It would be unwise to ignore the diligence and expertise of three respected lawyers who have been investigating match-fixing in tennis for more than two years and concluded on Wednesday that there was a “tsunami” of corruption on the fringes of the game.
Similarly, though, it would be witless to assume the game is about to collapse in a steaming pile of shame. It is a long way from Centre Court at Wimbledon, where the saints of the game dress in white, to the echoing outposts where only friends and family are witnesses to the shenanigans of sinners, a significant handful of desperate part-timers masquerading as full-time professional athletes, who have no qualms about manipulating the markets to take home what generally amounts to ill-gotten pocket money.
What tennis is also defending, however, is its image, a very marketable commodity indeed – and it goes by the generic term, integrity.
The Independent Review of Integrity in Tennis has deliberated since February 2016 and was set up in response to claims in a joint BBC/Buzzfeed investigation, and a Guardian probe into corrupt umpires in the Futures tour, that rocked administrators midway through the Australian Open. The review handed down its interim report in London on Wednesday.
The panel investigated the activities of more than 3,000 suspect players, and spent an estimated £15m shining a light on all corners of the game. It found there were no cover-ups or collusion at the top. But nearly 15% of players said they had first-hand knowledge of match-fixing. That is no small number.
The panel therefore suggested the International Tennis Federation withdraw from its £50m sponsorship deal with the Swiss data collection company Sportradar – due to end in 2020 – because its supply of live scores contributes to the temptation for players to gamble on matches beyond the normal scrutiny of authorities. This created a “fertile breeding ground” for dodgy betting, it said.
Part of the problem, the report said, was the money outside the main Tour is so poor that only 336 of the men and 253 women players even remotely break even. That sounds about right. A tiny minority of those in this category fall prey to bookmakers and their charms. Many of them, though, play just for the pleasure. While they know they will never properly “make it”, they are doing something they love.
It is the same at the top, as it happens – except that Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray, along with perhaps another 100 or so exceptional players, earn so much they can indulge their love of the game without worrying about “extras”. It would, indeed, be a daft bookmaker who even thought of asking any established player to throw a tennis match.
For now, at least, the tsunami rumbles in the distance. The forecast is good to fair.
Djokovic may wonder if his best will ever return
As every tennis fan knows, Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray began life within a week of each other, nearly 31 years ago. However, having tracked each to the top of their sport, they have lately slid back to the field as if on the same toboggan, and it is intriguing to speculate whose career will finish first.
At the moment it is Djokovic – who leads Murray 12 majors to three – who looks to be struggling more, worryingly so in Barcelona on Wednesday when he lost in three sets of inconsistency to the world No140, Martin Klizan.
He will have some serious conversations with his restored coach, Marian Vajda, as they plot a path to Roland Garros, where only two years ago he became the third player to hold all four majors at once. It is tempting to assume that his unconvincing partnership with Andre Agassi, which began at last year’s French Open and officially ended this month, has disguised a deeper malaise than the elbow injury that has hampered him for more than two years.
Djokovic joined Murray on the sidelines after having to quit against Tomas Berdych in the quarter-finals at Wimbledon last summer, and, like the Scot, then pulled out of the US Open. They both reluctantly decided to risk surgery this year, but the Scot has resisted the temptation to scratch the itch and resume playing before he is ready. The Serb, meanwhile, has now won five and lost five of his comeback matches in 2018. It is a long time since Djokovic was a 50-50 proposition going into any tournament.
His losses this year have come against 58th ranked Hyeon Chung, Taro Daniel (109), Benoit Paire (47), Dominic Thiem (7) and Klizan, who was a bit of a prodigy before injury.
Djokovic never looked comfortable against Klizan, apart from raising his level in the second set, and he badly needs a deep run in a tournament – any tournament. He was abject at the finish, as if he wanted to get off the court, a look we have not seen since his early days.
Klizan, gifted but inconsistent, is one of the game’s sleepers. Two years ago in Rotterdam, the strong left-hander saved five match points and inflicted a third-set bagel on Roberto Bautista Agut, who’d won 13 of 14 previous matches – and 24 hours later he came from 3-5 down in the second to put Nicholas Mahut out in the semi-finals. In the final, he saved three match points against Gael Monfils to win his fourth ATP Tour final from four appearances.
He does not lack for resilience, but he often doubts he is good enough to beat the best – even though his fellow professionals voted him the best newcomer of 2012. Injury has cursed the 28-year-old Slovak since then, but on Wednesday everything clicked and he was worth his 6-2, 1-6, 6-3 win.
Djokovic must have thought at some point in the match that he was watching a minor version of himself years ago. The conundrum for him now is: will he ever get that back?