
Perhaps I am too judgemental, but to me it seems as though some athletes now spend as much time complaining as they do performing. It’s almost as if complaining has become a part of the performance, a very tedious one at that, since most complaints appear to have little or no foundation. Nowhere is this truer than in football.
Not a game goes by without a player rolling on the floor in supposed agony before being back on their feet and effortlessly sprinting around moments later. Some argue that diving is a part of the game. Well, disease is a part of life, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t work to eradicate it.
And the juvenile behaviour doesn’t end on the pitch. Take Didier Drogba’s sideline outbursts about supposed unfairness. Or Ferguson’s multiple touchline bans, and his complete banning of the media too of course. It doesn’t end with football of course. Who could forget Serena Williams’ hissy fit at a line judge at last year’s US Open, or this year’s, for that matter. Thank god for Hawkeye - without it we would still be in an age of screaming fits over line calls.
All of this contributes to an atmosphere of petulance and immaturity in sport, where it is those who kick up the most fuss that get their way, or at least get the attention. Of course, the most recent example of this petulance comes from Carlos Tevez, who refused to come on and play for Manchester City - a move not only of extreme stupidity, in my opinion, but also one that displayed a worrying attitude of entitlement that seems to pervade football culture.
It’s not just the spoilt brat syndrome that makes itself known among athletes. There is also a worrying trend of players behaving in a rather precious manner. Perhaps the most recent example of this was in the tennis world at the 2011 US Open, where players hinted at the possibility of a strike after being made to play in wet conditions. This strike never materialised of course, since it was, largely, an empty threat. The players may want change, but none want it so much that they are about to sacrifice tournament points to get it.
Rafael Nadal was the most vocal of the players when airing their issues with the tournament directors, commenting that he wasn't given enough warning as to when he was going to need to be on court. If Nadal feels as though he is being slightly rushed, that’s too bad. But the other player is given no more lenience and at the end of the day, any player worth his salt should be able to handle challenges and unusual circumstances, and play through them with a little more grace.
Equally, running to the media to complain about the situation screams of a player having a tantrum, since most of them have been around press for much of their careers and know exactly how they operate. It should be pointed out that Novak Djokovic was nowhere to be seen in the fracas. He went on to win the tournament. Could this be a lesson to some?
And it’s not as though this is the first time Nadal has felt that there is something to complain about. He has regularly aired his opinions on the jam-packed nature of the tour schedule. Djokovic has spent this year’s Asian swing of the tour recuperating after an injury. Will he come out at the end of the year with complaints over scheduling? I doubt it.
If he does, I would bet that they are not as vehement as Nadal’s, probably because his injury, unlike Nadal’s, has little to do with scheduling. Nadal, as an extremely physical player, finds the long tour more challenging on his body than other players do. Every athlete wants the rules to work to their advantage, and an attempt at manipulating it to be so is perhaps acceptable, but outright and continued whinging is not.
If players feel as though they are put in a compromised position, they have every right to refuse to participate. Nadal’s comments at the US Open indicated he felt as though the tournament directors were more concerned about making money than they were about players’ safety. What would Nadal have sacrificed by refusing to play? Supposedly money and points. And yet he chose to play. If the players themselves do not value their safety over money, what do they expect from the tournament directors?
The recent deaths of Dan Wheldon and Marco Simoncelli show that safety in sport is by no means something that should taken lightly. If an athlete ever feels as though they are in genuine danger of getting hurt or worse, they have every right to challenge those they believe to be endangering them, but to do so and then continue to play in conditions you have said are unsafe tends to undermine your argument.
Of course, we cannot completely blame the players. Sport and its fans have perhaps also become a little precious in recent years. Compare the punishments awarded to John McEnroe, at the height of one of his frenzied verbal attacks on the umpire, and Andy Roddick, who was penalised in Cincinnati for hitting a ball into the stands in a moment of frustration. Admittedly, Roddick was wrong to remonstrate with the umpire. However, it is a mark of how much standards have changed that such an event was treated with as harsh a punishment as a penalty point, which are rarely used in the game.
The same is perhaps true of fans. Nowadays, a football player so much as picks up a cigarette or has a few too many pints and the moment is captured and played out on the national, sometimes international stage. As such the relevance of certain actions can often be blown out of proportion, with the public jumping on the judgement bandwagon.
All that being said, I stand by the point of view that we are entering an age of pampered athletes who’s every demand and whim is catered to, largely thanks to their ‘celebrity status.’ It’s about time that we as fans stopped idolising athletes and giving them a god-like status.
Their feats are impressive and deserve applause and support, no doubt. But we should not expect or accept low standards of behaviour from them any more than we would from the person working in the office next door to us. At the end of the day, we’re all just doing our jobs.

| < Prev | Next > |
|---|







