Serena Symposium

We had a neighborhood block party on Saturday, and we had to work on Sunday, so we missed the women’s final at the U.S. Open and the immediate reaction thereafter. In doing so, it turned out we missed a lot, including a young player’s first major win, and a veteran player’s failed bid for an historic twenty-fourth major win. There was, as such circumstances almost inevitability present, some drama.

After dropping the first set to Naomi Osaka, Serena Williams looked to be back in the mix, down just 4-3 in the second. But she’d already been mixing it up with the match umpire, who eventually charged her with a game penalty, effectively placing the set and the match out of reach for Williams.

For those who did not watch the match, we are reliant on our trusted commentators for assistance in understanding a difficult situation. As a public service, I present two voices. The first belongs to my favorite new tennis writer, Louisa Thomas, who isn’t really new at the game, at least by internet standards. In Thomas’ estimation, the umpire, Carlos Ramos, failed to grasp the moment and severely overreacted, at least in part due to Williams’ identity– not as an all-time champion, but as a woman, and one who is not Caucasian. Public scorn shades Osaka’s ensuing championship moment. The fault, Thomas contextualizes, of Ramos, but mitigated, she explains, by the grace of Williams.

The second voice belongs to one of my favorite sports commentators, Mary Carillo, who, as ever and always, speaks with a clarity that flows from experiential authority:

In the end, reactions from commentators, however experienced or perceptive, are just that: reactions. For Osaka, this was her moment, and, whatever happens from here, no one– Ramos, Williams, the fans in Queens, or anyone else– can take it away from her. For Williams, it’s about what happens next. She’ll try to match Margaret Court’s major-championship record in Melbourne this January.

Advertisements