It was Friday the 13th. So it wasn’t a huge surprise that a few wacky events took place at Wimbledon.
But what transpired, from 1 p.m. when John Isner and Kevin Anderson walked onto Centre Court until 11:05 p.m., when Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic walked off with unfinished business, was beyond anyone’s imagination.
Chapter 5 is called Choices, Choices, Choices
WIMBLEDON – We’ll have to assume, for the sake of argument, that there was no way for the All England Club to get special dispensation from the Merton Borough Council to break curfew – just this once.
Because a 1 a.m. finish for Djokovic vs. Nadal Friday night into Saturday would have been a better solution for all concerned.
The winner of the match could have slept in Saturday, perhaps had a light hit, a lot of treatment. And then, on Sunday, play the final.
As it is, one of them had to play late Friday, relatively early Saturday – and again on Sunday, where he will face the equally exhausted Kevin Anderson.
Anderson spent over 11 hours on court from Wednesday through Friday, just in two extra-time matches against John Isner and Roger Federer.
11:03 p.m.: the end
If the All England Club had the option somehow, and didn’t exercise it, it did two of its illustrious former champions a disservice.
As it was, they returned to the court just 14 hours later to finish where they left off Friday night, when Djokovic squeezed out the third-set tiebreak to lead two sets to one.
The decision to start their semifinal – which kicked off around 8 p.m. because of the length of the Anderson-Isner marathon – under the roof was up to the referee, Andrew Jarrett.
It made sense, because there wasn’t going to be much daylight left, and better to take the time to close the roof and get the air-conditioning systems adjusted during the break after the first match.
It was going to have to happen anyway at some point, and time was precious.
The decision to resume on a beautiful, sunny Saturday with the roof closed was also Jarrett’s. Except, if both players agreed to play “outdoors”, with the roof open, at what is an outdoor tournament, it could have been changed even if it wasn’t a hard and fast rule.
One wanted to, one did not, is the general consensus although there’s no official confirmation from any of the parties involved at this point.
No. 1 Court option not an option
There certainly is precedent at Wimbledon for a men’s semifinal to be played on No. 1 Court.
We tend to forget all the years when rain played havoc with the schedule, often threatening to prevent the tournament from finishing on time. And a couple of times, it actually did.
But as former finalist Andy Roddick pointed out Friday night on Twitter, he’s been there.
Once he was moved over to finish. On the second occasion, he played the entire match there.
Both times, he won, and ended up losing to Roger Federer in the final.
But Djokovic vs. Nadal in 2018 is not Roddick vs. Ancic, or Roddick vs. Johansson a dozen years ago.
No offense to those two fine players.
There was virtually no chance in Hades the tournament would move Nadal and Djokovic to No. 1 Court to finish their match.
Beyond the television considerations, the players likely would have both raised a ruckus.
It would have eliminated the roof-or-no-roof choice, though.
Had the second semifinal featured, say, Alexander Zverev and Grigor Dimitrov, you can speculate it might have been a different story. Had the women’s final not featured Williams, it might have been another story again.
Maybe.
The women pay the price – again
The way the schedule panned out, part of it no one’s fault, is a tough one for the men.
But it’s an even tougher one for the women.
Seven-time champion Serena Williams and two-time Grand Slam champion Angelique Kerber will reprise their 2016 final.
Except they had no clue when they would play. They couldn’t be sure when to eat, when to warm up, when to do anything.
And that was especially key because of the lack of a fifth-set tiebreak for the men.
At precisely 1 p.m. Saturday, when they were due to walk on Centre Court with their flower bouquets, Nadal was just wrapping up the fourth set against Djokovic.
Didn’t it seem as though we were beyond this back in the 1990s, when they finally did away with the facetiously-named Super Saturday at the US Open?
For a couple of decades, the women were an afterthought. They were the white creme between the two Oreo cookies as CBS dictated they be scheduled between the two men’s semifinals on the second Saturday.
Mercifully, that finally ended.
Serena and her sister Venus had everything to do with this when, back in 2001, it was decided that they could headline a night session with their significant star power.
The end of CBS’s longstanding contract as the event’s main broadcaster also allowed for more flexibility.
And then, the fact that someone finally decided that having the men play best-of-five sets on the Saturday, and come right back on the Sunday afternoon and play another best-of-five sets for a major title didn’t make for optimal tennis.
Well, maybe they considered that. Maybe.
Super Saturday to the max
The epic moment in Super Saturday history came on Sept. 8, 1984. Every match went the distance and every player on court that day was a champion.
First off was a legends’ match that began at 11 a.m. when Stan Smith defeated John Newcombe. Ironically, CBS had requested that extra match because the previous year’s Super Saturday had featured three blowouts.
Then came the first men’s semi: Ivan Lendl defeated Pat Cash 3–6, 6–3, 6–4, 6–7 (5–7), 7–6 (7–4). (Thank goodness for the fifth-set tiebreak).
Then, finally, the legendary Chris Evert and Martina Navratilova came on to play the women’s singles final.
Navratilova won that one, 4–6, 6–4, 6–4.
Then, closing in on 7:30 p.m., bitter rivals John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors finally took the court for the second men’s semi.
McEnroe won that one, 6–4, 4–6, 7–5, 4–6, 6–3. It all ended at 11:16 p.m.
Women’s doubles also a casualty
With Nadal and Djokovic taking priority on Centre Court, one of the other finals was bumped off.
Of course, it was the women’s doubles final between Barbora Krejcikova and Katerina Siniakova and Nicole Melichar and Kveta Peschke.
They had been scheduled after the women’s singles final and the best-of-five sets men’s doubles final.
That’s long enough to wait (and with the men’s doubles also not having a deciding-set tiebreak, who knows how long).
But with the change, they have been relegated to “Court to be determined – not before 5 p.m.” status along with the far less consequential legends match featuring Thomas Enqvist, Thomas Johansson, Tommy Haas and Mark Philippoussis.
So they don’t know when they’re going to play. And they don’t know where.
It’s thin soup. Even given the extraordinary circumstances, you feel somehow that the tournament could have made better choices.
About Post Author
More Stories
ATP Rankings Report – As of Aug. 26, 2024
WTA Rankings Report – As of Aug. 26, 2024
Canucks This Week – Week ending Sept. 1, 2024 (Sunday results)