Tue 1 Feb 2022 08.00 GMTan a thing feel entirely impossible and entirely inevitable all at once? This, perhaps, was the paradox of the most recent: once it began you could already glimpse how it ended. We’ve all been doing this for 15 years. The muscle memory is too strong, the emotional liturgy too deeply ingrained.
With just a modicum of distance, it’s possible to observe what a strange and diminishing state of affairs this is: the men’s half of an entire sport reduced to the level of a pub debate, a swirling and interminable noise that seems to have sucked all the oxygen and a good deal of the fun out of the room.
At what point does this stop feeling relevant or constructive or remotely interesting and become an industrial waste of everyone’s time? This isn’t Nadal’s fault, any more than it is the fault of Roger Federer or. Rather, the problem is with men’s tennis itself, the people who cover it, the people who follow it and the people who market it: a panoply of well-meaning characters who in the past few years have begun to indulge the sport’s myth-making to a vaguely unhinged degree.
The same is true of power. For all their excellence on the court, there has been a self-perpetuating element to the Big Three, a dynasty that has been enabled and encouraged, often by the same organisations responsible for broadening opportunity.
Law Law Latest News, Law Law Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Source: smh - 🏆 6. / 80 Read more »