Pressure on to dump deVilliers [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Pressure on to dump deVilliers

Pages : [1] 2

Fee
04-02-2008, 02:14 AM
http://blogs.sun-sentinel.com/sports_tennisblog/2008/03/pressure-increa.html

March 31, 2008
Pressure increases to get de Villiers out of the ATP
Posted by Charles Bricker at 6:04:21 PM

KEY BISCAYNE -- With fewer than nine months to go on his three-year contract, ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers is facing intensified heat from some of the tour's top players, who want him terminated.

According to one of my best sources, and someone very well connected to ATP politics, several top-20 players have organized a petition that demands that the six-man board of directors not begin negotiations to extend de Villiers' contract past December until they've examined other candidates for the CEO's job.

Obviously, you don't examine other candidates if you're happy with the man who's doing the job and, while the board of directors appears to be solidly behind de Villiers, there are players who are not.

I'm not ready to take this petition at face value because it very likely is a negotiations ploy to get some concessions from the CEO by threatening to raise a united front against his continued employment.

What concessions? For starters, they want someone on the board who is an active player. In short, someone whom they claim will represent the players rather than the corporate heads.

That demand in itself suggests very strongly that there is a major disconnect between the ATP executives and the players and, if that's true, a lot of it is because de Villiers has forced through a number of issues that have not satisfied everyone.

Like moving the Hamburg tournament to a different spot on the calendar and stripping it of its Masters Series status, which has led to a lawsuit that has now cost the ATP an estimated $5-6 million.

There is also the threat of a lawsuit by Nikolay Davydenko, whose name was revealed by the wagering company Betfair and plastered all over every sports section in the world last year because of a suspicious betting pattern in one of his matches. That cloud has been hanging over his head for six months while his attorneys have resisted handing over phone records that they say would invade his privacy. No one has found a smoking gun, but neither has the ATP cleared his name. I'm not saying Davydenko is innocent or guilty, but this is far too long to leave this guy twirling in the wind.,

de Villiers hasn't endeared hmself to some tournament officials, either, including Sony Ericsson tournament chairman Butch Buchholz, who Monday expressed clear unhappiness with de Villiers' decision last year to reduce Masters Series finals from best-of-5 to best-of-3 sets.

de Villiers deserves a defense here. He was hired to replace Mark Miles two and a half years ago and jump-start a tour that was having serious but not lethal problems. He wasn't hired to maintain the status quo. He was hired to make changes and he's moved aggressively ahead with those changes, making enemies in the process. That's too bad but that's what classically happens when you give someone the charge of making changes.

More than once de Villiers has told me, "If the time comes when they don't want me here, I'll resign. But I believe in what I'm doing and the board of directors has backed me unanimously on every major issue."

Some of his decisions have been clear mistakes, like the screwy round robin system that ended up in a terrrible controversy at the Tennis Channel Open in Las Vegas last year. de Villiers initially ignored the ATP's own clear rules to allow James Blake and not Evgeny Korolev moved to the quarterfinals of that tournament. He later admitted his mistake, but it wasn't easily forgotten by some players.

He has had major successes. There is about 30 percent more prize money in the game today than when he took over. He's worked to simplify the calendar. He's gotten more publicity for doubles players than they've ever had.

But the Hamburg controversy, coupled with an attempt to demote the status of Monte Carlo, was a turning point in his relationship with a number of European and South American players who depend on clay court events for points and money.

He found a creative compromise for Monte Carlo, but it hasn't closed all the wounds.

I spoke with Nikolay Davydenko this afternoon and he kept hammering home the lack of communication between the ATP and the players. I said, "Wait a minute. The ATP is the players." His response was that, yes, that's the way it's supposed to be, but that's not the way he perceives it.

The board of directors has three player representatives -- former doubles player Jacco Eltingh, Iggy Jovanovic, who was not a touring pro, and Perry Rogers, who is Andre Agassi's agent.

The top 20 players leading this drive to oust de Villiers say none of those three represents the players but are more interested in representing the tour's financial interests and backing de Villiers' decisions.

But the fact is in an election last June, Rogers was elected over Justin Gimelstob, who would have been an active voice for the players.

No one in his right mind wants de Villiers out right now. There's no one to step in on an interim basis and if he quit it would leave the tour in chaos.

My best guess is he's going to weather this storm, but he's going to have to find some way to make peace with the top-20 players.



The first comment after this article is pretty interesting:

You guess wrong, DeVilliers should resign now. He knows nothing about the game, nor cares about the players. When the top 20 of the sport ask for his departure, he should tender his resignation immediately.

Besides, he says things that aren't true to players, tournament directors, agents and the press.

Who wants a guy whose best interests are not tennis.

Posted by: Norman Canter | March 31, 2008 at 10:29 PM

(Norman Canter works with a number of players through his management company, http://www.renaissancetennis.com/clients.htm )

tangerine_dream
04-02-2008, 03:01 AM
The claycourters don't need any more leverage they have more than enough clay tournaments to play in. :rolleyes:

And what about the other really bad decision of their trying to fix something that isn't broken, such as reducing the successful Masters series to some kind of NASCAR number that nobody can relate to and then plastering it on the net?

FedFan_2007
04-02-2008, 03:14 AM
Terminate Mr. Disney. No 2000/1000 business. Monte Carlo keeps mandatory status. Hamburg stays as a Masters Series. Best of 5 finals in Masters Series makes a comeback starting this clay season.

Action Jackson
04-02-2008, 03:18 AM
Well the fact the tournament directors have too much of a say at what goes on at the ATP and while it's meant to be a players union, it doesn't or hasn't actually worked for their respective interests, which in itself is quite a difficult to define.

De Villiers has made some shocking errors and refused to acknowledge them. Just comes out with ideas for the sake of it, without doing proper research and no that does not mean some loaded questions on a survey, to get biased results.

CooCooCachoo
04-02-2008, 07:22 AM
Disney's fairytale won't have a happy ending, for once.

FedFan_2007
04-02-2008, 07:30 AM
Every Masters Series final should be best of 5, even Toronto/Montreal.

Castafiore
04-02-2008, 07:35 AM
The claycourters don't need any more leverage they have more than enough clay tournaments to play in. :rolleyes:
Compared to HC season and given the very tight schedule of the main clay court season? Yeah, right.

Adler
04-02-2008, 07:52 AM
Every Masters Series final should be best of 5, even Toronto/Montreal.
Fast HC Masters Series events - yes, but only if there's at least one week break between them

Jelena
04-02-2008, 09:18 AM
Would be the best news for long if ATP got rid of Mr. Disney.

Action Jackson
04-02-2008, 09:31 AM
Fast HC Masters Series events - yes, but only if there's at least one week break between them

Rubbish, doesn't matter, the finals should be best of 5 sets.

Action Jackson
04-02-2008, 09:32 AM
Tangerinus, trolling again, if she actually had a look at the calendar closely and genuinely believes what she actually wrote, then that would be almost scary.

Aphex
04-02-2008, 10:04 AM
I feel the pressure to dump on de Villiers too. :o He shouldn't mess with the Masters series. That's a pretty worked in brand name by now. He should've kept 5 sets finals. Top 8 getting byes was ok. I think he should make 7 out 9 mandatory, players could choose which to play. He could use his renaming scheme to find different names for International Series and International Series Gold. Not many people care about which is which. He should have shortened the season by reshuffling events instead of this crazy most money gets it overhaul. Only two weeks shorter a season would make a huge difference I think.

Action Jackson
04-02-2008, 10:06 AM
Good points Aphex, in fact he increased the length of the season for next year.

Funny the clay events, when they are the ones that have been fucked over with the Olympics, whereas the Nth American hardcourt events haven't been shuffled to the same extent.

Nathaliia
04-02-2008, 10:23 AM
Guy should be brought down.

And yeah, if he doesn't clear Davydenko's name, there will come some bad Russians and help him do that :cool:.

TheBoiledEgg
04-02-2008, 10:37 AM
take Mr Disney to Paris and leave him dangling for a week of the Eiffel Tower, that will give him more publicity.

sooner this idiot goes the better

TheBoiledEgg
04-02-2008, 10:39 AM
The claycourters don't need any more leverage they have more than enough clay tournaments to play in. :rolleyes:



there arent enough clay tourns

80% of all tourns are hard either indoors or out.
why didnt the idiot demote Cincinnati or Toronto to a MM level :rolleyes:

Labamba
04-02-2008, 11:32 AM
hopefully he will leave at the end of the year when his contract expires

too many mistakes, the players don't trust him anymore

Rubbish, doesn't matter, the finals should be best of 5 sets.

couldn't agree more

How many great finals have there been since the best of 5 sets finals were removed? None, really. And how many before the change? Plenty of them.

The answers are pretty telling, how can it be good for tennis if there are less great matches every year? :shrug:

Jelena
04-02-2008, 11:59 AM
couldn't agree more

How many great finals have there been since the best of 5 sets finals were removed? None, really. And how many before the change? Plenty of them.

The answers are pretty telling, how can it be good for tennis if there are less great matches every year? :shrug:
I remember when I was at Hamburg qualies 2005, how there were in the afternoon chats about the final of Rome on the same day. (The five-hours final of Rafa and Roger.) Everybody who saw glimpses of the match said, it was an unbelievable match. How often did we talk about great matches, that were only best of three? :scratch: Moya-Rafa in Chennai in January, but others? :unsure: :shrug:

rocketassist
04-02-2008, 12:20 PM
if the ATP are thinking about extending his contract then I might have to stop watching ATP run events in protest.

Hopefully if he goes we can still save the Masters Series and possibly get 5 set finals back.

Fingers crossed!

MrExcel
04-02-2008, 12:24 PM
I refer to my avatar message...

cobalt60
04-02-2008, 01:34 PM
Ah Norman Cantor;) 2 of his clients? Erlich and Ram of course;)

maria_marie
04-02-2008, 01:58 PM
So long Mr. Disney. The only thing he managed to promote successfully is the Hawk Eye system. The round robin was a flop, the new calendar is awful and I reckon that Mercedes doesn't want to extend its sponsorship because Hamburg will no longer be a TMS event. In addition, this year's clay season is too short and Rafa should feel screwed up because he can't defend all his points from last season

PiggyGotRoasted
04-02-2008, 02:17 PM
Hes such an egg:o

Sunset of Age
04-02-2008, 02:41 PM
The sooner he's gone, the better.

From all the fiascos he's caused I think that messing with the already very tight clay court schedule AND the abolishment of 5-set finals in the masters tournaments are the worst decisions made to the sport in the past 20 years.

Get him out... right now.

Jimnik
04-02-2008, 03:01 PM
Round Robin. :retard:

The Davydenko issue. :retard:

The "1000", "500" and "250" Series. :retard:

The abolishment of 5 set finals. :retard: :retard:

Downgrading Halle and Queens when the grass season is already too short and insignificant. :retard: :retard: :retard:

Am I missing anything? Good riddance to this genius.

Shabazza
04-02-2008, 03:22 PM
Round Robin. :retard:

The Davydenko issue. :retard:

The "1000", "500" and "250" Series. :retard:

The abolishment of 5 set finals. :retard: :retard:

Downgrading Halle and Queens when the grass season is already too short and insignificant. :retard: :retard: :retard:

Am I missing anything? Good riddance to this genius.

The sad part is, even if this guy is gone, those changes will stay, unfortunately.

Merton
04-02-2008, 03:35 PM
Mr. Disney should have been fired right after the RR fiasco and the way he mishandled the situation at Las Vegas. The situation now is worse than when he took over, and there is the big question of whether the partnership of technical directors and professional players is viable or the players need to form another union.

Merton
04-02-2008, 03:36 PM
Round Robin. :retard:

The Davydenko issue. :retard:

The "1000", "500" and "250" Series. :retard:

The abolishment of 5 set finals. :retard: :retard:

Downgrading Halle and Queens when the grass season is already too short and insignificant. :retard: :retard: :retard:

Am I missing anything? Good riddance to this genius.

Add cronyism and favouritism towards Tiriac :retard:

tangerine_dream
04-02-2008, 03:43 PM
Tangerinus, trolling again, if she actually had a look at the calendar closely and genuinely believes what she actually wrote, then that would be almost scary.
There are 23 clay tournaments and only 6 on grass, both could be considered specialist surfaces, whereas hardcourt is more of an equalizer and there are plenty of those. This is fair?

why didnt the idiot demote Cincinnati or Toronto to a MM level :rolleyes:
Because even Mr Disney is smarter than you.

rocketassist
04-02-2008, 04:12 PM
The sad part is, even if this guy is gone, those changes will stay, unfortunately.

Really? I think us tennis fans and players can still rescue it.

Labamba
04-02-2008, 04:39 PM
the best of 5 finals in Masters Series shouldn't be impossible to bring back under a new leader...

Federer would be up for it:

Q. There's going to be a three‑set final this year. How do you feel about that? There are mixed reviews.

ROGER FEDERER: This is a subject to talk about, you know. Because I'm a fan of the best‑of‑five‑set finals. But then if you look at the long run of every tournament, we've had many problems throughout the last few seasons where we play a five setter here and guys then pull out the next week.
It's happened especially in back‑to‑back tournaments in Rome and Hamburg, maybe Toronto and Cincinnati before where they didn't always have five‑set finals. But another tournament gets hurt under those circumstances.
I understand for the live audience it's not good. For us, the players, we'd also like to play five sets. But if you have to back it up with tournament after tournament, it is better for the players and for other tournaments if you have the best‑of‑three finals.
So there's good and bad in this story, and I think it's fair that every tournament of the Masters Series level has the same format in terms of how the finals should be played. They're best‑of‑three unfortunately, and that's the way we have to play it here in Miami, as well.

http://www.sonyericssonopen.com/content/20080401174317.html

Jimnik
04-02-2008, 06:37 PM
It's fair because more people grow up playing on clay than do on grass. :shrug:

What's "fair" in your mind, an equal number of both? Should we reduce the number of clay tournaments to 6 to make it "fair" to grass or should we add grass court events into the calendar till we come up with 23? Even halving the number of clay tournaments to 12 and doubling the number of grass tournaments to 12 is not doable.
There's no such thing as "fair" in the real world but you can at least try to improve. It's obvious why there's a lack of variety at the top of the game right now. There are plenty of players who just don't thrive on hardcourts (even the fast ones) as they do on grass and too many players who can play only on clay and still make the top 50.

I'm not saying I agree with the decision to dump a clay TMS but clearly the grass fans have more reason to complain than the clay fans. The way the trend is going there'll be nothing but slow hard and fast clay events in the future.

*bunny*
04-02-2008, 06:48 PM
The fact that there are many hard court tournaments and nearly as many clay court tournaments cannot be blamed for the demise of grass court tournamenst.
So many times when this clay vs hard courts or clay vs fast courts argument crops up, some people always start complaining about the scarecity of grass court tournaments.
In an ideal world, there should be a grass court masters tournament (I love the idea), and there should be more weeks between Roland Garros and Wimbledon to accommodate a longer grass season. But many tournaments that used to be played on grass stopped using the surface and most of them changed the surface to hard courts purely because it's expensive to maintain grass and hard courts come cheaper. As a result, players now get fewer chances to play on grass, and it's becoming more and more specialised. It's a sad fact, but no reason to blame clay (and hard courts for that matter) for the demise of grass courts.

Back to the topic and I think it's high time Mr Disney left tennis. I understand that to run a sport organisation, which is ultimately an entertainment, love for the sports is not enough, but it's equally impossible to run it without love for it, and this man repeatedly showed us that he has no love for tennis at all.

rocketassist
04-02-2008, 07:16 PM
It's fair because more people grow up playing on clay than do on grass. :shrug:

What's "fair" in your mind, an equal number of both? Should we reduce the number of clay tournaments to 6 to make it "fair" to grass or should we add grass court events into the calendar till we come up with 23? Even halving the number of clay tournaments to 12 and doubling the number of grass tournaments to 12 is not doable.

Should be more than 6 grass for sure- stop talking like a claytard.

Shabazza
04-02-2008, 08:51 PM
Really? I think us tennis fans and players can still rescue it.

Us tennis fans can do shit.

Fee
04-13-2008, 03:52 AM
http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/04/10/more-on-the-de-villiers-letter-and-other-items.aspx

The De Villiers Letter and Other Items
Posted by Douglas Robson at 4/10/2008 9:13 PM and is filed under Tennis

De Villiers Taking Heat

Ft. Lauderdale's Sun-Sentinel first reported that a letter of discontent regarding ATP Chairman Etienne de Villiers was circulating at Key Biscayne last week. I confirmed the report about the brewing mutiny. Here is a near-verbatim copy of the letter as described to me by a person familiar with it:


Dear Player Council and Player Board Representatives:

We the undersigned players request that our voice be heard and our input be sought on the future discussions of the future ATP CEO /Chairman of the board position.

As you have been elected by us, the players, it is important that we are part of the discussions on Etienne de Villiers’ future. Like in many of your current decisions, we would like to see different options. Therefore, we request that other potential candidates are identified, interviewed and assessed prior to any vote taking place on the board in regard to Etienne’s future.

Men’s tennis is a very hot property at the current time. Thus we require an open and transparent process, a process of which Etienne will be part, in order to identify as strong and effective a leader for our sport.

Signed:

Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, Nikolay Davydenko, David Ferrer, Andy Roddick, David Nalbadian, Richard Gasquet, James Blake, Tomas Berdych, Mikhail Youzhny, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, Andy Murray, Tommy Robredo, Paul-Henri Mathieu, Juan Monaco.


The petition lacks just three players from last week's top 20: Guillermo Canas, Marcos Baghdatis and Ivo Karlovic. I was told the only reason they didn’t sign is because they weren’t available.

What does the letter mean? Well, for starters, it denotes a lack of communication and growing dissatisfaction with the job de Villiers is doing. Obviously, he’s taken his lumps with the failed round-robin experiment, the Hamburg lawsuit and the seemingly endless Sopot investigation (and possible lawsuit from Davydenko). He’s had his triumphs too, such as the revamped doubles scoring, and prize money is up 30% on his watch.

De Villiers has long maintained that if he could no longer affect change or loses support of the players and board, he would quit. He doesn't need the money. Surely, he doesn't need the headache. Frankly, I’m surprised he’s lasted as long as he has. De Villiers has long maintained that if he could no longer affect change or lost support of the players and board, he would quit. Frankly, I’m surprised he’s lasted as long as he has.

I don’t know if this is a negotiating tactic or something deeper, but it could be that the players have lost faith in the three reps on the board, former doubles pro Jacco Eltingh, Andre Agassi’s agent Perry Rogers and Iggy Jovanovic, who was not a touring pro but worked for the ATP.

One top agent told me the players feel the board is stacked in de Villiers’ favor and that their voice is simply being ignored. Players were also alarmed by rumors that negotiations on extending de Villiers contract had already begun at Indian Wells - without the proper transparency. Stay tuned – this could get messy. Then again, this is the dysfunctional family called tennis.

Action Jackson
04-13-2008, 04:40 AM
Thanks for the post Fee and just proves and confirms what many of us have known.

Mr. Disney is a bit of a lame duck and a stooge to the tournament directors, this could get quite interesting.

At the same time just hope they have someone ready to replace him.

Aloimeh
04-13-2008, 04:47 AM
Is there any will among the players for a grass court MS, i.e. by upgrading Queens, for example? It seems there's a whole mess with the schedule, with the three claycourt MS packed so close together, with Miami following right after IW and with Cincinnati right after Montreal/Toronto. Can't they space things out a bit?

FiBeR
04-13-2008, 06:01 AM
:bigclap:

FiBeR
04-13-2008, 06:03 AM
:worship: Monaco, Nalbandian, Cañas :yeah:

Eviscerator
04-13-2008, 06:33 AM
Dump DeVilliers?

Where do we sign the petition?

Rosa Luxembourg
04-13-2008, 08:08 AM
The claycourters don't need any more leverage they have more than enough clay tournaments to play in. :rolleyes:



Sure, keep Houston but dump Hamburg and almost Monte Carlo :rolleyes:... Oh wait, that's the only tournaments Roddick can still win:p

And on the topic, the process should be open, i.e. if the Disney man wants to stay, he need to present his program for the next term, if there are any new candidates, they should do the same.

Or Levy
04-13-2008, 08:35 AM
Well, the top players sure seem to stand united on that one.

I wonder who wrote the petition, got everyone to sign, etc.

alelysafina
04-13-2008, 11:33 AM
Maybe we should start a petition?

tangerine_dream
04-24-2008, 05:51 PM
From TR.net (http://www.tennisreporters.net/):

Pasarell behind De Villiers changes
ATP heavy hitter says 'It's déjà vu all over again' with players resisting change

The top players may be unhappy with the direction that ATP chief Etienne de Villiers is taking the tour, but ATP Board tournament representative Charlie Pasarell is firmly in the CEO's corner. If that's the case given his influence amongst tournament directors, it's unlikely that the players will be able to force the board to interview new candidates before De Villiers' contract is reviewed at the end of this year.

Players recently delivered a letter to the board calling for input on De Villiers' position along with specifically asking for a job search.

Pasarell, who is one of the owners of the Pacific Life Open, told TennisReporters.net that he likes the daring direction that De Villiers is taking the tour and the players are being predictably conservative and stubborn.

Jimnik
04-24-2008, 06:01 PM
From TR.net (http://www.tennisreporters.net/):

Pasarell behind De Villiers changes
ATP heavy hitter says 'It's déjà vu all over again' with players resisting change

The top players may be unhappy with the direction that ATP chief Etienne de Villiers is taking the tour, but ATP Board tournament representative Charlie Pasarell is firmly in the CEO's corner. If that's the case given his influence amongst tournament directors, it's unlikely that the players will be able to force the board to interview new candidates before De Villiers' contract is reviewed at the end of this year.

Players recently delivered a letter to the board calling for input on De Villiers' position along with specifically asking for a job search.

Pasarell, who is one of the owners of the Pacific Life Open, told TennisReporters.net that he likes the daring direction that De Villiers is taking the tour and the players are being predictably conservative and stubborn.
Truth is I think the players don't have the time and energy to fight ATP boardroom decisions. It's just too much effort to fight for change, especially when you've got your own ranking and career to worry about.

Deboogle!.
04-24-2008, 06:06 PM
What a joke. It's not that the players are resisting change; it's that they are unhappy with the specific changes that have been proposed!! where have any players said they don't want things to change, i think they are all smart enough to know that change has to happen if their season is to be shortened, etc. What a joke.

CyBorg
04-24-2008, 06:07 PM
I have no problem with Hamburg being downgraded, but I bet there is more to the story there - probably much of it involving poor communication on the part of the ATP and Hamburg organizers.

Fee
04-24-2008, 06:39 PM
What a joke. It's not that the players are resisting change; it's that they are unhappy with the specific changes that have been proposed!! where have any players said they don't want things to change, i think they are all smart enough to know that change has to happen if their season is to be shortened, etc. What a joke.

Exactly. Ask the players (say the top 200) if they want changes and they will say yes, they just don't want the all changes that Devilliers has brought about or proposed. This is not surprising really, the players are looking out for what is best for themselves (and their health) while Etienne wants to protect the tournament directors and look for money. Shame that he won't find the middle ground that truly benefits all of the parties involved.

Kitty de Sade
04-24-2008, 06:51 PM
I can't imagine why Mr. Disney is having trouble. All of his ideas have been successful contributions of pure genius so far. :shrug: :tape:

He needs to go, yesterday.

Chip_s_m
04-24-2008, 07:10 PM
Exactly. Ask the players (say the top 200) if they want changes and they will say yes, they just don't want the all changes that Devilliers has brought about or proposed. This is not surprising really, the players are looking out for what is best for themselves (and their health) while Etienne wants to protect the tournament directors and look for money. Shame that he won't find the middle ground that truly benefits all of the parties involved.

I think he is trying to find some middle ground in this area, though. He's dropping one Masters event and in 2009 masters events won't be back-to-back (supposedly--where's that schedule?). Pretty much all the top players have voiced their concerns about that and my guess is that it will reduce injuries.

Frankly, I don't understand the pure hatred for De Villiers on this board. I don't love the guy, but I'd say I'm neutral towards him. He's screwed up a few times, but he's also increased prize money, reduced the required number of events (for 2009), expanded the game into Asia, and is pushing for more combined events, which bring in more revenue and certainly don't hurt the players. Issues with Monte Carlo and Hamburg being downgraded and 3 masters events in 4 weeks are just growing pains. In order to shorten the required number of events, one masters event had to go, so no matter how you look at it, people were going to be unhappy. I have no problem giving De Villiers credit for having the balls to take that step. Sure, he did fuck up with round robin, but did that mistake have any serious negative effects on the tour? No, and if it had worked it could've potentially revolutionized the game.

Deboogle!.
04-24-2008, 07:40 PM
I don't hate him either, in fact, I respect him for going out and trying to do some radical things; it's easy to be an armchair critic - it's a lot harder to go out there and have the balls to go out there and at least try to make things happen - as long as he's man enough to admit his mistakes, which I question in regards to RR but anyway. The problem is that the players really don't seem to matter. He's catering to the TDs and to where the money is and almost all but forgetting the people who actually make the ATP successful - the players. As far as I can tell, the 2009 season is not going to be shorter, at least not by much anyway. These comments from Pasarell just prove that; they expect things to be done for them but screw the players who actually have their careers and livelihood and health to worry about.

I think some of his changes haven't been bad at all. The doubles started out as a mess but once they reached a compromise, I think for the most part it's turned out OK.

rocketassist
04-24-2008, 08:13 PM
I don't hate him either, in fact, I respect him for going out and trying to do some radical things; it's easy to be an armchair critic - it's a lot harder to go out there and have the balls to go out there and at least try to make things happen - as long as he's man enough to admit his mistakes, which I question in regards to RR but anyway. The problem is that the players really don't seem to matter. He's catering to the TDs and to where the money is and almost all but forgetting the people who actually make the ATP successful - the players. As far as I can tell, the 2009 season is not going to be shorter, at least not by much anyway. These comments from Pasarell just prove that; they expect things to be done for them but screw the players who actually have their careers and livelihood and health to worry about.

I think some of his changes haven't been bad at all. The doubles started out as a mess but once they reached a compromise, I think for the most part it's turned out OK.

You're American, and your events have not been pissed around with.

Simple.

Deboogle!.
04-24-2008, 08:23 PM
You're American, and your events have not been pissed around with.

Simple.Sorry, I have nothing else to say to you except stop talking about shit you don't understand. Find a post of mine where I agree with what EDV is doing and try again.

GlennMirnyi
04-24-2008, 10:50 PM
That article was written by Captain Obvious I'm sure.

Action Jackson
04-26-2008, 10:02 AM
Exactly. Ask the players (say the top 200) if they want changes and they will say yes, they just don't want the all changes that Devilliers has brought about or proposed. This is not surprising really, the players are looking out for what is best for themselves (and their health) while Etienne wants to protect the tournament directors and look for money. Shame that he won't find the middle ground that truly benefits all of the parties involved.

That's the key there. Well he can't have no circus without the performers.

I have zero respect for this guy and always have. There are ways to go about getting change in sport, for the better of the game. I can give 3 clear examples of this, but they just didn't sit on the toilet one day and thought lets try this gimmick.

Sunset of Age
04-26-2008, 12:25 PM
ATP should change their name to ATTDaCC:

Association of Tennis Tournament Directors and Cash Cows.

Jelena
04-26-2008, 12:50 PM
ATP should change their name to ATTDaCC:

Association of Tennis Tournament Directors and Cash Cows.
crap..... consider you repped. :lol:

Action Jackson
04-26-2008, 12:58 PM
ATP should change their name to ATTDaCC:

Association of Tennis Tournament Directors and Cash Cows.

Lucky you only stole part of my line with this one. Among my friends it was known as the ATD, but the cash cows is true.

nobama
04-30-2008, 01:10 AM
http://www.insidetennis.com/0508_federer.html

INSIDE TENNIS: A lot of No. 1 players distance themselves from getting involved in tennis policies and politics. Not you. You’ve spoken out and have pretty much been a traditionalist when it comes to the use of Hawk-Eye, a bunch of Wimbledon issues, the downscaling of the long-established Monte Carlo tournament or having tournaments experiment with the round-robin format. Why have you chosen to speak out?

ROGER FEDERER: You have to remember that tennis has incredible roots. We haven’t been around just for five years so you can change everything and everybody’s open to changes. I grew up a certain way with tennis being in a certain way. I don’t want it to change, because I think it’s a great sport. The problem we have is that we should have more sponsors, bring more money in and get back on normal TV. That’s been the biggest problem for us. We had some bad deals with the ISL deal that went bankrupt [when tennis supposedly was going to land huge international marketing deals that never materialized.] That really hurt us a lot in terms of being on a normal TV network. They sold the broadcasting rights to private networks. That just killed the market for us in terms of sponsorship, and being on TV for the regular fan. The stadiums now are sold out, people are loving this sport. It’s a great live sport to attend. It’s a pity. But we’re on the way back, because we have a great package to sell. This is what we need to focus on and not little changes like that stupid round robin.

Sunset of Age
04-30-2008, 01:29 AM
^^ Roger :worship: :worship: :worship:

Deboogle!.
04-30-2008, 01:37 AM
Unfortunately, the ATP is losing its biggest sponsor, who is going to sponsor Fed personally instead :lol:

Kitty de Sade
04-30-2008, 01:40 AM
Unfortunately, the ATP is losing its biggest sponsor, who is going to sponsor Fed personally instead :lol:

I had to read this a couple of times, and stop myself from laughing. Of course it happens that way. :rolls:

I give Federer credit for saying what he did. He has the right idea about what needs to happen.

Merton
04-30-2008, 01:41 AM
I think he is trying to find some middle ground in this area, though. He's dropping one Masters event and in 2009 masters events won't be back-to-back (supposedly--where's that schedule?). Pretty much all the top players have voiced their concerns about that and my guess is that it will reduce injuries.

Frankly, I don't understand the pure hatred for De Villiers on this board. I don't love the guy, but I'd say I'm neutral towards him. He's screwed up a few times, but he's also increased prize money, reduced the required number of events (for 2009), expanded the game into Asia, and is pushing for more combined events, which bring in more revenue and certainly don't hurt the players. Issues with Monte Carlo and Hamburg being downgraded and 3 masters events in 4 weeks are just growing pains. In order to shorten the required number of events, one masters event had to go, so no matter how you look at it, people were going to be unhappy. I have no problem giving De Villiers credit for having the balls to take that step. Sure, he did fuck up with round robin, but did that mistake have any serious negative effects on the tour? No, and if it had worked it could've potentially revolutionized the game.

It is not a question of hatred at all, I do not know the guy so how can I hate him. But let me ask a simple question: Suppose that the ATP was a public company and you bought stock the day Mr. Disney became the CEO. Would you be happy today with the performance of your investment? The RR issue is not merely a question of failed experimentation. Quite a few of us here foretold beforehand that it was a disaster, so a well functioning board should have also seen the consequences beforehand. There was a warning from the Buenos Aires tournament, a competent executive would have stopped the experiment right there on the spot, before the disaster of Las Vegas. Furthermore, Mr. Disney never took responsibility for the fiasco.

You say "did that mistake have any serious negative effects on the tour?" For sure the ATP credibility was shot, for example if you are the Mercedes marketing director why would you bother dealing with these ATP clowns? If you are a TV network negotiating rights, you also take advandage of that. Being a tennis fan means spending time following the sport and deriving pleasure from it, so the fact is you are in essence a shareholder, it is only the case that you don't have a control claim over the ATP, as you would if you were a real shareholder.

Other than that, there is no shorting the required number of events, just an allocation that gives a masters event to China and moves one from Hamburg to benefit a certain organizer in Madrid. There are no significant changes in the duration of the season, there is a cosmetic change in the name of the masters brand carrying a potential disaster if the challengers and futures end up downgraded, since they are the pools that generate future top players. Then you have a ticking bomb in the form of a potential liability towards the Hamburg tournament.

The last part is holding combined events, personally I don't care for WTA but I am open to the idea that holding combined events might be beneficial, for example providing greater bargaining power to negotiate TV rights. But where is the eveidence? From what I have seen, Mr. Disney basically says that there has been serious research conducted and then he asks us to trust him. Why would we do so given the evidence from the other issues above?

Merton
04-30-2008, 01:46 AM
For those that claim that US-based fans have not been affected since there have not been real changes, this is far from true. Chicago has applied for the 2016 Olympics, as a part of the candidacy there will be for sure some planning to construct tennis sites. What would prevent an inspired entrepreneur from using the Madrid precedent to take the masters away from Cinci and move it to Chicago? I wouldn't be surprised if Tiriac himself initiated such an effort.

Clay Death
04-30-2008, 01:47 AM
Unfortunately, the ATP is losing its biggest sponsor, who is going to sponsor Fed personally instead :lol:


whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaz up deb? mercedes wants to go after golf and equestrian events.

what will be next? bloody hot do eating contests.

tennis is just not getting any respect.

Sunset of Age
04-30-2008, 01:47 AM
Unfortunately, the ATP is losing its biggest sponsor, who is going to sponsor Fed personally instead :lol:

Well Deserved - :armed: :armed: :armed:

nobama
04-30-2008, 01:50 AM
Unfortunately, the ATP is losing its biggest sponsor, who is going to sponsor Fed personally instead :lol:
You're joking right?

Kitty de Sade
04-30-2008, 01:54 AM
It's detailed here-

From Marketwire (http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=849308)

Sunset of Age
04-30-2008, 01:59 AM
It's detailed here-

From Marketwire (http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=849308)

Yep. Read that one, it's no joke. :devil:

Fee
04-30-2008, 02:04 AM
That's just China. We won't be seeing Federer driving a Mercedes on American televisions (and probably not anywhere else either). Kind of like that Kia deal that Agassi had, that was for Asian markets only.

Clay Death
04-30-2008, 02:05 AM
It's detailed here-

From Marketwire (http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=849308)


who knows how much that deal is worth? he is already pulling in over $30 mill just in endorsement income. 2007 income alone comes in at better than $40 mill since he won over $10 mill in prize money.

this deal with Mercedes may worth another $10-$15 mill a year. when it rains, pours.

Deboogle!.
04-30-2008, 02:27 AM
I had to read this a couple of times, and stop myself from laughing. Of course it happens that way. :rolls:

I give Federer credit for saying what he did. He has the right idea about what needs to happen.My fault, I should've said 'which' not 'who' :p

whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaz up deb? mercedes wants to go after golf and equestrian events.

what will be next? bloody hot do eating contests.

tennis is just not getting any respect.Pretty much :shrug:

It's detailed here-

From Marketwire (http://www.marketwire.com/mw/release.do?id=849308)Thanks :)

That's just China. We won't be seeing Federer driving a Mercedes on American televisions (and probably not anywhere else either). Kind of like that Kia deal that Agassi had, that was for Asian markets only.Still, they're dropping the ATP and putting money into Fed, wherever the deal is for. I'd rather Mercedes cut back on the money they give to the ATP than end it altogether but sponsor Fed in Asia :shrug: And just before I get accused of some bullshit, it has nothing to do with Fed personally, more my disappointment that this sponsorship is ending for the ATP, which needs all the promotion money it can get right now. I'm no fan of Mercedes at all, but the partnership seemed to work fairly well.

GlennMirnyi
04-30-2008, 02:30 AM
whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaz up deb? mercedes wants to go after golf and equestrian events.

what will be next? bloody hot do eating contests.

tennis is just not getting any respect.

Eating contests aren't funny because Nalbandian wins them all.

Fee
04-30-2008, 02:34 AM
Still, they're dropping the ATP and putting money into Fed, wherever the deal is for. I'd rather Mercedes cut back on the money they give to the ATP than end it altogether but sponsor Fed in Asia :shrug: And just before I get accused of some bullshit, it has nothing to do with Fed personally, more my disappointment that this sponsorship is ending for the ATP, which needs all the promotion money it can get right now. I'm no fan of Mercedes at all, but the partnership seemed to work fairly well.

I agree, it was a huge blow when Mercedes announced they were getting out, but if tennis is falling apart in the US and falling apart in Germany, then I can see thier issue. It was a great deal (and the only way I would ever get to drive 3 different Benz models in less than a week ;) ).

Lee
04-30-2008, 02:55 AM
Pasarell, who is one of the owners of the Pacific Life Open, told TennisReporters.net that he likes the daring direction that De Villiers is taking the tour and the players are being predictably conservative and stubborn.

Pasarell is one of the people that decided the main gate only open 1 hour before first match starts instead of traditionally in Indian Wells, open the gate at 9am so fans can come early to watch players practices. This policy doesn't even save much money as the extra pay was for 2 security guards that check the carry-ons by fans. All other works are done by volunteers who oppose to the changes.

With this stupid policy, fans who without tickets, have to come early, go thru security, buy their tickets, get out (yes, you can't stay around the ticket area after you bought your tickets) and wait until it's time for the main gate to open, go thru the security again. Very fans friendly. :rolleyes:

Kitty de Sade
04-30-2008, 03:36 AM
Still, they're dropping the ATP and putting money into Fed, wherever the deal is for. I'd rather Mercedes cut back on the money they give to the ATP than end it altogether but sponsor Fed in Asia :shrug: And just before I get accused of some bullshit, it has nothing to do with Fed personally, more my disappointment that this sponsorship is ending for the ATP, which needs all the promotion money it can get right now. I'm no fan of Mercedes at all, but the partnership seemed to work fairly well.

Very valid points, and ones that I agree with as well. :yeah:

Mercedes isn't a hack corporation backing a nobody. Federer is the most famous tennis name on planet earth. End of story- he is literally like money in the bank, and he deserves every bit of it. He's not getting any younger either- make the money now, and strike while the iron is hot. I sure wouldn't refuse one red cent that Mercedes wanted to give me...:p

That being said, I couldn't agree more that the ATP needs to figure out what to do promo-wise, AFTER Federer is gone. They need to get a handle on how to promote the next generation NOW, rather than later. I have a lot of concerns about the state of affairs, when sponsors are folding up their tents and going home.

I wasn't crying into my soup because Mercedes pulled the plug, per se. It was symbolic, as though they didn't see a long term return on their investment. They back Fed, yes, as well they should. What happens after he's done, though? The ATP needs to figure out a way to answer that question.

Deboogle!.
04-30-2008, 04:16 AM
My point wasn't so much Federer instead of the ATP but the bigger picture problem of a single player instead of the ATP. IMO, one of tennis's problems is that it's a star-driven sport. I think part of that comes from the nature of the fact that it's an individual sport. I'm from a city where support of the home team is in your blood - even if you don't like the sport at issue, you support the teams against all other - players and stars come and go but it doesn't matter, we want our home teams to win no matter what. Tennis is not anywhere near that kind of level - and it almost seems like they don't even try (look at this new Feel It campaign - it's all based on the stars). Sure, we here at MTF are fans of the sport. our favorites come and go and when one retires we still keep up on that player but also find new blood to support. But the people who just see a Williams or a Federer or a Roddick or a Sampras or an Agassi and don't care about the sport itself will go on to something else when that player retires, as he or she inevitably will.

To me, there is a severe lacking in the promotion of the sport. And that's what I find the sad part of money leaving the tour as a whole and going to individual players. It's not the money, it's not the players specifically, it's the principle. Tennis is such an amazing sport in so many ways. The mental aspect is ridiculous, the players are so incredibly fit and have to work so much harder to make much less money than a lot of other sports and the really unique thing - it's the only major sport where men and women compete together a lot of the time on main stages. Despite the vitriol against the WTA here, I think it's a pretty impressive aspect about the sport - not that many sports outside the olympics have men and women competing for titles of equal importance. Tennis is special and its stars are important but what the sport needs is people who are fans of the SPORT independently of the stars, people who will watch it on tv no matter who's playing, because they like the sport. People like us :p

And I guess for me the more money that leaves the tour and goes to the individual players makes that harder. It's not a matter of the players deserving it or not, it's just what the whole trend signifies for me.

Action Jackson
04-30-2008, 04:34 AM
It is not a question of hatred at all, I do not know the guy so how can I hate him. But let me ask a simple question: Suppose that the ATP was a public company and you bought stock the day Mr. Disney became the CEO. Would you be happy today with the performance of your investment? The RR issue is not merely a question of failed experimentation. Quite a few of us here foretold beforehand that it was a disaster, so a well functioning board should have also seen the consequences beforehand. There was a warning from the Buenos Aires tournament, a competent executive would have stopped the experiment right there on the spot, before the disaster of Las Vegas. Furthermore, Mr. Disney never took responsibility for the fiasco.

You say "did that mistake have any serious negative effects on the tour?" For sure the ATP credibility was shot, for example if you are the Mercedes marketing director why would you bother dealing with these ATP clowns? If you are a TV network negotiating rights, you also take advandage of that. Being a tennis fan means spending time following the sport and deriving pleasure from it, so the fact is you are in essence a shareholder, it is only the case that you don't have a control claim over the ATP, as you would if you were a real shareholder.

Other than that, there is no shorting the required number of events, just an allocation that gives a masters event to China and moves one from Hamburg to benefit a certain organizer in Madrid. There are no significant changes in the duration of the season, there is a cosmetic change in the name of the masters brand carrying a potential disaster if the challengers and futures end up downgraded, since they are the pools that generate future top players. Then you have a ticking bomb in the form of a potential liability towards the Hamburg tournament.

The last part is holding combined events, personally I don't care for WTA but I am open to the idea that holding combined events might be beneficial, for example providing greater bargaining power to negotiate TV rights. But where is the eveidence? From what I have seen, Mr. Disney basically says that there has been serious research conducted and then he asks us to trust him. Why would we do so given the evidence from the other issues above?

Only his family could be happy with his performance. It's obviously understandable why Mercedes is hitting the road and leaving the ATP, under this management regime. It's simple, you don't want to be seen to be associated with a board that is not competent, it's not like they have found a major sponsor yet to replace Mercedes.

Taking no responsibility for the mistakes, he has made. A true leader has to accept the flak, while taking the plaudits. We all know he is a sock puppet or gimp for Tiriac. Like all politicians, he promised the big words and the big deeds, but really he is full of hot air.

The season has been lengthened, nobody knows the status of the Challengers under the new regime. It's like the tennis food chain and the Challengers/Futures events for the vast majority of players is a very important stepping stone (heck even Federer played Futures events) . This is where they have to fight their way through the jungle to make it in the big leagues.

Notice how the best run organisations for the most part, you don't hear from them. Disney is all about soundbites, as they say all sizzle and no steak.

Kitty de Sade
04-30-2008, 04:41 AM
To me, there is a severe lacking in the promotion of the sport. And that's what I find the sad part of money leaving the tour as a whole and going to individual players. It's not the money, it's not the players specifically, it's the principle.

Completely understandable. The brass is doing nothing to help the situation right now.

Tennis is special and its stars are important but what the sport needs is people who are fans of the SPORT independently of the stars, people who will watch it on tv no matter who's playing, because they like the sport. People like us :p

Okay, there is the million dollar question. If the money doesn't go to the promotion of individual stars, how do you get people to commit? How do you get someone unfamiliar, or on the fence, to watch it? If the stars are no longer stars, and say everyone is put into a general pool, what then...

Not to say that everyone on the periphery is a star ******, but how do you promote a sport effectively, should the concept of "superstar" be removed, as a calculated way to filter money back into the tour as a whole? :shrug:

People like us? :rolls: :hug:

And I guess for me the more money that leaves the tour and goes to the individual players makes that harder. It's not a matter of the players deserving it or not, it's just what the whole trend signifies for me.

This is a fair point. It deviates further and further away from what tennis was meant to be. It's tantamount to a machine this way.

Deboogle!.
04-30-2008, 05:01 AM
Okay, there is the million dollar question. If the money doesn't go to the promotion of individual stars, how do you get people to commit? How do you get someone unfamiliar, or on the fence, to watch it? If the stars are no longer stars, and say everyone is put into a general pool, what then...I think it's possible to have a combination of both. people who are basketball fans are Kobe or Shaq or Bird or Magic Johnson fans, and also basketball fans. Same with all the big sports - whether individual or team. Even a super-individual sport like Boxing. Sure, people are Oscar de la Hoya fans, but they also pay for all the big fights on PPV, no matter who's playing. People who are NASCAR fans are fans of NASCAR and also the stars, same for pretty much every major sport i can think of.

Don't misunderstand me, I'm not saying that no attention should be paid for the stars or that no dollars should be put there, but at this point I'm not seeing any promotion of the sport as a whole. the USO Series is a good step IMO and it's a good basic model. they're saying, hey, follow this series, follow what happens, all these hundreds of players fighting for the crown, follow how it will turn out. I think it's a good model that could be vastly expanded on. Use the stars to promote the SPORT, instead of, or in addition to, themselves. They're also doing a bit of it with the Doubles Rules campaign, but it's not enough. And it requires money, lots of money.

I don't have all the answers and I don't pretend to and of course implementation is harder than us sitting here thinking about it, but things like making the sport seem more accessible, getting players to go out and do clinics not at tournaments but in the community - instead of a clinic on the tourney grounds, send them to a local high school or summer camp, whatever. Ads not about how great Player X is but ads about how Player X's greatness adds to the sport's intrigue - that's the USO series model - they show all these players and yes they give them stupid nicknames or whatever, but they get across the point that all these different talents and personalities make up the great sport that is tennis and hey, you should watch to see how it all turns out! Maybe it's too subtle or esoteric or maybe I'm just crazy, but I think it's possible :p

mind you I don't necessarily think EDV is responsible for all of tennis's problems, but it's becoming quite clear that he's not helping so getting someone in there who believes in the sport the way it is fundamentally but has more creative ways of promotion and marketing and stuff would be good.People like us? :rolls: :hug:yes! :p people like us, like the vast majority of MTF members, who love the sport first and the stars second. :p

GlennMirnyi
04-30-2008, 05:26 AM
I agree with the point that the sport is way greater than the players.

FedFan_2007
04-30-2008, 05:48 AM
Well I for one am glad that TMF is getting more millions.

nobama
04-30-2008, 11:41 AM
My fault, I should've said 'which' not 'who' :p

Pretty much :shrug:

Thanks :)

Still, they're dropping the ATP and putting money into Fed, wherever the deal is for. I'd rather Mercedes cut back on the money they give to the ATP than end it altogether but sponsor Fed in Asia :shrug: And just before I get accused of some bullshit, it has nothing to do with Fed personally, more my disappointment that this sponsorship is ending for the ATP, which needs all the promotion money it can get right now. I'm no fan of Mercedes at all, but the partnership seemed to work fairly well.
Yeah I don't get that one. :scratch:

rocketassist
04-30-2008, 11:43 AM
I'm still hoping the Masters Series can be saved by him going.

rocketassist
04-30-2008, 11:45 AM
Pasarell is one of the people that decided the main gate only open 1 hour before first match starts instead of traditionally in Indian Wells, open the gate at 9am so fans can come early to watch players practices. This policy doesn't even save much money as the extra pay was for 2 security guards that check the carry-ons by fans. All other works are done by volunteers who oppose to the changes.

With this stupid policy, fans who without tickets, have to come early, go thru security, buy their tickets, get out (yes, you can't stay around the ticket area after you bought your tickets) and wait until it's time for the main gate to open, go thru the security again. Very fans friendly. :rolleyes:

Pasarell is the director of an American event, which have not been messed with by de Villiers, hence most of his support base seems to be Yanks.

nobama
04-30-2008, 11:46 AM
So just who is replacing Mercedes when this partnership ends?

mangoes
04-30-2008, 11:47 AM
Still, they're dropping the ATP and putting money into Fed, wherever the deal is for. I'd rather Mercedes cut back on the money they give to the ATP than end it altogether but sponsor Fed in Asia :shrug: And just before I get accused of some bullshit, it has nothing to do with Fed personally, more my disappointment that this sponsorship is ending for the ATP, which needs all the promotion money it can get right now. I'm no fan of Mercedes at all, but the partnership seemed to work fairly well.

Completely agree.

Action Jackson
04-30-2008, 11:48 AM
Completely agree.

What, you don't why Mercedes would pull the plug? It's obvious.

Deboogle!.
04-30-2008, 03:19 PM
Also, this is kind of off-topic :lol: but you mentioned people cheering for the home team, which is interesting because the recent comments that have been popping up in GM about how German tennis is suffering with the departure of the likes of Becker and Graf really highlights to me the dangers of home-based support. It's a great way to draw attention to the sport when your home players are in the Top 10 or Top 5 and winning slams, but when all the players from your state/province/country are not even in the Top 50, there needs to be fans who will turn on their TVs and come to tournaments regardless of how well "their" guys are doing. Here in the US all the teams in the most popular sports tend to carry a large and consistent fan base regardless of how well they're actually performing, but for a sport which is more "niche" and more about the individual it seems harder for that support to persist.I think you misunderstood what I meant, I wasn't saying that tennis should be a "home team" type thing where people cheer for their home country player, I meant it more in the sense that where I come from, people cheer for the team no matter who is playing for them and that it would be nice for tennis to get to the point where it has a lot of fans who cheer for whoever's playing - like what you said at the end. I wasn't suggesting they should promote the home players at all, just wanted to make that clear :lol:

I doubt in this day and age we'll ever get past the cult of personality, especially when it comes to sports stars, but the key is for the ATP to do an active job of promoting ALL players in all markets, instead of promoting the most marketable players or refusing to promote lower-ranked players outside their "home" markets. I was pleasantly surprised last year to see some positive fluff pieces on Henin being televised last year - yes, partly because I am a fan, ;) but mainly because coverage tended to ignore her in favor of S. Williams or Sharapova or Ivanovic/Jankovic (let's hear the swimming pool story one more time! :silly: ), even though she had been the best player of the entire season and ended the previous year as number one.

Anyway, just thinking "out loud." :lol:Yes, this is exactly what I meant.

Pasarell is the director of an American event, which have not been messed with by de Villiers, hence most of his support base seems to be Yanks.OMG, your lunacy seems to grow by the day. Please, post the link to a post of an American who supports de Villiers. I challenged you once before and you ignored the challenge, so please, find a post and link me to it.

tangerine_dream
05-08-2008, 08:12 PM
When one of the most genial guys on tour doesn't like you there's a problem. :help:

From TR.net:

NADAL CAN’T UNDERSTAND DE VILLIERS

Nadal was asked if he had taken the matter up with ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers, but was stone cold in his reply. “I don’t have nothing to speak with this man, no? Not more. … Lose more time trying to fight for nothing, it’s very stupid. Last year I have lose a lot of time trying to understand why he doing these things, and he’s impossible to understand.”

Nadal said he hopes the injury will subside before Hamburg next week, as he’s still fully intending to travel to Germany. “Because two Masters Series without play in the best conditions on clay going to kill me, no?”

His early exit in Rome costs Rafa almost 500 points, and he has 350 more to defend in Hamburg next week, where he lost in last year’s final to Roger Federer. If he fails to show up there, Novak Djokovic will breath down his neck very strongly for the No. 2 position. Djokovic was 1,200 points behind Nadal in this week’s rankings, and has a quarterfinal showing to defend in both Rome and Hamburg.

Deboogle!.
05-08-2008, 09:46 PM
Oh no, I know what you meant, you were very clear. :hug: I was just expanding by going off on a tangent, as I am wont to do. :lol::rolls: I was like wait when did I say this and then saw it was a few days ago LOL silly me :smash: but good i'm glad :) tangents are good ;):D:drool: :hug:

tae04
05-08-2008, 10:03 PM
I dont understand why we dont have old players or legends running the ATP or WTA. I think it would be much better. Have a McEnroe or Borg president of the ATP. Or a Billie Jean King or Navratilova running the WTA. I think things would run more smoothly with someone who knows the game and how the year works.

nobama
05-09-2008, 02:05 AM
WTA finally got something right....wish the ATP was part of this too...

WTA Tour Goes Live Online With ESPN360.com

By Tennis Week Thursday, May 08, 2008

Eleven Sony Ericsson WTA Tour tournaments will be available online starting today — if you get ESPN360.com.

ESPN360.com and the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour announced a new agreement today that will provide tennis fans with more than 150 hours of live online tennis coverage from Sony Ericsson WTA Tour events around the world. The agreement will provide ESPN360.com viewers exclusive coverage, including more than 70 scheduled matches at 11 events on 49 days between May and November.

Live online coverage begins today with live coverage from The Qatar Telecom German Open in Berlin and will conclude with coverage of the season-ending Sony Ericsson Championships in Doha.

Additionally, matches will be available for on-demand replay for at least 48 hours after their completion.

Currently, ESPN360.com is available in about 20 million American homes via more than 25 Internet Service Providers around the country including Verizon, AT&T, RCN, Beld, Bend, Charter, Frontier, Grande Communications, Knology, Mid-Hudson, MediaCom, Spencer, Municipal Utilities, Starstream Communications, Sus-com, U.S. Cable and more. ESPN360.com is free to fans who receive their high-speed internet service though an affiliated ISP provider. For more information on whether your ISP offers ESPN360.com or on how to get it, go to www.espn360.com.

"The Sony Ericsson WTA Tour is thrilled to have ESPN360.com as a new media partner," said Michael Rowe, Sony Ericsson WTA Tour Vice-President Television and Digital Media. "This agreement not only vastly expands the presence of live Tour tennis on the internet but allows new and existing tennis fans access to more live action, more of the time. To develop the online and digital output with a world-renowned sports broadcaster like ESPN360.com is very exciting for women’s tennis."

ESPN360.com’s schedule of Sony Ericsson WTA Tour coverage also includes the following events: Internazionali BNL d’Italia in Rome, Italy; International Women’s Open in Eastbourne, UK; Rogers Cup in Montreal, Canada; Toray Pan Pacific Open in Tokyo, Japan; China Open in Beijing, China; Porsche Tennis Grand Prix in Stuttgart, Germany; Kremlin Cup in Moscow, Russia; Zurich Open in Zurich, Switzerland; Generali Ladies Linz in Linz, Austria; and Sony Ericsson Championships in Doha, Qatar.

GlennMirnyi
05-09-2008, 02:18 AM
When one of the most genial guys on tour doesn't like you there's a problem. :help:

From TR.net:

NADAL CAN’T UNDERSTAND DE VILLIERS

Nadal was asked if he had taken the matter up with ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers, but was stone cold in his reply. “I don’t have nothing to speak with this man, no? Not more. … Lose more time trying to fight for nothing, it’s very stupid. Last year I have lose a lot of time trying to understand why he doing these things, and he’s impossible to understand.”

Nadal said he hopes the injury will subside before Hamburg next week, as he’s still fully intending to travel to Germany. “Because two Masters Series without play in the best conditions on clay going to kill me, no?”

His early exit in Rome costs Rafa almost 500 points, and he has 350 more to defend in Hamburg next week, where he lost in last year’s final to Roger Federer. If he fails to show up there, Novak Djokovic will breath down his neck very strongly for the No. 2 position. Djokovic was 1,200 points behind Nadal in this week’s rankings, and has a quarterfinal showing to defend in both Rome and Hamburg.

Well, maybe he couldn't understand Nadal either... :p

tangerine_dream
05-11-2008, 07:05 PM
Doug Robson has some more dirt:

More trouble for De Villiers?
A source in Rome tells me that the Players Council voted this week to take down ATP Chairman Etienne de Villiers and the three players’ reps on the ATP board, which if nothing else, is a vote of no-confidence. De Villiers, meantime, threatened to resign. Stay tuned on this unfolding acrimony between the players and ATP leadership.

Fee
05-11-2008, 07:09 PM
And still no 2009 calendar. Perhaps there is still time to scrap the 500-1000 crap, bring back the Masters Series and save the ATP from the nose dive that DeVilliers was sending it into.

l_mac
05-11-2008, 07:14 PM
And still no 2009 calendar. Perhaps there is still time to scrap the 500-1000 crap, bring back the Masters Series and save the ATP from the nose dive that DeVilliers was sending it into.


Let's hope so.

How would that have worked next year anyway? Would they have had to run two parallel rankings systems for the first season, one using the new points system and one with the old?

amierin
05-11-2008, 07:20 PM
Blake and Ljubo are player reps. Who is the third one?

rocketassist
05-11-2008, 08:04 PM
whaddowewant? DISNEYOUT. Whendowewantit? NOW!

Deboogle!.
05-11-2008, 08:10 PM
Doug Robson has some more dirt:

More trouble for De Villiers?
A source in Rome tells me that the Players Council voted this week to take down ATP Chairman Etienne de Villiers and the three players’ reps on the ATP board, which if nothing else, is a vote of no-confidence. De Villiers, meantime, threatened to resign. Stay tuned on this unfolding acrimony between the players and ATP leadership.eeeeeeeeeeeeeeenterestinggggggg

And still no 2009 calendar. Perhaps there is still time to scrap the 500-1000 crap, bring back the Masters Series and save the ATP from the nose dive that DeVilliers was sending it into.We can only hope!!!

Blake and Ljubo are player reps. Who is the third one?I thought they were the player council.... I thought the ATP player reps were not currently active players. I know Perry Rodgers - old good friend and agent of Agassi is one. I think the player reps on the board are elected by the player council.

edit: from wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Tennis_Professionals : It also includes three player representatives with two-year terms, Jacco Eltingh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacco_Eltingh) as the European representative, Iggy Jovanovic (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Iggy_Jovanovic&action=edit&redlink=1) as the International representative and Perry Rogers (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perry_Rogers&action=edit&redlink=1) as the Americas representative. The player representatives are elected by the ATP Player Council.

Wiki might be wrong of course :lol: But if the Players Council voted against the players' reps, that would be sort of odd if they're the ones who elected them. Of course the fact that there's not one currently active player on the ATP Board is.....pretty effing disgustng.

Chip_s_m
05-11-2008, 09:48 PM
Wikipedia is right:

http://www.atptennis.com/en/aboutatp/organization.asp#eltingh

Deboogle!.
05-11-2008, 09:51 PM
thanks :yeah: I was too lazy to try to find it on there :lol:

amierin
05-11-2008, 10:45 PM
Thanks for clearing up any confusion I may have caused.

Deboogle!.
05-11-2008, 10:49 PM
:hug: not your fault understanding the organization within the ATP is almost as complicated as rocket science :help: :lol:

~*BGT*~
05-11-2008, 10:58 PM
Doug Robson has some more dirt:

More trouble for De Villiers?
A source in Rome tells me that the Players Council voted this week to take down ATP Chairman Etienne de Villiers and the three players’ reps on the ATP board, which if nothing else, is a vote of no-confidence. De Villiers, meantime, threatened to resign. Stay tuned on this unfolding acrimony between the players and ATP leadership.

Don't threaten; just do it!! :(

Merton
05-12-2008, 12:58 AM
thanks :yeah: I was too lazy to try to find it on there :lol:

:hug: not your fault understanding the organization within the ATP is almost as complicated as rocket science :help: :lol:

One of the worst site ever in terms of providing information about the financial performance of the ATP and its prospects :help: I hope they frequently inform players and tournament directors about their performance, I can understand a bit some lack of transparency considering that they have to negotiate with sponsors and TV networks all the time but still available information is ridiculously thin.

Deboogle!.
05-12-2008, 01:08 AM
One of the worst site ever in terms of providing information about the financial performance of the ATP and its prospects :help: I hope they frequently inform players and tournament directors about their performance, I can understand a bit some lack of transparency considering that they have to negotiate with sponsors and TV networks all the time but still available information is ridiculously thin.Couldn't agree more. That's why I didn't even bother going to the atp site and googled instead - figured i'd find a decent answer faster that way :help:

El Legenda
05-12-2008, 01:16 AM
Couldn't agree more. That's why I didn't even bother going to the atp site and googled instead - figured i'd find a decent answer faster that way :help:

remember few months ago when i told you that the top players were going to try to get the clown out :lol: my source was good ;)

Deboogle!.
05-12-2008, 01:20 AM
remember few months ago when i told you that the top players were going to try to get the clown out :lol: my source was good ;)I do remember ;) Let's see said top players follow through soon :p

Merton
05-12-2008, 01:48 AM
For sure the Hamburg organizers will benefit from the publicity coming out of the tournament to turn the heat on the ATP. It will be an interesting week.

Action Jackson
05-12-2008, 03:26 AM
There will be a party, if they get rid of this clown.

CyBorg
05-12-2008, 04:41 AM
For sure the Hamburg organizers will benefit from the publicity coming out of the tournament to turn the heat on the ATP. It will be an interesting week.

How successful is Hamburg money-wise? I haven't heard anything about financial losses. Disney is a bastard to mere want to downgrade Hamburg on a whim.

Action Jackson
05-12-2008, 04:44 AM
I saw Steeb in Australia and he is the TD of Hamburg, it seems to be a well-run event, they are able to close the roof on their centre court within 10 minutes, it's not like they haven't spent money on the site development.

CyBorg
05-12-2008, 04:57 AM
I saw Steeb in Australia and he is the TD of Hamburg, it seems to be a well-run event, they are able to close the roof on their centre court within 10 minutes, it's not like they haven't spent money on the site development.

Ah. So, 'good job, now go away'.:)

tangerine_dream
05-13-2008, 07:49 PM
It gets better every day:

Exclusive: Rogers Removed From ATP Board; Player Unrest Grows

Reliable sources in the game are confirming that Perry Rogers has been removed from the ATP Board of Directors. Rogers, who managed Andre Agassi throughout his career and remains Agassi's best friend, has served, for the past two years, as one of three player representatives on the six man Board which is chaired by ATP CEO Etienne de Villiers.

The player council, comprised of 10 current players, one former player and a coach, voted Rogers off the board. There is no indication yet of who Rogers’ replacement will be. Under terms of the ATP constitution if a board member has more than a year left on his term when he is voted out of office then another vote must be held to fill his seat. Rogers' replacement will be voted on during Wimbledon, which begins on June 23.

"We can confirm that there has been a change to the composition of the ATP Board by action of the Player Council and look forward to working with the new Player Board Representative," an ATP spokesman told Tennis Week this morning. "We thank Perry Rogers for his dedicated service on the ATP Board."

http://www.tennisweek.com/news/fullstory.sps?inewsid=3753830

amierin
05-13-2008, 07:53 PM
Major major occurence. Here's more from the article.


But the calendar remained an insoluble problem as far as placating top players were concerned and the decision to downgrade Monte Carlo and Hamburg from Masters Series status last year as well as switching Hamburg to a slot after Wimbledon so that Madrid could be moved into May, elicited a remarkably vocal response from Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Nikolay Davydenko — all three of whom criticized their leader at a press conference at Monte Carlo thirteen months ago.

Partially as a result of that kind of support, Monte Carlo was able to retain its status, albeit without full player commitment, but Hamburg was treated so thoughtlessly that the German Federation took the ATP to court. Attempts are being made in Boston this week to avoid what is largely viewed as pending disaster for the tour as both sides are participating in mediation. However a source close to the case tells Tennis Week that the ATP remains adamant in its position and will not alter its stance that Hamburg will be stripped of its Masters Series status starting next year. The ramifications of the court case are immense.

"If the ATP lose, the tour will implode," was how one experienced official described it to me. "And if they don’t, Hamburg is still not going to go away. They have money to fight this and are unlikely to accept a first unfavorable ruling."
All this has created the kind of atmosphere whereby players feel they are not being listened to and that their careers are being damaged. Time and again in recent weeks, Nadal has complained of the compressed European claycourt season and now has blistered feet to show for it. Quite apart from that, there have been 23 defaults in five tournaments since the tour arrived in Europe, creating a new crisis for the sport.
Given the current atmosphere, it was inevitable that there would be scapegoats and Rogers, who has been brilliant at handling Agassi’s frequently tempestuous career, has become the first.

"But this is only the beginning," one well informed insider told me from Hamburg today. "The top players are not going to go away. They want what they have always wanted — representation on the Board that reflects their views. It is an old story and has been going on for years. There have been too many people sitting in conference rooms not listening to what the people who have to go out and play the matches on different surfaces with no proper preparation are telling them."

tangerine_dream
05-27-2008, 03:45 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/tennis/2008-05-26-players-council_N.htm
World's top men's players aiming for more say
By Douglas Robson

PARIS — The Big Three of men's tennis aren't just asserting themselves in the ATP Tour's rankings. They are attempting to ensure their voice is heard in the upper echelons of the game by angling for slots on the tour's Players' Council.

Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic, the world's top three players and French Open favorites, have put themselves forward as candidates on the 10-man council, the ATP confirmed. The council serves as a conduit to the ATP board for the players, and elects three board members.

Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have been increasingly vocal critics of ATP leadership, in particular ATP Chairman and President Etienne de Villiers. The ATP is 50% owned by the players and the tournaments. It runs and governs ATP events, but not the Grand Slams or Davis Cup.

Discontent started to brew last year when the ATP announced its new 2009 calendar, which downgraded clay-court events at Monte Carlo and Hamburg from Masters Series status and moved Hamburg to a later slot in the year.

Federer, Nadal and No. 4 Nikolay Davydenko called a news conference in Monte Carlo at that time to express dissatisfaction. Monte Carlo's status was restored; Hamburg's was not, and it is suing the ATP. The trial is set to begin in July.

At the Sony Ericsson Open in March, nearly every top-20 player, including the top three, sent a letter to the ATP asking that other candidates be considered before de Villiers' contract as chairman and president is renegotiated. His three-year term ends in December.

Two weeks ago, the Players' Council voted to oust Perry Rogers, one of three player representatives on the six-man ATP board that is chaired by de Villiers. Rogers is Andre Agassi's childhood friend and longtime agent. His other clients include NBA star Shaquille O'Neal and Agassi's wife, Steffi Graf.

"We as council members want to have a voice, and we want to be heard, we want to be involved in all of the decisions made," said current Players' Council member James Blake when asked about the vote following his first-round win vs. Rainer Schuettler of Germany on Sunday. "That's all we're asking, is having a fair say, because we don't have (a) union leader like a lot of other sports that have collective bargaining agreements."

Nadal, the three-time defending French Open champion from Spain, has been a persistent adversary this spring regarding the compressed clay-court schedule, which includes three Masters Series tournaments in four weeks.

"I always said that the calendar was wrong and that the ATP was doing a very poor job with it," Nadal said via e-mail earlier this month. "Something needs to be done since it is unfair for us."

The new council will be voted on at Wimbledon, which begins June 23. All 10 positions are at stake. Four positions come from players ranked 1-50; two by those ranked 50-100; two from the top 100-ranked doubles players; and two at-large. Terms last two years.

The other two player reps on the ATP board, former pro Jacco Eltingh and ex-ATP official Iggy Jovanovic, also could come under attack.

Jovanovich, whose term expires this year, said this week that since more of the tour's rules are "triggered" by players with higher rankings, such as mandatory participation at Masters events, it's understandable they sometimes feel their voice goes unheeded.

"At times, I feel they are right," he said.

Blake noted the difficulty of satisfying the tour's various constituents, whose needs vary widely.

"There's different sections where there's clay courters, top players, there's doubles players," the American No. 9 said. "And so we want to make sure the council is what represents all of those players."

~*BGT*~
05-27-2008, 04:44 AM
Besides James and Ljubicic, who are the other members of the Players Council?

tangerine_dream
05-27-2008, 05:40 AM
Besides James and Ljubicic, who are the other members of the Players Council?
Ivan Ljubicic (President), James Blake (VP), Thomas Johansson, Olivier Rochus, Paul Goldstein, Davide Sanguinetti, Bob Bryan, Kevin Ullyett, Paradorn Srichaphan, and Martin Garcia

davis
05-27-2008, 05:45 AM
Bravo to Roger, Rafa, and Novak. Whether their presence and voice would make a difference remains to be seen, but it's the right signal.:worship:

Alex999
05-27-2008, 06:00 AM
Bravo to Roger, Rafa, and Novak. Whether their presence and voice would make a difference remains to be seen, but it's the right signal.:worship:
Let's hope so :yeah:.

Or Levy
05-27-2008, 06:29 AM
Well, I'm surprised - and pleasently so, that the three of them want to be members on the council. I bet Devilliers would just die from having to deal with them even more than now.

fast_clay
05-27-2008, 12:51 PM
look after the calendar and the players and the money in the sport will take care of itself... very simple..

Fee
05-27-2008, 05:45 PM
I would love it if these three get elected and can actually squeeze the work in to their schedules. I would love it even more if it leads to DeVilliers getting fired.

rafa the best
05-27-2008, 06:34 PM
Finally, after all the talking Rafa has done, this man will go away.
I wish they would have a former tennis player in his place, someone who knows tennis and players, whjat they need and want.

Johnny Groove
05-27-2008, 06:35 PM
Finally, after all the talking Rafa has done, this man will go away.
I wish they would have a former tennis player in his place, someone who knows tennis and players, whjat they need and want.

Agassi :yeah:

Action Jackson
05-27-2008, 06:47 PM
Agassi :yeah:

No.

Deboogle!.
05-27-2008, 07:34 PM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc. Would be nice to see one of the truly elite players on there, but do we really need all 3 of them? I almost think the bigger problem is getting a current top player on the BOARD, not the player council. Maybe that's the ultimate goal. But I also think it wouldn't be good if the council was stacked with only top players because their interests do not represent the whole tour's either. It's an interesting development, that's for sure.

Merton
05-27-2008, 07:45 PM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc. Would be nice to see one of the truly elite players on there, but do we really need all 3 of them? I almost think the bigger problem is getting a current top player on the BOARD, not the player council. Maybe that's the ultimate goal. But I also think it wouldn't be good if the council was stacked with only top players because their interests do not represent the whole tour's either. It's an interesting development, that's for sure.

Agree, top players provide a certain perspective but it is impossible to grasp issues that are not directly related to them, for example a player moving between challengers and the main tour struggling to get direct entry to ATP tournaments. The board is another matter, the presence of a high profile player there carries certain advantages, like high profile, publicity and ability to communicate with technical directors. Still, it is not necessarily the best representation choice as eventually what matters is the bottom line the board accomplishes.

2moretogo
05-27-2008, 08:28 PM
WTA finally got something right....wish the ATP was part of this too...

WTA Tour Goes Live Online With ESPN360.com

By Tennis Week Thursday, May 08, 2008

Eleven Sony Ericsson WTA Tour tournaments will be available online starting today — if you get ESPN360.com.

ESPN360.com and the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour announced a new agreement today that will provide tennis fans with more than 150 hours of live online tennis coverage from Sony Ericsson WTA Tour events around the world. The agreement will provide ESPN360.com viewers exclusive coverage, including more than 70 scheduled matches at 11 events on 49 days between May and November.

Live online coverage begins today with live coverage from The Qatar Telecom German Open in Berlin and will conclude with coverage of the season-ending Sony Ericsson Championships in Doha.

Additionally, matches will be available for on-demand replay for at least 48 hours after their completion.

Currently, ESPN360.com is available in about 20 million American homes via more than 25 Internet Service Providers around the country including Verizon, AT&T, RCN, Beld, Bend, Charter, Frontier, Grande Communications, Knology, Mid-Hudson, MediaCom, Spencer, Municipal Utilities, Starstream Communications, Sus-com, U.S. Cable and more. ESPN360.com is free to fans who receive their high-speed internet service though an affiliated ISP provider. For more information on whether your ISP offers ESPN360.com or on how to get it, go to www.espn360.com.

"The Sony Ericsson WTA Tour is thrilled to have ESPN360.com as a new media partner," said Michael Rowe, Sony Ericsson WTA Tour Vice-President Television and Digital Media. "This agreement not only vastly expands the presence of live Tour tennis on the internet but allows new and existing tennis fans access to more live action, more of the time. To develop the online and digital output with a world-renowned sports broadcaster like ESPN360.com is very exciting for women’s tennis."

ESPN360.com’s schedule of Sony Ericsson WTA Tour coverage also includes the following events: Internazionali BNL d’Italia in Rome, Italy; International Women’s Open in Eastbourne, UK; Rogers Cup in Montreal, Canada; Toray Pan Pacific Open in Tokyo, Japan; China Open in Beijing, China; Porsche Tennis Grand Prix in Stuttgart, Germany; Kremlin Cup in Moscow, Russia; Zurich Open in Zurich, Switzerland; Generali Ladies Linz in Linz, Austria; and Sony Ericsson Championships in Doha, Qatar.

I don't because it is missing Comcast. :sad:

Fee
05-27-2008, 08:29 PM
The player council is split to allow from representation of each group. If the top 3 get elected, the other 9 members would be from the other demo of players and would still have the votes to override them if necessary. I can't see the top 3 running roughshod over the others, but to have them leading the council would surely give them a heck of a lot more attention than they've been getting.

The board is the most important, but if a new player council throws it's weight into the board representation, then the effects could be greater in the long term.

amierin
05-27-2008, 09:03 PM
Agassi :yeah:

No way. He is the departed Perry Rogers bff.

amierin
05-27-2008, 09:09 PM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc. Would be nice to see one of the truly elite players on there, but do we really need all 3 of them? I almost think the bigger problem is getting a current top player on the BOARD, not the player council. Maybe that's the ultimate goal. But I also think it wouldn't be good if the council was stacked with only top players because their interests do not represent the whole tour's either. It's an interesting development, that's for sure.

I think the top players are going for the Council because the Europeans feel their voice is not being heard. Sure there are issues that they won't be able to relate to but all the slots are in play so there may be a good balance after all.

mamasue
05-27-2008, 11:43 PM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc. Would be nice to see one of the truly elite players on there, but do we really need all 3 of them? I almost think the bigger problem is getting a current top player on the BOARD, not the player council. Maybe that's the ultimate goal. But I also think it wouldn't be good if the council was stacked with only top players because their interests do not represent the whole tour's either. It's an interesting development, that's for sure.
Um, no. The current player council appears to be a worthless group of ATP Board Yes Men which is evidenced by the crappy 2009 calendar they obviously endorsed. :rolleyes: The only one I've heard speak out in the last year wss Blake and all he's done was to agree with the ATP Board like a typical ass kisser. :o The 3 players who have spoken out the most are Roger, Rafa and Davydenko. They are the ones who brought the calendar problems to light, not anyone on the worthless current player council, and have continued to keep it in the news. And definitely the Djkerobitch is delusional. He's only very recently said anything about the calendar problems and he's obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship!!! :haha:

Go Rafa and Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to spend as much time as necessary to straighten things out at the ATP!!

mamasue
05-27-2008, 11:56 PM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc. Would be nice to see one of the truly elite players on there, but do we really need all 3 of them? I almost think the bigger problem is getting a current top player on the BOARD, not the player council. Maybe that's the ultimate goal. But I also think it wouldn't be good if the council was stacked with only top players because their interests do not represent the whole tour's either. It's an interesting development, that's for sure.
Um, no. :rolleyes: Rafa, Roger and Davydenko have been at the forefront of the problems with the calendar and lack of player interest in the ATP. And they have continued to speak out and keep their plight in the news. The current player council members are worthless Yes Men as evidenced by their obvious approval of the atrocious 2008 and 2009 calendars. :rolleyes: The only one to have said anything is Blake and all he's done is to agree with the status quo like a good ass kisser. And Djerkobitch is obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. He's only just recently said anything about the problems. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship! :haha:

Go Rafa!! Go Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to put some skin in the game and to spend time they don't have to make the ATP consider the players' best interest in all of their decisions!

rocketassist
05-27-2008, 11:56 PM
Um, no. The current player council appears to be a worthless group of ATP Board Yes Men which is evidenced by the crappy 2009 calendar they obviously endorsed. :rolleyes: The only one I've heard speak out in the last year wss Blake and all he's done was to agree with the ATP Board like a typical ass kisser. :o The 3 players who have spoken out the most are Roger, Rafa and Davydenko. They are the ones who brought the calendar problems to light, not anyone on the worthless current player council, and have continued to keep it in the news. And definitely the Djkerobitch is delusional. He's only very recently said anything about the calendar problems and he's obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship!!! :haha:

Go Rafa and Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to spend as much time as necessary to straighten things out at the ATP!!

Blake's head is up De Villiers' ass more than it is Federer's ass.

He's American, his strongest tournaments haven't been tampered with, that's why he agreed to it.

rocketassist
05-27-2008, 11:56 PM
Um, no. The current player council appears to be a worthless group of ATP Board Yes Men which is evidenced by the crappy 2009 calendar they obviously endorsed. :rolleyes: The only one I've heard speak out in the last year wss Blake and all he's done was to agree with the ATP Board like a typical ass kisser. :o The 3 players who have spoken out the most are Roger, Rafa and Davydenko. They are the ones who brought the calendar problems to light, not anyone on the worthless current player council, and have continued to keep it in the news. And definitely the Djkerobitch is delusional. He's only very recently said anything about the calendar problems and he's obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship!!! :haha:

Go Rafa and Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to spend as much time as necessary to straighten things out at the ATP!!

Blake's head is up De Villiers' ass more than it is Federer's ass.

He's American, his strongest tournaments haven't been tampered with, that's why he agreed to it.

Deboogle!.
05-28-2008, 01:05 AM
Um, no. The current player council appears to be a worthless group of ATP Board Yes Men which is evidenced by the crappy 2009 calendar they obviously endorsed. :rolleyes: The only one I've heard speak out in the last year wss Blake and all he's done was to agree with the ATP Board like a typical ass kisser. :o The 3 players who have spoken out the most are Roger, Rafa and Davydenko. They are the ones who brought the calendar problems to light, not anyone on the worthless current player council, and have continued to keep it in the news. And definitely the Djkerobitch is delusional. He's only very recently said anything about the calendar problems and he's obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship!!! :haha:

Go Rafa and Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to spend as much time as necessary to straighten things out at the ATP!!I had this nice logical well thought out reply all set to post to you, but really, the fact that you feel the need to take this serious issue and devolve it into yet another Djokovic-bashing session means it's really just not worth it :yawn:

Clara Bow
05-28-2008, 07:36 AM
IMO the player council includes a nice cross-section of the tour - a little doubles, a little top player, a little "journeyman" etc.

I am going to have to disagree with you in that I don't feel that the current council is the best cross section. You should also have a variety of players from different surfaces and different backgrounds. If my understanding is correct, there are no players from Latin America or Spain and the traditional clay countries are not represented. I am not saying the whole board needs to be made up of it- but make it representative. It is not just about singles, doubles and levels of play but also realizing that it is a global and not just a hardcourt sport.

Castafiore
05-28-2008, 07:44 AM
I am going to have to disagree with you in that I don't feel that the current council is the best cross section. You should also have a variety of players from different surfaces and different backgrounds. If my understanding is correct, there are no players from Latin America or Spain and the traditional clay countries are not represented. I am not saying the whole board needs to be made up of it- but make it representative. It is not just about singles, doubles and levels of play but also realizing that it is a global and not just a hardcourt sport.
:yeah:

Action Jackson
05-28-2008, 07:50 AM
I am going to have to disagree with you in that I don't feel that the current council is the best cross section. You should also have a variety of players from different surfaces and different backgrounds. If my understanding is correct, there are no players from Latin America or Spain and the traditional clay countries are not represented. I am not saying the whole board needs to be made up of it- but make it representative. It is not just about singles, doubles and levels of play but also realizing that it is a global and not just a hardcourt sport.

Of course it's not balanced, well it's balanced in the context that it suits particular players more so than others.

There has to be some changes and it's good the big 3 have stood up and said something, but their interests are a lot different to many of their peers.

nobama
05-28-2008, 10:57 AM
Um, no. :rolleyes: Rafa, Roger and Davydenko have been at the forefront of the problems with the calendar and lack of player interest in the ATP. And they have continued to speak out and keep their plight in the news. The current player council members are worthless Yes Men as evidenced by their obvious approval of the atrocious 2008 and 2009 calendars. :rolleyes: The only one to have said anything is Blake and all he's done is to agree with the status quo like a good ass kisser. And Djerkobitch is obviously just trying to ride the coattails of the big 2. He's only just recently said anything about the problems. Poor fool, he so desperately wants to be a part of the Rafa and Roger friendship! :haha:

Go Rafa!! Go Roger!! I'm so glad they are willing to put some skin in the game and to spend time they don't have to make the ATP consider the players' best interest in all of their decisions!
Um when has Federer bitched about the calendar? Just Monday he said the schedule had nothing to do with so many players withdrawing from RG. And he wasn't nearly as vocal as Nadal was about the clay court season this year. This is what he said in Rome: "So I agree, it's not right, you know, but it's the way it is this year unfortunately, and hopefully things will be better next time." IMO no player has really been at the "forefront of the problems with the calendar". I would love it if we could get to the point where players are able to prevent stupid shit like RR and re-naming tournaments but so far it seems like they're quite powerless to do anything.

Sunset of Age
05-28-2008, 11:12 AM
Um when has Federer bitched about the calendar? Just Monday he said the schedule had nothing to do with so many players withdrawing from RG. And he wasn't nearly as vocal as Nadal was about the clay court season this year. This is what he said in Rome: "So I agree, it's not right, you know, but it's the way it is this year unfortunately, and hopefully things will be better next time." IMO no player has really been at the "forefront of the problems with the calendar". I would love it if we could get to the point where players are able to prevent stupid shit like RR and re-naming tournaments but so far it seems like they're quite powerless to do anything.

Well, Fed might indeed not have been as vocal about it as Raf, but the quote you mention surely makes clear that he's not happy with it either... :shrug:
As for the players having little or no impact - alas, it looks that way - but well, what are they to do about it? Go on strike? That would hurt themselves more than the ATP I think, and as such it is no option.

ae wowww
05-28-2008, 01:54 PM
GTG deVilliers! Get out!!

Fee
06-10-2008, 04:42 AM
This is old, but it needs to be in the thread for the sake of posterity ;)

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/other/sfl-flspfrenchnote30sbmay30,0,3024325.story

In players' revolt, ATP head may roll

By Charles Bricker | South Florida Sun-Sentinel
May 30, 2008

PARIS - The fate of ATP chairman Etienne de Villiers will be settled after the Hamburg lawsuit is settled, probably sometime in early August, and it's not clear if the tour's chief executive will have his contract renewed even if the ATP wins the case.

The tour is being sued by owners of the Hamburg tournament, which the ATP board of directors, at de Villiers' recommendation, downgraded from its Masters Series level.

"We have one big issue and that's the Hamburg suit, the 23rd of July, and it's [the trial] going to last two to three weeks," said Ivan Ljubicic, the No. 30-ranked player and a key member of the Player Council.

"If Hamburg wins, there's no ATP anymore and everything has to start from scratch again. If ATP wins, we will review Etienne's future."

De Villiers' contract expires at the end of December, and most of the top-20 players have made it clear they want other candidates looked at before consideration is given to re-upping de Villiers.

Things look bleak for de Villiers' future with the ATP. No one goes looking for a new chief executive if they're satisfied with the work and direction the current one is taking the tour.

Ljubicic was asked how much the Hamburg suit has cost the ATP thus far. "A lot of money," he said. "Eight million dollars?" he was asked. "Close," he replied. "But it will be more than that for sure when it is over."

This has been a tumultuous year for de Villiers, who faces a palace revolt from rank-and-file players. The Council, which advises de Villiers' supportive Board of Directors, already has voted to dump Andre Agassi's agent and longtime friend, Perry Rogers, and the man Rogers defeated last summer, Justin Gimelstob, is a leading candidate to replace him.

"Justin has called me, but there are four or five others," Ljubicic said. The election will be held during Wimbledon.

Why was Rogers removed? "The players were not happy with him. It's as simple as that," Ljubicic said. "He wasn't representing our points of view and was working against our opinions."

Top players, most notably world No. 3 Novak Djokovic, have suggested that the Board of Directors has done a poor job of keeping rank-and-file players informed of decisions they're considering.

"True?" Ljubicic was asked. "That's the feeling," he replied.

Fee
06-16-2008, 05:43 AM
Jacco Eltingh has been voted off the Board. Not sure when it takes effect, but its probably immediate since there will be elections on Saturday at Wimbledon.

Action Jackson
06-16-2008, 05:57 AM
Na na na hey hey goodbye Jacco.

Fee
06-17-2008, 07:14 PM
Weird that the news about Jacco has not gone public yet...

Sunset of Age
06-17-2008, 07:16 PM
Weird that the news about Jacco has not gone public yet...

That's strange indeed. Nothing in the papers over here so far...

Eviscerator
06-17-2008, 07:48 PM
He is still around. I was hoping this thread would be the final nail in his coffin. ;)

Fee
06-17-2008, 07:59 PM
He'll be gone soon enough. Saturday evening in London is going to be the start of the countdown, I'm pretty sure. First the player council elections, then the board elections, then the massive celebration... then the real work begins on Sunday when the hangovers clear. They won't fire ET without a replacement, but I'm sure he will know soon enough that his days are numbered.

Matt01
06-17-2008, 09:30 PM
He is still around. I was hoping this thread would be the final nail in his coffin. ;)


Same here. Can't wait for the day he's gone :bounce:

Via
06-18-2008, 12:18 AM
I hope they won't find another mark miles, just because this guy is pushing things the wrong way, they'll go back to another do-nothing lame duck.

Jimnik
06-18-2008, 12:41 AM
Are there any retired players that would be interested?

Action Jackson
06-18-2008, 10:07 AM
The TD of Monte Carlo Franulovic is meant to be a candidate.

Fee
06-18-2008, 05:05 PM
The TD of Monte Carlo Franulovic is meant to be a candidate.

For the board or for the CEO of the ATP?

Sunset of Age
06-18-2008, 05:07 PM
He is still around. I was hoping this thread would be the final nail in his coffin. ;)

Nice avvy. He'd surely know his way with Mr. Devil. ;)

Kitty de Sade
06-18-2008, 05:18 PM
He'll be gone soon enough. Saturday evening in London is going to be the start of the countdown, I'm pretty sure. First the player council elections, then the board elections, then the massive celebration... then the real work begins on Sunday when the hangovers clear. They won't fire ET without a replacement, but I'm sure he will know soon enough that his days are numbered.

Champagne chilling....starting the music....:aparty: :drink:

Fee, if you could figure out a way to make the beginning of the ousting happen by Saturday, that would work nicely. :hatoff:

Fee
06-18-2008, 05:22 PM
Champagne chilling....starting the music....:aparty: :drink:

Fee, if you could figure out a way to make the beginning of the ousting happen by Saturday, that would work nicely. :hatoff:

I think the players are going to take care of that all on their own. :)

MusicMyst
06-18-2008, 07:47 PM
Are there any retired players that would be interested?

Who would you suggest? You need somebody who actually knows how to run a sports business, which eliminates most retired players.

NicoFan
06-18-2008, 08:18 PM
Who would you suggest? You need somebody who actually knows how to run a sports business, which eliminates most retired players.

Very true.

Today's sports environment is extremely complex. No retired player would have the skills to run the game.

Johnny Groove
06-18-2008, 08:34 PM
Very true.

Today's sports environment is extremely complex. No retired player would have the skills to run the game.

Well then perhaps they should do away with having one supreme ruler of it and instead have a roundtable of top tennis minds that have the same common goal in mind (improving the game) but have different methods of going about it :shrug:

EDIT: On second thought, this sounds too much like the US Congress, so nevermind :tape:

ZackBusner
06-18-2008, 09:26 PM
The most important thing is: They need someone who know how to run a community more than someone who only knows how to run a company. (Maybe a person who has experience with something like US congress would be not so bad :p)

NicoFan
06-18-2008, 09:47 PM
Well then perhaps they should do away with having one supreme ruler of it and instead have a roundtable of top tennis minds that have the same common goal in mind (improving the game) but have different methods of going about it :shrug:

EDIT: On second thought, this sounds too much like the US Congress, so nevermind :tape:

I've thought of that...something like a roundtable with a business person, a tennis admin person who has helped run a tennis federation or something similar, and a former player. Or two or three of each.

Though nothing can replace a strong leader who knows how to run a league. Paul Tagliabue was an awesome leader for American football - #1 sport in the U.S. And until recently, Bill France ran NASCAR with an iron fist and helped the sport go to #2 in the U.S. - lately the sport has been having problems though. But still, no one would argue that he's not a great leader who has done an excellent job.

Jimnik
06-18-2008, 11:17 PM
Who would you suggest? You need somebody who actually knows how to run a sports business, which eliminates most retired players.
Well, a lot of people on here complain that EDV is too business-minded and only seeking to maximize profits. Personally I think the popularity of tennis and the ability to make money go hand-in-hand. But the decisions he's made are more for the short term and he lacks any kind of vision or long term goal. At least a retired tennis player would, hopefully, have a deep passion and belief in the sport itself and hence would know where the future of the sport should ideally lie.

If it's a question of negotiating and doing deals with media, sponsers and tournament directors then that could be left in the hands of a different department or a company like IMG. The head of the ATP needs to have some knowledge of business, otherwise he could just make a series of unrealistic decisions, but I don't think he needs a degree from university.

Then there's also the problem that the ATP doesn't have complete power over the sport. They need to work together with several organizations including the Grand Slams, the ITF and the WTA. A retired player would hold far more weight and trustworthyness than any random businessman which is very important if you want to get things done. Otherwise the gap between all the various interests will widen and they'll be scared to make any changes at all.

Via
06-18-2008, 11:46 PM
a prominent person already involved in tennis should be considered to head the atp right now, because they badly need a strong figure to unite them. they can always hire business executives to work under the ceo (and de villiers has already been doing that, only they are mostly ex-disney men :lol: )

Fee
06-19-2008, 03:10 AM
Players taking control of ATP, but future in jeopardy

Charles Bricker

Sports Columnist

3:46 PM EDT, June 18, 2008

Step by step, dagger by dagger, the ATP Players Council is taking almost complete control of the men's tennis tour, and the tipping point that could lead to the end of the ATP as we know it could come at an absolutely critical meeting on Saturday at Wimbledon.

The 10-member Council, which is primarily advisory to the ATP Board of Directors as a sort of conduit between players and management, has tired of the cajoling and pleading for more communication and more influence in major decisions.

The only major power the Council has, and it's using it, is to replace the men who are empowered to make financial and policy decisions - the ATP Board and, by extension, the chairman and chief executive of the ATP himself, Etienne de Villiers.

There will be no more shots over the bow of the boat.

Gone: Jacco Eltingh, who held the European seat on the board and whose alliance with de Villiers made him a prime target.

Gone: Perry Rogers, Andre Agassi's longtime friend, agent and confidante, who held the Americas seat, dumped a month ago by the Council because they couldn't communicate with him and because he, too, was a strong de Villiers ally.

Gone: By Saturday, the international representative to the board, Iggy Jovanovic, who will step down. That's three of the six board members.

At the Saturday Council meeting, there will be more emphatic moves.

The Council probably will elevate its chairman, the highly-esteemed player and tour elder statesman Ivan Ljubicic, to one board seat. The other two places undoubtedly will be filled by people whose goals match those of the players who have revolted against de Villiers' controversial decisions over the past two years.

Once that's done, de Villiers will be stripped of board support.

The international seat on the Board will come down to either Mahesh Bhupathi, the Indian doubles player, or David Egdes, senior vice president of the Tennis Channel.

There are seven men running for the Americas seat, but only two are believed to have realistic chances of winning - retired player Justin Gimelstob, who thought he had the seat won a year ago when he contested Rogers, and Norman Canter, managing director of Renaissance Tennis Management.

Once the Council partisans are in control of the board, it's very difficult to see how de Villiers, whose contract is up Dec. 31 anyway, can survive the rest of the year.

In fact, sacking de Villiers could lead to an out-of-court settlement of the devastatingly expensive lawsuit that was filed by the German Tennis Federation in March of 2007 after de Villiers, as part of a plan to redesign and streamline the ATP schedule, moved the Masters Series event at Hamburg to Madrid and downgraded Monte Carlo. That lawsuit, which will be heard beginning July 23, already has cost the ATP an estimated $7 million in attorneys' fees and, says Ljubicic, that number will be significantly higher when the case is adjudicated. It could bankrupt the ATP.

Here are a number of scenarios that lie ahead for the ATP:

· No longer backed by a friendly Board of Directors, de Villiers resigns and the ATP settles the Hamburg suit. The deal to take the Hamburg event to Madrid as a combined clay-court tournament with the Sony Ericsson WTA Tour, is cancelled and Hamburg goes back to its original May date in Germany, retaining its Masters Series status.

· de Villiers stands fast as a lame duck the rest of the year and is replaced Jan. 1 by a new CEO, even if the ATP wins the Hamburg suit.

· Financially ruined by the cost of the suit, the ATP disbands and the players reform a union and recreate the men's tennis tour.

· Finally, this very intriguing possibility. The ITF, which runs the Grand Slams, and the various Slams themselves, financially bail out the ATP if the Hamburg suit is lost. No one is going to advertise it, but there have been key conversations along this line already, involving some of the most important international executives in tennis.

When the history of these past two turbulent years of men's tennis is written, one of the crucial questions will be, "Why did all this happen?"

It happened because de Villiers, who spent 15 years in executive jobs for the Walt Disney Company, including president and managing director of Walt Disney International, was brought in to kick the ATP into the 21st Century and the players didn't like his management style.

Rank and file players, particularly those in the top-20, wanted heavy influence over streamlining the tour and de Villiers discovered early on that if you ask 20 players for a view, you'll get at least 15 different answers.

No leader can function trying to please every constituent.

U.S. and European players in general want more hardcourt tournaments. Spanish and South Americans want more clay. Some players were outraged that they could be suspended if they didn't play a Masters Series event, another of de Villiers' proposals.

He inherited an almost impossible situation because the job of professional tennis player has no long-term guarantees. As a result, about 95 percent of the players never see the big picture of what could make the tour better. They see only their picture.

Nevertheless, here's where I think de Villiers got into trouble. At Disney he had only to report to a Board of Directors and, once in awhile, have a sitdown with Mickey and Donald. The ATP is a completely different animal.

It was a mistake to think he only needed to deal with a board. There are over 1,000 independent contractors (players) out there who demand to be more involved in his decisions, and they have a lot more at stake than your average stockholder.

de Villiers never made the management style adjustment from Disney to tennis.

There were early mistakes. His 2006 round-robin tournament system that was designed to keep top players in the draw, even if they lost in the first round, was widely opposed by the players from the start.

There was his misfire over a rule that should have allowed Russia's Evgeny Korolev to come out of the round robin and into the quarterfinals at the Tennis Channel Open in Las Vegas. de Villiers ruled that James Blake, a much bigger draw, would get that spot.

He admitted those mistakes, and that's to his credit. But that's where the disconnect with the players began, creating just enough doubt in players' minds about his ability to understand their needs that almost everything he would do after that was open to question.

"I still have a lot of respect for Etienne. I think he's a very good leader," Players Council member Tommy Johansson told me on Tuesday. "But I have to say he's got to have the right people around him.

"He's a great businessman. His knowledge about tennis is not that big, but it has improved a lot since he came on board. It's just a very tough job because you can't please everybody."

Johansson went on to talk about the communications disconnect, an issue that has left me perplexed.

I asked: "OK, you're not getting enough information from the Board of Directors or you feel that Etienne isn't meeting with players enough to answer questions. How simple is it to just let them know, as a Council, that this is a serious problem and it needs to be corrected right now?"

"I don't know," Johansson replied. "We're still working on it."

And it will be settled on Saturday.

"I still think Etienne is a great leader," said Johansson. "But if he would have just had the right guys next to him. Maybe a guy like Jim Courier or Mats Wilander. Not to work for the ATP, but to just pick up the phone and call them and ask for their opinions. Things would have been smoother."

If anything good comes out of this mess, it is this: "This is pretty much the first time in the history of tennis that the players are united," Johansson said.

This was not, however, the way anyone wanted to unite the players.

Charles Bricker can be reached at cbricker@sun-sentinel.com His blog can be read at sun-sentinel.com/sports.

Copyright © 2008, South Florida Sun-Sentinel

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/columnists/sfl-0618brickertennis-column,0,1812530.column?page=1

Deboogle!.
06-19-2008, 03:21 AM
wow :eek: interesting time in mens tennis, for sure. will be fascinating to see how this one pans out :eek:

Fee
06-19-2008, 04:22 AM
Saturday is going to be juicy, to say the least. I won't be around so someone please keep an eye on Bricker's column and Doug Robson's blog. They have stayed on this story all year and they will be the ones who break it over the weekend, I'm sure.

Chip_s_m
06-19-2008, 04:39 AM
Thanks Fee. That's a great article.

Castafiore
06-19-2008, 10:30 AM
Thanks for the article

There are seven men running for the Americas seat, but only two are believed to have realistic chances of winning - retired player Justin Gimelstob, who thought he had the seat won a year ago when he contested Rogers, and Norman Canter, managing director of Renaissance Tennis Management.
Gimelstob? :unsure:

U.S. and European players in general want more hardcourt tournaments.
They do? :scratch: Even more? Yes, there just aren't enough hardcourt tournaments right now. Sheesh, cut down that huge grass court season already and add more hardcourt events.

I'm not sure if that's a reasonable summary. :shrug:

rocketassist
06-19-2008, 10:35 AM
They do? :scratch: Even more? Yes, there just aren't enough hardcourt tournaments right now. Sheesh, cut down that huge grass court season already and add more hardcourt events.

I'm not sure if that's a reasonable summary. :shrug:

There should be a week or two more grass (including an AMS) and maybe more carpet in the indoor season- no more hard and clay than we already have.

There are too many hardcourt TMS as well.

cobalt60
06-19-2008, 12:35 PM
The Council probably will elevate its chairman, the highly-esteemed player and tour elder statesman Ivan Ljubicic, to one board seat.
The international seat on the Board will come down to either Mahesh Bhupathi, the Indian doubles player, or David Egdes, senior vice president of the Tennis Channel.

There are seven men running for the Americas seat, but only two are believed to have realistic chances of winning - retired player Justin Gimelstob, who thought he had the seat won a year ago when he contested Rogers, and Norman Canter, managing director of Renaissance Tennis Management.



Interesting article. Thanks Fee.
The above mentioned names are very very interesting. Nice to see Ivan is so well respected and I recently read an article about Mahesh and how business savvy he is. And although I think the tennis channel has come a long way recently it still has a way to go but I would be interested if anyone has any further info on David Egdes. Not sure how Justin would do honestly :shrug: And I don't know much about Cantor other than the fact that I believe he was recently fired by Ram/Erlich.

alfonsojose
06-19-2008, 01:35 PM
Gimelstob? :help:

Via
06-19-2008, 01:41 PM
a bit shocking to hear that 7 million plus (USD?) would be enough to bankrupt atp, while wimbledon this year is offering close to £12 million in prize money. financially the atp is no disney, that's for sure.

zadle69
06-19-2008, 04:29 PM
i think the whole sport needs a complete overhaul it is hard for them to compete with soccer, baseball, football, golf and basketball and now UFC ultimate fighting is booming and becoming popular globally with people from around the world. i dont think having the top 3 would be good also. there are too many egos and stuff may not get accomplished the way it should be.

Fee
06-19-2008, 04:52 PM
Yes, Gimelstob. He was on the player council for two years. Please put aside your personal feelings (based on never meeting him and never speaking to him) and try to understand that what you think he might have been as a player has absolutely nothing to do with what he might be like as a businessman/player rep/board member.

Deboogle!.
06-19-2008, 04:55 PM
At least Justin would care about the future of the game, that much is certain. It's not about what these people are like as people, it's about how they're going to save the ATP. Whether Justin is a good man for that job is hard to say, but at least he loves the sport.

NicoFan
06-19-2008, 06:01 PM
Thanks for posting.

Hmmm...I don't like de Villiers and want to see him gone, but not sure the future looks any brighter even without him. :shrug:

Tennis needs to put all these controversies behind them. Diehard fans may find it all intriguing but casual fans don't want to hear all this conflict. This all isn't good for the sport as a whole.

scoobs
06-19-2008, 06:04 PM
Thanks for posting.

Hmmm...I don't like de Villiers and want to see him gone, but not sure the future looks any brighter even without him. :shrug:

Tennis needs to put all these controversies behind them. Diehard fans may find it all intriguing but casual fans don't want to hear all this conflict. This all isn't good for the sport as a whole.
Quite. Whatever the result of all this boardroom intrigue, player council mutiny, the Hamburg lawsuit and the Madrid consequences, whoever is left standing at the end when the dust settles has an unenviable task of trying to run a successful tour out of all this.

The damage being done is significant.

They need a new major sponsor, let's not forget, and who is going to want to come on board with all this going on?

NicoFan
06-19-2008, 06:09 PM
Quite. Whatever the result of all this boardroom intrigue, player council mutiny, the Hamburg lawsuit and the Madrid consequences, whoever is left standing at the end when the dust settles has an unenviable task of trying to run a successful tour out of all this.

The damage being done is significant.

They need a new major sponsor, let's not forget, and who is going to want to come on board with all this going on?

Very true.

And with the global economy in the dumps, one of the first things corporations eliminate from the budget is - sponsorships!

The players may get their way - but they may bury the sport doing it. :sad:

(And I agree with the players on many issues, but there are so many factors involved in addition to their own concerns - this doesn't bode well that they are the ones steering the ATP ship.)

Merton
06-19-2008, 09:40 PM
Thanks for the updates, Disney should have been fired after Las Vegas last year but it is certainly better to fire him now and go with an interim chairman until the end of the year than to leave him on board as a lame duck.

scoobs
06-19-2008, 09:48 PM
whatever happens needs to happen quickly so they can sort out this Madrid/Hamburg mess and try and get 2009's calendar finalised. The early events need to be sorting out contracts with players soon if they aren't already. Before too long the clay tournaments will need to be doing the same and it's got to be difficult with no official calendar agreed yet and so much confusion.

Fee
06-21-2008, 06:08 AM
Before Play, Politics Takes Center Stage

Posted by Douglas Robson at 6/20/2008 8:45 AM and is filed under Tennis

As noted in today’s USA Today, the off-court action could be as interesting as what happens on court at Wimbledon.

The WTA will announce if it intends to keep or ditch on-court coaching (I predict it will go the way of the 9-point tiebreak). A new players’ council will come to power this weekend, including what should be the top three players, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. And the three vacant player representative positions on the ATP board will be filled.

“It’s an exciting weekend prior to any balls being struck,” outgoing players’ council member Paul Goldstein told me this week.

It’s been a busy few weeks for the outgoing 10-member players’ council. In March, they ousted longtime Andre Agassi agent and confidante Perry Rogers, who represented the Americas region. Within the last two weeks, they dumped former top doubles player Jacco Eltingh, who was the European rep. The third players’ rep, onetime ATP communications director Iggy Janovanic (international rep) removed his name from the list of candidates last week.

I’m told that there are 6-7 candidates for the open Americas region seat, including recently retired Justin Gimelstob (who ran last year and lost); James Blake’s brother, Thomas Blake; Norman Canter of Florida-based Renaissance Tennis Management; and former pros Jeff Tarango and Jeff Morrison.

The Sun-Sentinel reported this week that highly respected Ivan Ljubicic, the players’ council president, would be elevated to one of the seven ATP board seats, presumably for the European region.

The international seat will likely be filled by either Indian doubles player Mahesh Bhupathi, Tennis Channel senior vice president David Edges or tennis coach and academy owner Bob Brett.

It should be noted that it’s not the new players’ council that elects the three vacant ATP board positions, but the old, outgoing council (the one Goldstein is on until Saturday night).

Of course, all of these political machinations are aimed at taking more control of the tour. The top players feel their voice has not been heard and that the previous board reps were in cahoots with ATP chief Etienne de Villiers (which may or may not be true). Suffice it to say, it’s hard to see how ATP head Etienne de Villiers, a former Disney executive, will last beyond the Dec. 31 expiration of his contract, if he lasts that long.

Goldstein, who retired last year and is working for a Silicon Valley green-energy startup, said that “communications could have been better” with the departed board reps. The top-60 ranked player seemed encouraged by the possible election of the Big Three.

“It’s pretty neat that highest ranked guys in the world -- for the first time in my 15 years as a pro and maybe ever -- are taking an active interest in the governance of the game,” said Goldstein, who also happens to be my neighbor in the Noe Valley district of San Francisco.

But what’s really hanging over everyone’s head is the Hamburg lawsuit. Hamburg is suing the ATP over its demotion from Masters Series status. The trial, which sources say has already cost the ATP from $3-$7 million, begins July 21. If the ATP loses, it could shake the foundations of the men’s tour.

“In terms of the future of tour, the result of the Hamburg case is the 800 pound gorilla,” says Goldstein.

I'm zipping off to the airport to fly to London, but I'll have my picks for Wimbledon by Monday.

http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/06/20/before-play-politics-takes-center-stage.aspx

cobalt60
06-21-2008, 12:25 PM
Once again thanks Fee :)
And as an aside this is what threads on GM should be about :yeah:

zadle69
06-21-2008, 07:12 PM
please keep us updated as far as the result

malmeida
06-21-2008, 07:42 PM
from the tennis.com ticker:

Justin Gimelstob, Tennis Channel vice president David Edges and Ljubicic are the new player representatives on the ATP board, according to reports out of Wimbledon.

http://www.tennis.com/news/ticker.aspx

NicoFan
06-21-2008, 07:54 PM
Thanks for the information. :)

Deboogle!.
06-21-2008, 10:33 PM
Sounds good :yeah: It's gotta be better than who was there before...

raven gypsy
06-21-2008, 11:30 PM
UPDATE FROM TODAY:


ESPN's Justin Gimelstob named to ATP board


Charles Bricker | South Florida Sun-Sentinel
1:00 PM EDT, June 21, 2008
WIMBLEDON - David Egdes, senior vice president of the Tennis Channel, and ESPN commentator and retired former American player Justin Gimelstob were this afternoon elected to the six-member board of directors of the ATP in what is believed to be the first step in the effort by players to seize control of the men's tour away from chairman and chief executive Etienne de Villiers.

"I'm very excited for the opportunity to be involved in the process of re-establishing a healthy communication between the board and its players," said Gimelstob, who lives part-time in Delray Beach.

"The players deserve to determine the direction that the game goes in and I believe the fact that I am recently off the tour and with my access in the world around tennils I hope to bridge the gap and help move the ATP tour in a position direction."

Egdes was briefer, saying he was anxious to begin work in 2009 and that the concerns of rank and file players were his primary concern.



Gimelstob will fill a vacancy created when the 10-member Players Council, whose only real authority is to vote out board members, terminated Perry Rogers two months ago because they found themselves unable to effectively communicate with him.

Rogers is agent, confidante and long-time friend to Andre Agassi. A second spot became available when Iggy Jovanovic declined to run for another term. The Council also created a third opening when it fired Jacco Eltingh. That spot probably will be filled next week by Council President Ivan Ljubicic.

All the electees are strongly opposed to de Villiers for various reasons. The ATP chairman has been under heavy criticism not just for stripping the clay court tournament in Hamburg of its high Masters Series status and moving it to Madrid, but for what player after player has described as a lack of communication.

The German Tennis Federation filed a $76 million suit against the ATP shortly after de Villiers and his board voted to move the tournament to Spain and the attorneys' fees are estimated to be $7 million or more already. The trial is scheduled to begin July 23 in Dover, Del.

Of the six members on the ATP board of directors, three are held by tournament representatives and three by the players. The Players Council has authority to replace only the players representatives and they've exercised that option. With the naming of three people sympathetic to player complaints toward de Villiers, it would appear as though de Villiers no longer has the board backing he needs to effectively continue.

The meeting, at Wimbledon, continued on after the election of Egdes and Gimelstob and there were reports that the 10 members were planning to draft a series of resolutions, one of which called on de Villiers to resign immediately. His contract expires on Dec. 31.

Rogers ran against Gimelstob a year ago and came to Wimbledon thinking he had the votes to win. He lost and got into a protracted dispute with Rogers, calling him "manipulative" and "a liar."

This time, he had the votes and he'll take his place on the board immediately.




http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/tennis/sfl-0621atpboard,0,6811315.story

raven gypsy
06-22-2008, 12:00 AM
New ATP Board Takes Shape

Posted by Douglas Robson at 6/21/2008 9:25 AM and is filed under
Tennis
The breaking news Saturday from Wimbledon is that the three new players’ representative on the ATP board have been elected. The new Americas rep is former pro and current Tennis Channel commentator Justin Gimelstob, who replaces longtime Andre Agassi agent Perry Rogers. Rogers was voted out of his job by the players’ council in March.

Taking over the international position from Iggy Jovanovic is David Edges, a former IMG guy and now vice president with the Tennis Channel. Ivan Ljubicic will serve in the final vacant position as the European rep, replacing the ousted Jacco Eltingh. The Croat will serve as an interim rep until the U.S. Open.

These announcements, along with the names of the new 10-member players’ council, should be posted on the atptennis.com later. The ATP board reps are elected by the old players' council, which as of today is no longer in existence. But I'm told that the Big Three of Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic -- all expected to be on the new council -- went in and spoke to the outgoing council members to let them know who they supported.


The ramifications of the new elections for the ATP leadership and other topics remain to be seen. It could clearly affect the major issue in front of the tour - the Hamburg lawsuit. If current leadership is removed, could the suit be settled before it goes to trial?


http://blog.douglasrobson.com/2008/06/21/new-atp-board-takes-shape.aspx

nobama
06-22-2008, 12:17 AM
http://www.atptennis.com/1/en/2008news/playercouncil.asp
NEWS June 21, 2008
Federer, Nadal, Djokovic Elected to ATP Player Council

LONDON -- The elections for the ATP Player Council ended Saturday. The following players have been voted onto the new ATP Player Council which begins its two-year term Sunday:

No. 1-50 Ranking
Roger Federer (SUI)
Rafael Nadal (ESP)
Novak Djokovic (SRB)
TBD (Council will appoint in due course)

No. 51-100 Ranking
Peter Luczak (AUS)
Michael Berrer (GER)

Doubles
Yves Allegro (SUI)
Eric Butorac (USA)

At-Large
David Martin (USA)
Martin Garcia (ARG)

The outgoing Player Council on Saturday also voted for the new ATP Board Player Representatives. Justin Gimelstob (pictured) was elected to become Americas Player Board Representative and will fulfill the existing term that ends in December 2010. David Egdes was elected to become International Player Board Representative and will begin his three-year term on January 1, 2009. The vacant Europe Player Board Representative position will be voted on by the new Player Council at the US Open. In the meantime, Ivan Ljubicic will temporarily fulfill the role.

Etienne de Villiers, ATP Executive Chairman, said: "It’s hugely positive for men’s tennis that players continue to offer their time and undertake the effort to get involved in the management and direction of our sport. It’s vital that players continue to be involved, understand and contribute fully to where the ATP is going and we look forward to working with the new Player Council at this very exciting time for our sport and its future. I'm also delighted to welcome David Egdes, Justin Gimelstob and Ivan Ljubicic to the ATP Board and I look forward to working with three men who I have the utmost respect for and whose experience will be invaluable as the sport continues to evolve."

Manon
06-22-2008, 12:22 AM
Thank you guys.

fast_clay
06-22-2008, 12:27 AM
new blood new blood... good stuff..!!

disappointed to hear tarango didnt get a start... he could call a spade a spade...

Deboogle!.
06-22-2008, 12:27 AM
well, hopefully this works. i still have reservations about the top 50 player reps being all the top 3, but hopefully it ends well in the long run.

fast_clay
06-22-2008, 12:31 AM
well, hopefully this works. i still have reservations about the top 50 player reps being all the top 3, but hopefully it ends well in the long run.

yeah... it is pretty top heavy alright...

but i dont have a problem whatsoever with the views they have aired...

and for me, the fact that they have success (albeit varied) on each surface kinda gives me the feeling they'll be behind a well-balanced tour... a nice fast, slow and all court player combination...

hopefully they get the stalinist mandatory event quota reduced... thats one i'll be watching...

tangerine_dream
06-22-2008, 04:19 AM
from the tennis.com ticker:

Justin Gimelstob, Tennis Channel vice president David Edges and Ljubicic are the new player representatives on the ATP board, according to reports out of Wimbledon.

http://www.tennis.com/news/ticker.aspx
Congrats to Justin on his new role but I hope he realizes that as a player rep interviews like this one will not reflect well on him:

Justin trashes Anna K. (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2008/06/new_dc_athlete_has_a_kournikov.html)

krystlel
06-22-2008, 05:04 AM
I don't like the top 3 all being player representatives either for the top 50, that's not an accurate representation of everyone's interests.

Action Jackson
06-22-2008, 06:18 AM
Lets see how it works.

scoobs
06-22-2008, 08:49 AM
Yes indeed.

The big question now is

What happens next?

Manon
06-22-2008, 10:08 AM
You asked, you watch. It's a bit odd there's top 3 but who knows?

Action Jackson
06-22-2008, 10:11 AM
Yes indeed.

The big question now is

What happens next?

Either a concentration of the top 3 to the detriment of the game or there could be some positive changes.

Then the likely option of a whole lot of nothing.

nobama
06-22-2008, 03:53 PM
Q. You were elected to the Player Council. With the top three players on the council now, will this mean a change in direction for the tour, do you think?

ROGER FEDERER: Well, I think important was, you know, that we, the players, feel like we're represented in the right way. You know, instead of always just being asked in the press maybe, saying stuff from the locker rooms and whatever, I think it was important that also the other players see that we truly care on sort of a council and board level.

I think it's interesting times in tennis. It's good times in tennis because, you know, there's been quite a few changes. But I think it's only for the better.

I don't know the changes yet, but, I mean, it's not gonna affect a whole lot the lower‑ranked players. Maybe what they think, it's now we're only going to look for the top players. I'm going to represent all players like the way we're supposed to.

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 03:56 PM
It's more than a bit odd that it's the top 3. I would say that it is nice to see the top players actually seem to care about the game, but I think that it's more that they want to make sure their own concerns are given priority rather than actually caring about the game as a whole or about any of the players outside of themselves.

GuiroNl
06-22-2008, 04:00 PM
This thread should be named

"Pressure to dump on de Villiers"

clandis
06-22-2008, 04:30 PM
Congrats to Justin on his new role but I hope he realizes that as a player rep interviews like this one will not reflect well on him:

Justin trashes Anna K. (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2008/06/new_dc_athlete_has_a_kournikov.html)

Man, that was nasty. What a reprehensible interview. Trash-talking is one thing, but that was personal. He must have hit on her and been turned down. And the remarks about Charlie Sheen's wife further show no class.

GuiroNl
06-22-2008, 04:48 PM
Man, that was nasty. What a reprehensible interview. Trash-talking is one thing, but that was personal. He must have hit on her and been turned down. And the remarks about Charlie Sheen's wife further show no class.

The guy was obviously approached by his father in his youth. Biblically approached.

nobama
06-22-2008, 05:11 PM
It's more than a bit odd that it's the top 3. I would say that it is nice to see the top players actually seem to care about the game, but I think that it's more that they want to make sure their own concerns are given priority rather than actually caring about the game as a whole or about any of the players outside of themselves.How did they get voted on the player council? Who votes?

Deboogle!.
06-22-2008, 06:04 PM
How did they get voted on the player council? Who votes?So what? Who ran against them? :lol:

alfonsojose
06-22-2008, 06:34 PM
Man, that was nasty. What a reprehensible interview. Trash-talking is one thing, but that was personal. He must have hit on her and been turned down. And the remarks about Charlie Sheen's wife further show no class.

He has no class. Sadly and conveniently, some posters here forgot his embarrrasing articles at SI.com. And coming from the Andy/Mardy/Blake american gang ... i have nothing against U.S. but some of their players .. :rolleyes:

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 07:19 PM
So what? Who ran against them? :lol:

Exactly.

:lol:

nobama
06-22-2008, 07:33 PM
So what? Who ran against them? :lol:Good point. :lol: I guess then my question is why didn't someone run against them if there is a concern that they're going to look out for the interests of the top players more than anyone else. :shrug:

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 07:36 PM
Good point. :lol: I guess then my question is why didn't someone run against them if there is a concern that they're going to look out for the interests of the top players more than anyone else. :shrug:

Who is going to go against them? :shrug:

They know they can't fight the system.

DhammaTiger
06-22-2008, 07:45 PM
But if no one stood against them than those who didn't stand shouldn't complain. Credit to the top 3, as they say, they are willing to put their money where their mouth is.

Deboogle!.
06-22-2008, 07:56 PM
Who is going to go against them? :shrug:

They know they can't fight the system.it's like asking why no one runs against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts, they know it's not worth the energy to lose in the end no matter how much better qualified they might be :lol: Maybe this will end up well, I hope so.

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 07:59 PM
it's like asking why no one runs against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts, they know it's not worth the energy to lose in the end no matter how much better qualified they might be :lol: Maybe this will end up well, I hope so.

:lol: Good analogy. :yeah:

I hope it ends well too. (Not too confident though ... )

nobama
06-22-2008, 08:16 PM
it's like asking why no one runs against Ted Kennedy in Massachusetts, they know it's not worth the energy to lose in the end no matter how much better qualified they might be :lol: Maybe this will end up well, I hope so.Can't be any worse than what the tour has had, hopefully it will be better.

cobalt60
06-22-2008, 08:39 PM
Congrats to Justin on his new role but I hope he realizes that as a player rep interviews like this one will not reflect well on him:

Justin trashes Anna K. (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/dcsportsbog/2008/06/new_dc_athlete_has_a_kournikov.html)

Even if he did not just get elected as the player rep this interview reflects poorly. Wonder what he was thinking; or maybe not thinking. :shrug:

Well having the top 3 on the board at least assures the ATP of good exposure. I personally think it is a very savvy political move.

fast_clay
06-22-2008, 10:10 PM
I don't like the top 3 all being player representatives either for the top 50, that's not an accurate representation of everyone's interests.

a bigger representation from 100-500 would be nice for sure...

if you remember back to the mid to late 90's, just after the aussie cricket team became World test Champions and THE dominant cricket force, they formed a new players union headed by former Test spinner Tim May. Now, this was great timing, as the aussie cricket team has some All-Time greats in the side like the Waugh's, McGrath and Warne and would go on to dominate well... they still dominate.

The players union in this case was for a selfless cause... their primary interest was that revenue that flowed from this new dominace and success flowed to the lower level players... and.. soon.. every state player was on a base salary minimum of like... $22K/year or something like that... where previously guys often had to work while playing 1st Class level...

The upshot was that it garaunteed that players young or experienced and not yet at National level, the chance to concentrate and hone their skills... and not have to hold down sometimes full time jobs...

It was not a revolt... or revolution... It was simply a power shift...

And... it was fair... This is a case where such a power shift has worked... All the players are happy because they get their due pay... and the admin is happy because the byproduct of investing in lower level play is future high performance and ultimate success...

I hope something similar happens here with the ATP, because the players interests have been a long time lost... not just at ATP level... but, further down the line as well...

If the cause is a selfless one, I am sure the top 3 will be hailed in the future as something much greater than their on-court prowess...

Manon
06-22-2008, 10:48 PM
Q. You were elected to the Player Council. With the top three players on the council now, will this mean a change in direction for the tour, do you think?

ROGER FEDERER: Well, I think important was, you know, that we, the players, feel like we're represented in the right way. You know, instead of always just being asked in the press maybe, saying stuff from the locker rooms and whatever, I think it was important that also the other players see that we truly care on sort of a council and board level.

I think it's interesting times in tennis. It's good times in tennis because, you know, there's been quite a few changes. But I think it's only for the better.

I don't know the changes yet, but, I mean, it's not gonna affect a whole lot the lower‑ranked players. Maybe what they think, it's now we're only going to look for the top players. I'm going to represent all players like the way we're supposed to.


In the past, top players have been reluctant to run for such positions, but NOVAK DJOKOVIC said the top three players jointly decided to become candidates.

'I think it's fantastic for the sport,' Djokovic said shortly before the vote. 'We're changing the face, changing the picture of everything in general.

'We decided together that this is the best thing for sport - to join the player council and to try to be united in the future to make good decisions for us, for everybody. To be involved in all these major decisions and all the specifics, the details, is very important for us, because in the end we are the most important part of the sport. People are coming because of us. We have to defend our interests.'

smucav
06-22-2008, 11:03 PM
Good point. :lol: I guess then my question is why didn't someone run against them if there is a concern that they're going to look out for the interests of the top players more than anyone else. :shrug:Player Council Candidates:

1-50 singles (4): Novak Djokovic, Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal

51-100 singles (2): Julien Benneteau, Michael Berrer, Peter Luczak, Mischa Zverev

1-100 doubles (2): Yves Allegro, Frantisek Cermak, Rogier Wassen, Marcelo Melo, Nenad Zimonjic, Eric Butorac, Sonchat Ratiwatana

At-large (2): Martin Garcia, Ivan Ljubicic, David Martin, Davide Sanguinetti, Danai Udomchoke, Yeu-Tzuoo Wang

Alumni (1): Jeff Tarango, Jaime Fillol

At least 4 Europeans, 1 North American, 1 South American and 2 from the rest of the world must be in the Player Council. No region can have more than five reps.

[Players only vote for the category they are in (i.e. singles players ranked 1-50 vote for 1-50 singles, etc.) and the at-large category.]

Or Levy
06-22-2008, 11:10 PM
Interesting list. Other than the big names, no one that is even close of being a 'big name', or even a past big name. Ljubicic excluded.

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 11:11 PM
Here's the full list of candidates:

Elected:
Novak Djokovic
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal
Michael Berrer
Peter Luczak
Yves Allegro
Eric Butorac
Martin Garcia
David Martin


What were the guys thinking when they selected this board? :confused:

6 Europeans
2 Americans
1 South American

Where is the international representation?

:lol:

Although with King Fed, Rafa, and Nole on the board, I'm sure that they will get their way on everything so I guess it doesn't matter. :shrug:

Manon
06-22-2008, 11:17 PM
Although with King Fed, Rafa, and Nole on the board, I'm sure that they will get their way on everything so I guess it doesn't matter. :shrug:

Well, we'll see. It seems it's good move but I'd rather wait.
Only 1 South American?

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 11:23 PM
Excuse the stupid question but I never paid much attention to the back room battles until recently: How does a guy get his name on the ballot? Can any player who wants to run nominate themselves?

fast_clay
06-22-2008, 11:31 PM
What were the guys thinking when they selected this board? :confused:

6 Europeans
2 Americans
1 South American

Where is the international representation?

:lol:

Although with King Fed, Rafa, and Nole on the board, I'm sure that they will get their way on everything so I guess it doesn't matter. :shrug:


Peter Lucsak is Australian.

The combination is about right in my opinion.

NicoFan
06-22-2008, 11:40 PM
Peter Lucsak is Australian.


Sorry, yes, you are right. Thanks for the catch. :)

nobama
06-22-2008, 11:44 PM
What were the guys thinking when they selected this board? :confused:

6 Europeans
2 Americans
1 South American

Where is the international representation?

:lol:

Although with King Fed, Rafa, and Nole on the board, I'm sure that they will get their way on everything so I guess it doesn't matter. :shrug:What does the players council do anyway? I have a hard time believing these three would have been elected (or even put themselves out there) if a lot of other tour players were against it or had reservations.

fast_clay
06-22-2008, 11:52 PM
Sorry, yes, you are right. Thanks for the catch. :)


no dramas champ...

Via
06-23-2008, 12:12 AM
Even if he did not just get elected as the player rep this interview reflects poorly. Wonder what he was thinking; or maybe not thinking. :shrug:

Well having the top 3 on the board at least assures the ATP of good exposure. I personally think it is a very savvy political move.

i tend to agree. it will attract a lot more attention to the players' cause, when the biggest names in the sport are leading the way. i'm not surprised they got elected, looks like other players also agree.

Here's the full list of candidates:

Elected:
Novak Djokovic
Roger Federer
Rafael Nadal
Michael Berrer
Peter Luczak
Yves Allegro
Eric Butorac
Martin Garcia
David Martin

Not elected:
Julien Benneteau
Mischa Zverev
Frantisek Cermak
Rogier Wassen
Mahesh Bhupathi
Marcelo Melo
Nenad Zimonjic
Sonchat Ratiwana
Ivan Ljubicic*
Davide Sanguinetti**
Danai Udomchoke
Yeu-Tzuoo Wang
Jaime Fillol**
Jeff Tarango**

* I'm fairly certain that Ljubicic withdrew his name at the last minute in order to temporarily fill the spot on the board.

** The 6/21 ATP press release didn't state who was elected to fill the (non-voting) alumni & coach positions on the player council (currently held by David Adams & Ricardo Piatti respectively).

was benneteau the only top 50 player who dared to run against the big 3? and lost :lol: (even if all the frenchies voted for him)

thanks for the list, i appreciate some inside details :)

NicoFan
06-23-2008, 01:07 AM
i tend to agree. it will attract a lot more attention to the players' cause, when the biggest names in the sport are leading the way. i'm not surprised they got elected, looks like other players also agree.


In theory, it sounds good and that it should be great for the sport.

But tennis has a hard time getting press for what happens on court as compared to other sports, let alone what happens off court.

After the initial media stir that the top 3 are on the council, I doubt what happens on the players council will get much ink at all.

DhammaTiger
06-23-2008, 04:57 AM
Considering all the hype about wanting the game to grow in the biggest continent. Not a single Asian was elected,even though there were at least 4 candidates from Asia.

zadle69
06-23-2008, 02:38 PM
well i guess tennis now is an official european sport. they needed less europeans and a more well diverse player council. also, i wonder what will happen when the sponsors start to pull out. i wonder who of the top 3 will be doing the blaming. I just think let the previous poster, if you want to make tennis global diversity is the key on the player council

Bazooka
06-23-2008, 03:19 PM
well i guess tennis now is an official european sport.

I don't know why a group of tennis players, very young, unexperienced in business, and almost ignorant about anything except tennis, can handle an organization like this.

I hate Mr. Disney and want him to go, but ATP needs the likes of him, even of they stink.

The everyday job of a board governing the ATP is about dealing with sponsors, tournament organizators, media companies, negotiating loans with banks and the like. I am not sure a bunch of kids around 23 years have anything to do about all that. Some of them (like Nadal) have not even finished high school, and spend all year travelling and training. They already have a job.

Players should decide about calendar and play rules, and have a way to remove their representative if needed, nothing else.

¿Want to fix the ATP problems with calendar? just do this:

1) Dump deVilliers.
2) Add one AMS in Asia, don't touch Hamburg, and if there are sponsors enough to back it, add another one in South América. Don't make them mandatory, that's silly. Let the sponsors pay the players for appearance if they want, like Tokio does.
3) Add some common sense. There are 52 weeks in a year, take 4 out for players holidays, you still have 48. Four slams take 12 weeks (one for preparation/rest, 2 for tournament), still have 36 weeks left. Take 2 more for MC (even if it's one...) and you still have 34 weeks in which you can place no less than 17 AMS/ISG events that are never in straight weeks. Yet the ATP current calendar has managed to have AMS events on consecutive weeks several times.

Via
06-24-2008, 12:55 AM
i don't think some of you have any idea what a player council does. as far as i understand it, they are player reps, they give the players a united voice in atp matters.

In theory, it sounds good and that it should be great for the sport.

But tennis has a hard time getting press for what happens on court as compared to other sports, let alone what happens off court.

After the initial media stir that the top 3 are on the council, I doubt what happens on the players council will get much ink at all.

i don't think they are about communicating to people like you and me. so it's nothing to do with the media. it's a good idea because they will be talking with other stakeholders in the sport; so what players are better than those who have the most bargaining power?

Considering all the hype about wanting the game to grow in the biggest continent. Not a single Asian was elected,even though there were at least 4 candidates from Asia.

it's not about marketing to asia. whether we like it or not, asian players are a minority on the tour.

I don't know why a group of tennis players, very young, unexperienced in business, and almost ignorant about anything except tennis, can handle an organization like this.

I hate Mr. Disney and want him to go, but ATP needs the likes of him, even of they stink.

The everyday job of a board governing the ATP is about dealing with sponsors, tournament organizators, media companies, negotiating loans with banks and the like. I am not sure a bunch of kids around 23 years have anything to do about all that. Some of them (like Nadal) have not even finished high school, and spend all year travelling and training. They already have a job.

Players should decide about calendar and play rules, and have a way to remove their representative if needed, nothing else.



23 years? well ok if you take the average... but that's pretty much the average age of players out there, isn't it.

once again they are elected to the players council, not the board. they won't handle business, won't deal with sponsors, won't negotiate loans. maybe you'll be happier to know that gimelstob and ljubicic are slightly older (and bald) :lol: but even ljubicic won't be talking to the banks, thank goodness.

there used to be a good explanation of the atp organisational structure on the website, now with all the continual improvement... it's gone. this http://www.atptennis.com/en/aboutatp/organization.asp doesn't help much, i know.

cobalt60
06-24-2008, 12:56 AM
^^ Thanks for the above.

fast_clay
06-24-2008, 01:08 AM
1) Dump deVilliers.
2) Add one AMS in Asia, don't touch Hamburg, and if there are sponsors enough to back it, add another one in South América. Don't make them mandatory, that's silly. Let the sponsors pay the players for appearance if they want, like Tokio does.
3) Add some common sense. There are 52 weeks in a year, take 4 out for players holidays, you still have 48. Four slams take 12 weeks (one for preparation/rest, 2 for tournament), still have 36 weeks left. Take 2 more for MC (even if it's one...) and you still have 34 weeks in which you can place no less than 17 AMS/ISG events that are never in straight weeks. Yet the ATP current calendar has managed to have AMS events on consecutive weeks several times.

yep...

so many weeks in a year... not hard to make common sense...

true leadership would make sense of a calendar which is shaped like the one u describe... but, somehow they manage to fuck it up...

no wonder guys like mcenroe felt as though they were sent to the gulag when the ATP was formed... sure, it bonded a world tour which is unique... but it far from represents the best interests of the product itself... ... its players...

when the product is happy... i think everyone is happy...

fast_clay
06-24-2008, 01:09 AM
i don't think some of you have any idea what a player council does. as far as i understand it, they are player reps, they give the players a united voice in atp matters.



i don't think they are about communicating to people like you and me. so it's nothing to do with the media. it's a good idea because they will be talking with other stakeholders in the sport; so what players are better than those who have the most bargaining power?



it's not about marketing to asia. whether we like it or not, asian players are a minority on the tour.



23 years? well ok if you take the average... but that's pretty much the average age of players out there, isn't it.

once again they are elected to the players council, not the board. they won't handle business, won't deal with sponsors, won't negotiate loans. maybe you'll be happier to know that gimelstob and ljubicic are slightly older (and bald) :lol: but even ljubicic won't be talking to the banks, thank goodness.

there used to be a good explanation of the atp organisational structure on the website, now with all the continual improvement... it's gone. this http://www.atptennis.com/en/aboutatp/organization.asp doesn't help much, i know.

luv ya werk...

Deboogle!.
06-24-2008, 01:10 AM
as far as i understand it, they are player reps, they give the players a united voice in atp matters.I think that's right as far as I've been able to tell. They certainly don't play a role in business decisions and the like, except that perhaps the player council can speak up against something but that is unlikely to have a great influence on those types of decisions, i'd imagine.

I can only speak for myself, but my concern is more that having the top 3 all on the board to represent the whole of the top FIFTY that the interests represented will be skewed to those that the top players share. I think most people would agree that the very top players have very different interests than even guys in the top 20, let alone top 50. When you take out the doubles reps, the top 3 are accounting for an extremely disproportionate amount of the tour. If they can use their influence to help everyone, then it will be great, and that is what I hope will happen, but I do have some reservations.

At the end of the day, I think the new blood on the board itself might end up to be a bigger deal than these guys on the player council. Because them being on the board is enough to threaten EDV, something the top 3 on the council couldn't have done alone anyway.

Action Jackson
06-24-2008, 03:19 AM
i don't think some of you have any idea what a player council does. as far as i understand it, they are player reps, they give the players a united voice in atp matters.



i don't think they are about communicating to people like you and me. so it's nothing to do with the media. it's a good idea because they will be talking with other stakeholders in the sport; so what players are better than those who have the most bargaining power?



it's not about marketing to asia. whether we like it or not, asian players are a minority on the tour.



23 years? well ok if you take the average... but that's pretty much the average age of players out there, isn't it.

once again they are elected to the players council, not the board. they won't handle business, won't deal with sponsors, won't negotiate loans. maybe you'll be happier to know that gimelstob and ljubicic are slightly older (and bald) :lol: but even ljubicic won't be talking to the banks, thank goodness.

there used to be a good explanation of the atp organisational structure on the website, now with all the continual improvement... it's gone. this http://www.atptennis.com/en/aboutatp/organization.asp doesn't help much, i know.

Well said, some people don't get it. They are the ones that are the elected representatives of the players, how they use it, well we don't know as of yet.

Disney needs to be marched out of there as soon as they can find a replacement.

Bazooka
06-24-2008, 08:36 AM
Disney needs to be marched out of there as soon as they can find a replacement.

Why waiting? An empty seat will very likely do the same good things as him with so many less mistakes.

Saumon
06-24-2008, 08:40 AM
I think that's right as far as I've been able to tell. They certainly don't play a role in business decisions and the like, except that perhaps the player council can speak up against something but that is unlikely to have a great influence on those types of decisions, i'd imagine.

I can only speak for myself, but my concern is more that having the top 3 all on the board to represent the whole of the top FIFTY that the interests represented will be skewed to those that the top players share. I think most people would agree that the very top players have very different interests than even guys in the top 20, let alone top 50. When you take out the doubles reps, the top 3 are accounting for an extremely disproportionate amount of the tour. If they can use their influence to help everyone, then it will be great, and that is what I hope will happen, but I do have some reservations.

At the end of the day, I think the new blood on the board itself might end up to be a bigger deal than these guys on the player council. Because them being on the board is enough to threaten EDV, something the top 3 on the council couldn't have done alone anyway.

If I understood well, the player council will choose a 4th guy to represent the top50. No? :scratch: The top3 were the only candidates anyway, so they were sure to be elected. If I'm not mistaken, candidates are nominated by their fellow players, aren't they? And if you remember last year's events (the LV fiasco and then MC), they asked Federer's and Nadal's opinion before asking the player council so now they can do both at once. :o

Action Jackson
06-24-2008, 08:42 AM
Why waiting? An empty seat will very likely do the same good things as him with so many less mistakes.

Hard to get sponsors with an empty seat, unless the company wants to promote invisibility.

The question is not if, it's when he is gone.

Zaba
06-24-2008, 10:47 AM
Players Council seeks more say in ATP affairs
Charles Bricker

Sports Columnist

June 23, 2008

WIMBLEDON, England

The newly reorganized ATP Board of Directors holds its first meeting Tuesday and high on the agenda will be settlement of the $75 million "Hamburg lawsuit."

Could a new board find a way to get rid of this suit before it's scheduled to go to court July 23?

Executive Chairman and President Etienne de Villiers has been trying, unsuccessfully, to find a settlement for months. But would the German Tennis Federation, which filed the suit more than a year ago after the ATP downgraded and moved its Masters Series event from Hamburg to Madrid, be willing to talk settlement if de Villiers quit?

I've seen nothing that suggests de Villiers will abandon his job before the end of his contract Dec. 31. Quite the contrary.

His corporate communications director has been emphasizing that de Villiers, far from being concerned about calls for his resignation, is moving forward with the tour's day to day business, which included the recent announcement of a couple of new heavyweight sponsors — Barclay's Bank and South African Airlines. However, Rafael Nadal, the four-time French Open champion and Wimbledon favorite, is believed to want de Villiers out immediately, though that is not a unanimously held position on the new board.

The pre-Wimbledon ambience has been swirling with politics since Saturday, when the ATP Players Council held what might have been its most important meeting since its inception in 1989. The 10-member Players Council elected Tennis Channel Senior Vice President David Egdes and Tennis Channel commentator Justin Gimelstob to two of the three open "players representative" spots on the board and appointed Council Chairman Ivan Ljubicic to a third board position.

There also is a newly elected Player Council and two key issues it will take up when it reforms are (a) how to increase their authority and (b) whether there should be a restructuring at the executive level of the ATP, regardless of whether de Villiers stays or goes.

Under the concept discussed in preliminary talks, there would be separate CEO and chairman positions at the top of the ATP hierarchy, and one might not necessarily report to the other.

One thing seems clear through all the complaints that have been brought by some tour members against de Villiers' management style — the Players Council, whose only real authority has been to remove board members (with no less than seven votes), wants more power.


http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/columnists/sfl-flspbricker23sbjun23,0,4604055.column

Sunset of Age
06-24-2008, 11:28 AM
However, Rafael Nadal, the four-time French Open champion and Wimbledon favorite, is believed to want de Villiers out immediately, though that is not a unanimously held position on the new board.

Raf! :yeah: :worship:

NicoFan
06-24-2008, 07:36 PM
There also is a newly elected Player Council and two key issues it will take up when it reforms are (a) how to increase their authority and (b) whether there should be a restructuring at the executive level of the ATP, regardless of whether de Villiers stays or goes.


Well there may be some of us who don't understand how the players council works ;) , but this quote from the article is what some of us are questioning.

While I think the players should have a larger voice, I do worry that they have no idea how to run a league. Sports are a huge business now. Yes, de Villiers should go, but tennis needs a business person running the show, but this time, someone who knows tennis too.

There are too many things that the players know nothing about - sponsorships and television deals - that have to be worked out if the sport is going to be successful.

While I think King Fed is a bit more business savvy than other players, based on Rafa's past comments, he is not at all. Don't know about Nole's business knowledge, but I think he's a bit young to be making decisions on how the ATP is run. :shrug:

As for all the Europeans on the players council, it's unfortunate. I know the other players voted them all in, but the Europeans are getting too much power. There are players from other parts of the world that need a voice, and based on the comments from the European players, I don't think they are taking other players into consideration much. Bad bad move to vote so many Europeans on to the council.

DhammaTiger
06-24-2008, 07:42 PM
As for all the Europeans on the players council, it's unfortunate. I know the other players voted them all in, but the Europeans are getting too much power. There are players from other parts of the world that need a voice, and based on the comments from the European players, I don't think they are taking other players into consideration much. Bad bad move to vote so many Europeans on to the council.

I agree with you 100% What the Europeans are saying we will go to Asia and South america and take your money but we will not share power with you guys.

Deboogle!.
06-24-2008, 07:45 PM
If I understood well, the player council will choose a 4th guy to represent the top50. No? :scratch: The top3 were the only candidates anyway, so they were sure to be elected. If I'm not mistaken, candidates are nominated by their fellow players, aren't they? And if you remember last year's events (the LV fiasco and then MC), they asked Federer's and Nadal's opinion before asking the player council so now they can do both at once. :oWe already went over in this thread that the fact that they were unopposed does not prove at all that they're the best people for the job. And as for asking Fed and Nadal before the council, I had a huge problem with that at the time, so at least I am consistent. Of course, the top players are important to the game, but giving them this disproportionate of a voice concerns me, and that won't change unless/until it becomes apparent that they are really using their voice for the good of the whole game and not just interests that are special to the top players.

DhammaTiger
06-24-2008, 07:48 PM
a league. Sports are a huge business now. Yes, de Villiers should go, but tennis needs a business person running the show, but this time, someone who knows tennis too.

There are too many things that the players know nothing about - sponsorships and television deals - that have to be worked out if the sport is going to be successful.

While I think King Fed is a bit more business savvy than other players, based on Rafa's past comments, he is not at all..

It's unfair to say that about Rafa. Remember he is not at all fluent in English,so there could be problem about translation. Knowing that rafa's father is a successful builder developer in Mallorca, I think some of the business acumen must have rubbed on him. So, I think it's hugely unfair to say that he has no business sense. Additionally, he can draw on a wealth of knowledge from his advisors, including his father and uncles, as to what decisions to take.