on these boards Scot-free (pun intended) is a mystery.
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
To be fair colonisation was a long and enduring process with no real fault of the colonies while the World War consisted of severe mistakes on both sides. A lot of people from the colonies are still sensitive about the whole issue not least because many were forced to fight in the war while their own people served as slaves under the 'Raj' and faced severe apartheid. It's not bigoted at all. The Japanese were tried for war crimes. Who put the English on trial? A little knowledge of history is all it takes.
Anyway, this IS political however. Not a place to discuss it for sure.
toby55555
Hall of Fame
Odd thing is I have three Indian work colleagues and they all voted to Leave. I suppose they think it will be easier for Indians to come here to work or at least a level playing field.Things are looking good
toby55555
Hall of Fame
It was because Scotland had bankrupted itself due to investments in the Darien company.Don't be naive. Why do you think they agreed to the union with England in the first place? Because they wanted a piece of the action!
toby55555
Hall of Fame
I may be wrong but I believe all prize money is paid in U.S dollars.
MichaelNadal
Bionic Poster
MatsPhilander
Legend
N
Navdeep Srivastava
Guest
Are you sure? From what I heard most of the Indians and Indians companies don't wanted to leave EU , some of the companies has a base in England for EU trade and now they have to start it from beginning and have to find new base.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
You make it sound as if colonisation, slave labour, and apartheid is unique to the British colonisation of India. "The Indians under the Brits had it worse than SE and E Asia under the Japanese because the Japanese were tried for their war crimes and the Brits did not" is a huge oversimplification to the point of absurdity, the same way that it would be stupid to say that E Asia had it worse because the Brits didn't exactly experiment on Indians as the Japanese did on Chinese and Korean men, women, and children in Unit 731.
As you said, a little history is all it takes. As far as I can sympathise with bitterness over war crimes--my grandmother narrowly escaped gang rape in a Japanese barracks in her teens, and spent the rest of the colonial era having her national identity systematically erased literally at the end of katana. I ironically owe the Japanese my existence, which in itself is a confusing thing to recognise.
But guess what--would the actions of long dead people seventy years ago justify me in saying that the Japanese deserved to be hit by the tsunami a few years back? No, because just because they're Japanese doesn't mean they deserve punishment, in the same way the English or today don't deserve to suffer financial ruin because of their war crimes in India 70 years ago. This is punishment for sheer stupidity, naïvety, and xenophobia on the part of many of those who voted for Brexit. This as a punishment for colonisation of India is a non sequitur at this point, as the only relationship between the two are the nationalities. So yes, it is bigotry, and he's completely out of order--he can take that resentment where it is needed, not here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
You missed my point completely.
1) I didn't say the colonies had it worse than x or y subjects of subjugation.
2) Yes, there is a difference between the Brits and the Japanese in that the Tokyo trials brought some semblance of accountability and reparations to the victims. And that makes a difference historically because Britain never made any form of reparations to its colonies after nearly two centuries of subjugation. Probably more. And I won't go into the human rights violations here because it'll pretty much take all day long. Besides, what happened in Hiroshima further reshaped the narrative in the war. Britain on the other hand, came out looking heroic in the aftermath, when nothing could be further away from the truth. Additionally, the colonial history in England is often retold in a way that justifies the whole thing. That is what has added to the resentment among the former colonies that spills over inappropriately at times.
3) There's a distinction between bigotry and resentment. And honestly, as you yourself admit, the financial turmoil at present is a result of prevailing xenophobia which means the Brits haven't changed much since 70 years ago. Indeed Africa was held a colony long after India became independent. Where was the mass opposition in England to this? How do you justify the unjust enrichment via colonialism and now neocolonialism?
But anyway, this is highly OT and I don't want the two of us getting banned over this. I don't wish financial turmoil or natural disasters or any instability on any state in an era of highly inter-linked trade and commerce.
Last edited:
Antonio Puente
Hall of Fame
Why single out the Brits, though? Conquest was the way of the world. The Spanish conquered 1/3 of the world. The French colonized on every continent. The Russians subjugated most of central Asia, all of Siberia, Ukraine, Finland, the Baltic states, Poland, etc. The Chinese subjugated millions, as did the Aztecs, Incas, Turks, Moors, etc., etc. Even the pre-colonized sub-continent of India... India is not and never has been a homogeneous state. Through the various historical kingdoms of India, you had minorities living under the boot of the ruling classes. Factor into that the Indian caste system...
Essentially, if you point a finger at Britain, you are doing so because they were better at it than anyone else. It's understandable that some around the world may harbor negative feelings toward the Brits, but we should probably resist pointing a finger from the modern age.
Essentially, if you point a finger at Britain, you are doing so because they were better at it than anyone else. It's understandable that some around the world may harbor negative feelings toward the Brits, but we should probably resist pointing a finger from the modern age.
Last edited:
mandy01
G.O.A.T.
Yes of course, there was a widespread belief that states had a right to go to war and a right of conquest. The difference was, India had never seen servitude such as the kind the British introduced. India before the advent of the Brits was an empire with many pockets of ruling classes. The wealth of the nation stayed in the nation. The Portuguese and French colonies in India were less dominant and also less abusive so there is correspondingly less resentment towards them.
I agree with you about the caste system which continues to plague the country till date. That however, doesn't offset the Crown's atrocities and the systematic, long-drawn plundering. Not least because Indians themselves were the forerunners of recognising and trying to eliminate the evils of the caste system.
tennisaddict
Bionic Poster
True.. Wishing Tsunami on Japan and getting a kick when British Financial Empire is taking a hit are two very different things.
The poster was well within his rights to express his resentment at over the two century long abuse India suffered at the hands of Britain.
kalyan4fedever
Legend
No, It is entirely possible, Indians will be in more demand now in Britain
N
Navdeep Srivastava
Guest
Ok to be fair , I don't know much about the situation.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Nope it means no such thing. You can't re-write history to fit into future realities. When he won Wimbledon, Murray was a British player and that record can never be altered. Ivan Lendl won most of his Slams as a Czechoslovak player. That can't alter just because Czechs and Slovaks are now different countries. If Scotland does become independent, Murray might opt for dual nationality anyway which means he will stay British and Scottish. But that will be a choice for him of course.
Similar threads
