Interesting perspective from the Head of The Baldwin School...
First, celebrating Williams' 31 Grand Slam final — this one, exactly a year after she gave birth to her first child — reminds kids that healthy competitiveness is an asset and that girls shouldn't stop themselves from being aggressive and ambitious. While boys seem to naturally absorb that idea, it's something that we shy away from encouraging in young women — and is one reason why, by age 14, girls stop playing competitive sports twice as often as boys. This despite the fact that embracing one's competitive spirit is critical for career success, particularly at senior leadership levels. Serena Williams is exactly the role model our girls need, showing them that inner competitiveness is a good thing.
http://www2.philly.com/philly/opinion/commentary/serena-williams-naomi-osaka-us-open-grand-slam-feminism-20180910.html
Um...this isn't a question of style. This was about breaking rules, having them applied, and acting as though one should be exempt from those rules.
Wonder what Serena would've said about her daughter and the next gen and women, if her opponent had been the one to throw that tantrum.
She probably would’ve been cool with her opponent’s passion and competitive spirit.
Did you read the article or just the pull quote? If you recognize where this perspective is com8ng from, the head of an all girl independent school on the Main Line, you would understand this goes beyond “rules.”
But then again, you’ve spent years screaming about “Deflategate.”
Gee, Larry, you really don't get it.
My perspective doesn't come from an article or what someone else is telling me. Unlike you, I watched the match.
Try reading Martina's take.
I presented a perspective.
I’ve also watched Serena since she had braces and wore beads in her hair. I’ve seen Serena get blown off the court in the first set and be down big in the second; express her fury and frustration (scream to the heavens, smash her racket and stamp her feet) then take the set and blow out her opponent in the third.
Serena has been the same player with the same temperament for more than twenty years and yes, I dropped in on the match from time to time and was thoroughly impressed with Osaka’s tenacity and drive... I thought she was gonna win her first major, but... we know Serena’s record.
The rationale of the Chair ump saying she “received coaching” from the stands is something I found staggering. After TWENTY years at the HIGHEST level what could anyone tell her during a match?
That’s a warning at best. At that point the ump says “play on.” Nah, he then inserted himself into the match. She would’ve been beaten by Osaka who was young scrappy and hungry as was Serena twenty years ago and she should have been celebrated as such.
But no, the ump escalated the shit because HE was gonna show the GOAT who was in charge, despite the fact he and everyone else in women’s tennis gets exponentially more money on the tour because of the Williams sisters.
I agree with a lot of what Martina wrote, but she seems to have forgotten what happened when her doubles partner, Pam Shriver, beat her at the US Open in ‘82 denying her the grand slam and $500k bonus and Martina, after the match, said she was suffering from exposure to a cat.
I just think the Chair Ump went out of his way to make the match about him and not the players. The reactions to Serena, (meltdown, tantrum, hissy fit) demonstrates a tremendous lack of respect.
Hell, McEnroe got endorsements for his temperament, Ilie Nastase earned his nickname, Ana Kournikova and other players got huge endorsements for winning... nothing.
I get it, Utley. I just don’t agree because as I often say here, I view the world through a different prism.
Poll
5 (45.5%)