So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Discussions about serious topics, for serious people

So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

The only reason I watch sport
0
No votes
The main reason, so I'll only watch the really big matches if I don't get to see the interviews
0
No votes
I enjoy them, but they aren't essential to my viewing
3
6%
I sometimes watch the interviews
11
23%
I'll watch the interviews if I see that they cried, or their head exploded
3
6%
I have no interest in their thoughts
30
64%
 
Total votes: 47

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 9:55 am

Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 9:51 pm
I was just coming to share that piece! A few quotes instead,
The real problem here, it strikes me, is not Osaka or even the impressive self-importance of the written media. Rather, it’s the press conference itself, which when you think about it is quite a weird idea, and one that essentially fails at its central function. The great conceit of the press conference is that it is basically a direct line from the athlete to the public at large, that we humble scribes are but the people’s faithful eyes and ears in the land of the gods.

In case you hadn’t noticed, this hasn’t really been true for a while. Athletes now have their own direct line to the public, and spoiler: it’s not us...

These aren’t elected politicians. These are simply people who have been elevated to prominence by dint of their hand-eye coordination and superior cardiovascular fitness...

We are not the good guys here. We are no longer the power. And one of the world’s best athletes would literally rather quit a grand slam tournament than have to talk to the press. Rather than scrutinising what that says about her, it might be worth asking what that says about us.
I've found the reaction to her (at least to me) rather reasonable decision to not subject herself to the press while competing to be very revealing. I don't know anything really about her, don't really follow tennis
That much is obvious. I'm guessing you don't follow any sport. I do. Too much, really. Sportspeople often talk about how much they hate doing the media, and all of them would kill to not have to do it, to be able to have a little more time to chill out after a big game. That would undoubtedly give them better physical and mental recuperation, which might make the tiny difference between winning and losing* They also all like to find a wrinkle to make their lives easier and will copy what others are doing if they can get away with it (witness the way referee intimidation mushroomed after one or two teams tried it and didn't get booked in football, for one excellent example). To allow one person not to do the media after the match because of vague reasons (as she gave initially) is to give them a little advantage over their rivals & soon everyone would be using vague & sh.t excuses like she did in her first statement to get out of it.

*at the top end of sport, the difference really is fractions of a percent. In cycling (to choose a good example which demonstrates this), a stage of the Tour de France might last 4 and a half hours. That's 270 minutes, or 16,200 seconds. If one rider beats a rival by 20 seconds, that's considered a pretty big margin of victory, yet it's 0.12% of the race time.
Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 9:51 pm
As the article points out, sportspeople have many avenues of promoting themselves, taking to their fans, spreading the word about their sponsors
Osaka's sponsors are not necessarily the same as those of Roland Garros. She can certainly promote her sponsors, but the tournament sponsors would be missing out on the eyeballs. Income the tournament receives from (a) TV, (b) sponsors & (c) ticket sales (in approximately descending order of amount) pays the prizes of all players & is used to fund tournaments at a lower level & the grass roots (or clay undersoil, since it's France) of tennis in France. Essentially, you're saying 'let the rich girl get richer & f.ck the rest'. I know you don't think like that and it's only because you don't have an interest in sport that you don't realise that this is the consequence of your position.
Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 9:51 pm
I'd also point out that the "if she can't take this completely unnecessary aspect of the job then she should just leave"
She sees herself as a tennis player. The finances of tennis view her as a reason for people to see images of the sponsors logos. See above for why it is, unfortunately, necessary.
There is a tennis players' union. If they all said they were happy to receive less prize money in return for not having to do the post-game media commitments (because the sponsorship would be less valuable and thus Roland Garros' income would be lower), then I'm sure that if all the hit were taken by the players, the organisers wouldn't mind awfully having one less thing to organise for each match.
Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 9:51 pm
why should she leave just because sports journalists can't find their own humanity?
Sports journalists (at least the top ones for big papers covering the big events) are a self-important bunch, that's true, but asking Osaka about her relatively poor record on clay (which is something her sister was complaining about) is perfectly reasonable. She's an excellent and hugely successful tennis player. Might she become an all-time great? Maybe, but to do so she'll have to get better on clay, which is one of the 3 surfaces the game is played on. It's quite a different skillset required to to perform well on the slower, grippier clay rather than the fast, bouncy hard courts that she's best on. Some great players can do it, others (merely the very good) can't and have to settle for being the best on one surface rather than all (e.g. Pete Sampras - he was shite on clay, but almost unbeatable on grass in his prime; whereas the likes of Serena, Federer, Nadal & Djokovic (all still playing) are all-surface players, although they all have a preferred surface).
Tennis' popularity has been massively enhanced over the last decade by the way these great champions have gone on and on rising to new challenges. Federer taking years to get his clay game to the point where he could seriously challenge Nadal in Paris & Nadal getting his grass game to the point where he could seriously challenge Federer at Wimbledon. Both of them had significant weaknesses on their great rival's preferred surface and both worked to overcome them, in the process making tennis more popular than ever, including more coverage of the lesser tournaments to see how the Fed was doing in Rome or Nadal at Halle to gauge how they might do in the big tournaments that followed. That, in turn massively raised the TV & sponsorship income and the prize money all round. It also raised the expectations that players would be able to work well on their weaknesses. Obviously depression and anxiety make it difficult to cope with questions about one's weaknesses, and so I understand why she wouldn't want to have to face them; but, if she'd been less vague in her original statement, then I reckon the vast majority of people would have totally sympathised.

noggins
Clardic Fug
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by noggins » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am

Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:17 am

Fishnut wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 7:39 pm
tom p wrote:
Mon May 31, 2021 7:33 pm
Well why didn't she just say that in the first place?
Maybe because talking about depression and anxiety is really f.cking hard.
One thing i forgot to point out: she didn't have to talk about anything. She employs agents (who take a very handsome cut of her sponsorship income) partly to deal with public statements.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:26 am

noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am
Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?
No, but the commensurate rise in prize money has been, in part, due to their presence in post-match interviews sitting in front of a board plastered in sponsors' logos & thus the increased number of photos of the same.

noggins
Clardic Fug
Posts: 205
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2019 1:30 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by noggins » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:30 am

Well the obvious solution is to pay x$ for the game and y$ for the postmatch foofaraw.

WFJ
Stargoon
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:54 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by WFJ » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:35 am

noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am
Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?
How interesting the interviews are is almost completely irrelevant. They are for promotion not enlightenment.

It is all very well saying screw the sponsors, but they are the lifeblood of competitive sport. It is just not viable without it. Certainly professional sport is not possible.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:37 am

noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:30 am
Well the obvious solution is to pay x$ for the game and y$ for the postmatch foofaraw.
As mentioned above, that impacts all players & the lower-ranked ones who are scraping by, living in campervans, as some are, would be hit by that. All players have to agree that it's a price worth paying.
A better suggestion might be to offer payers who don't want to do thee press a chance to pick some clothes from a dressing-up box & wear them stood in front of the sponsor's logo. Naomi Osaka dressed as Elton John would garner way more photos than Naomi Osaka in a baseball cap & tracksuit facing questions from sports hacks.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:37 am

WFJ wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:35 am
noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am
Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?
How interesting the interviews are is almost completely irrelevant. They are for promotion not enlightenment.

It is all very well saying screw the sponsors, but they are the lifeblood of competitive sport. It is just not viable without it. Certainly professional sport is not possible.
It is possible, but for fewer players, and the ones at the top would receive far smaller rewards.

WFJ
Stargoon
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:54 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by WFJ » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:41 am

tom p wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:37 am
WFJ wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:35 am
noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am
Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?
How interesting the interviews are is almost completely irrelevant. They are for promotion not enlightenment.

It is all very well saying screw the sponsors, but they are the lifeblood of competitive sport. It is just not viable without it. Certainly professional sport is not possible.
It is possible, but for fewer players, and the ones at the top would receive far smaller rewards.
Perhaps. But I cannot think of an example outside government/lottery funding for olympic athletes.

EDIT: and the Olympics themselves are obviously massively sponsor funded.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:51 am

WFJ wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:41 am
tom p wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:37 am
WFJ wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:35 am


How interesting the interviews are is almost completely irrelevant. They are for promotion not enlightenment.

It is all very well saying screw the sponsors, but they are the lifeblood of competitive sport. It is just not viable without it. Certainly professional sport is not possible.
It is possible, but for fewer players, and the ones at the top would receive far smaller rewards.
Perhaps. But I cannot think of an example outside government/lottery funding for olympic athletes.

EDIT: and the Olympics themselves are obviously massively sponsor funded.
Fair point. Maybe league cricket in Lancs/Derbyshire/Yorks - most teams will have 1 pro player & the league may or may not be sponsored. No doubt the clubs will still have some sponsorship by the local butcher and suchlike. The problem is that as soon as there's TV involved, sponsorship will get sold, so there's not really any counterexamples I can think of either.

WFJ
Stargoon
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2021 7:54 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by WFJ » Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:14 am

tom p wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:51 am

Fair point. Maybe league cricket in Lancs/Derbyshire/Yorks - most teams will have 1 pro player & the league may or may not be sponsored. No doubt the clubs will still have some sponsorship by the local butcher and suchlike. The problem is that as soon as there's TV involved, sponsorship will get sold, so there's not really any counterexamples I can think of either.
That's the thing. Even going back to the early days of nineteenth century professional sport, I think local business sponsorship was important for a lot of funding.

User avatar
science_fox
Fuzzable
Posts: 300
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:34 pm
Location: Manchester

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by science_fox » Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:17 am

For the LOLs https://twitter.com/S_Rabinovitch/statu ... 9669921792

I'm sure we can think of others. Reviwer2 for a start.
I'm not afraid of catching Covid, I'm afraid of catching idiot.

User avatar
lpm
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3273
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:05 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by lpm » Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:43 am

noggins wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 10:11 am
Has tennis recent rise in popularity been due to Federer and Nadal’s sparkling wit in post match interviews?
Yes. And it can be proved with statistics.

Tennis lagged golf for years, but took off in the early 1980s, becoming one of the mega sports with massive sponsorship, soaring prize money and true global stars. The reason was that women's tennis led the way into the gossip columns with the rivalry of American golden girl Chris Evert vs Commie automaton Navratilova. There was then a surge in the rivalry between big personality male players, with Borg vs McEnroe vs Connors vs Becker. The media swarmed over players like Pat Cash after he jumped into the stands and there were even celebrity marriages like McEnroe and Tatum O'Neal.

I bet I could plot a chart of tabloid gossip about tennis stars vs Wimbledon prize money. People wanted to read about tennis stars and journalists wanted the personal as well as the sporting stories.

The current popularity of the mens game is definitely due to the personal rivalries of Djokovic vs Federer vs Nadal vs Murray, and that cannot be untangled from the interest in their personal lives. Only people who never watch tennis will fail to know that the camera zooms in on Mrs Nadal in the stands with an inane commentator remark, or talks about how Murray's mum taught him to play, or talks about Federer's sets of twins. These post match interviews are necessary to feeding the beast of sports journalism, allowing them to link personal stories to sporting stories. I wouldn't be surprised if most of what the players hate about the interviews is that they always stray into gross personal intrusion "Do you think your break up with your boyfriend contributed to your defeat?", "How has becoming a father changed how you play?"

I suspect young folk today don't quite realise how normal sport used to be, with normal pay/prize money being accompanied by free football boots or tennis rackets, before professional sports people retired to become coaches or PE teachers or run a pub - they needed a job. The top players earned a lot, of course, but not a lifetime's fortune and they could slip back to relative obscurity once their years were done.
What ever happened to that Trump guy, you know, the one who was president for a bit?

User avatar
Woodchopper
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3679
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by Woodchopper » Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:02 pm

lpm wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:43 am
I suspect young folk today don't quite realise how normal sport used to be, with normal pay/prize money being accompanied by free football boots or tennis rackets, before professional sports people retired to become coaches or PE teachers or run a pub - they needed a job. The top players earned a lot, of course, but not a lifetime's fortune and they could slip back to relative obscurity once their years were done.
Yes, indeed. During the 80s a PE teacher at the bog standard comp I went to had played as an England rugby international throughout he 70s. A world record holding distance runner ran the town sports shop.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:37 pm

Woodchopper wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:02 pm
lpm wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:43 am
I suspect young folk today don't quite realise how normal sport used to be, with normal pay/prize money being accompanied by free football boots or tennis rackets, before professional sports people retired to become coaches or PE teachers or run a pub - they needed a job. The top players earned a lot, of course, but not a lifetime's fortune and they could slip back to relative obscurity once their years were done.
Yes, indeed. During the 80s a PE teacher at the bog standard comp I went to had played as an England rugby international throughout he 70s. A world record holding distance runner ran the town sports shop.
Spurs legend Dave McKay opened a tie shop in Enfield & footballers frequently used to open pubs.
1980s England & Manchester United midfield ace became a postie after retiring.

plodder
Dorkwood
Posts: 1520
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:50 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by plodder » Tue Jun 01, 2021 2:29 pm

It is astonishing to me that both tomp and lpm are correct in this thread.

lpm: how do you feel being on the same side of the argument as tom?

tomp: does it make you uncomfortable knowing plodder agrees with you?

either of you: do you think this could launch a real return of form for both of you? you've both been mostly talking shite for several seasons now - what's prompted this recent burst of thoughtfulness?

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Tue Jun 01, 2021 2:39 pm

tom p wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:37 pm
Woodchopper wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 12:02 pm
lpm wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:43 am
I suspect young folk today don't quite realise how normal sport used to be, with normal pay/prize money being accompanied by free football boots or tennis rackets, before professional sports people retired to become coaches or PE teachers or run a pub - they needed a job. The top players earned a lot, of course, but not a lifetime's fortune and they could slip back to relative obscurity once their years were done.
Yes, indeed. During the 80s a PE teacher at the bog standard comp I went to had played as an England rugby international throughout he 70s. A world record holding distance runner ran the town sports shop.
Spurs legend Dave McKay opened a tie shop in Enfield & footballers frequently used to open pubs.
1980s England & Manchester United midfield ace became a postie after retiring.
the footballer-turned-postie was Neil Webb, by the way. Forgot to add his name. d'oh!

User avatar
Brightonian
Catbabel
Posts: 738
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 3:16 pm
Location: Usually UK, often France and Ireland

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by Brightonian » Tue Jun 01, 2021 6:52 pm


User avatar
sTeamTraen
After Pie
Posts: 1975
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 4:24 pm
Location: Palma de Mallorca, Spain

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by sTeamTraen » Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:48 pm

Perhaps the vacuousness is not just in the interviews but in the sheer unimportance of the whole business.

Am I the only person here who would not miss the entire charade of televised "elite" professional sport if it just evaporated overnight?

No more Arsenal United or Chelsea Rovers? Fine by me. No more people getting paid $20 million a year to advertise crappy leisurewear or expensive watches. No more Formula 1 (nnnnneeoooowwww-whoosh. nnnnneeoooowwww-whoosh. Really? People pay to watch that?). A whole category of super-spreader events no longer needing to be brought back.

I might slightly miss the England cricket team, I think, but that would be about it.
Something something hammer something something nail

Millennie Al
Catbabel
Posts: 774
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2020 4:02 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by Millennie Al » Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:54 am

sTeamTraen wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:48 pm
Am I the only person here who would not miss the entire charade of televised "elite" professional sport if it just evaporated overnight?
Unlikely. But there are certainly very many people who would miss it. That is obvious from the fact that so many people are willing to pay to watch (especially in person).

Though I doubt the interviews are worth much. How many news bulletins have you seen which contained sport highlights where one of the highlights was an interview? The interviews are usually completely uninformative. In many cases players could probably prepare their answers before the event and then not have to think about them and the viewers wouldn't notice.
Covid-19 - Don't catch it: don't spread it.

User avatar
Woodchopper
Stummy Beige
Posts: 3679
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by Woodchopper » Wed Jun 02, 2021 7:31 am

Millennie Al wrote:
Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:54 am
sTeamTraen wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:48 pm
Am I the only person here who would not miss the entire charade of televised "elite" professional sport if it just evaporated overnight?
Unlikely. But there are certainly very many people who would miss it. That is obvious from the fact that so many people are willing to pay to watch (especially in person).

Though I doubt the interviews are worth much. How many news bulletins have you seen which contained sport highlights where one of the highlights was an interview? The interviews are usually completely uninformative. In many cases players could probably prepare their answers before the event and then not have to think about them and the viewers wouldn't notice.
The people mentioned in your first paragraph are probably much more interested in the interviews than you are. Those people aren't watching the evening news on BBC or ITV to see interviews of their sports stars. They are looking via dedicated channels on the interwebs or cable TV.

Go on YouTube you can easily find footage of post-tournament press conferences with Naomi Osaka that have hundreds of thousands or over a million views. Subscribe to Sky Sports or ESPN and you'll be able to watch commentators discuss what was said by sports stars in those press conferences. Its not what interests you, but more than enough people are interested to fund the billions being spent on access to sporting events.

I think that the world would be a better place if people who have achieved at elite level sport weren't global celebrities. So good for Osaka for trying to reduce the level of attention.

But their celebrity status is there and it generates massive amounts of money, including the tens or hundreds of millions earned by individual athletes. I doubt that the vast majority of sports stars would want to go back to the days when they could look forward to retiring as a coach, PE teacher or pub landlord.

tom p
Dorkwood
Posts: 1098
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 1:14 pm
Location: the low countries

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by tom p » Wed Jun 02, 2021 7:59 am

Millennie Al wrote:
Wed Jun 02, 2021 12:54 am
sTeamTraen wrote:
Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:48 pm
Am I the only person here who would not miss the entire charade of televised "elite" professional sport if it just evaporated overnight?
Unlikely. But there are certainly very many people who would miss it. That is obvious from the fact that so many people are willing to pay to watch (especially in person).

Though I doubt the interviews are worth much. How many news bulletins have you seen which contained sport highlights where one of the highlights was an interview?
Loads. The BBC, for example, basically only have the rights to Wimbledon, Queens & Eastbourne. Anything happening at Paris, New York or Melbourne concerning Andy Murray over the past decade would have the winning shot (usually only from the quarters onwards, because the BBC has to pay Eurosport for the rights to show that clip) and then his words at the press conference, because they don't have to pay for those rights & the news story "Murray wins again" is very short (even adding in tournament, round, opponent, and score it's still about 5 seconds) but a few words from him at the press conference pads it out a bit.

temptar
Sindis Poop
Posts: 70
Joined: Sun May 10, 2020 6:19 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by temptar » Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:08 am

As an ex-Formula 1 fan and an ex-tennis fan, and still a figure skating fan, I find and found the post-match presser completely vacuous for years. I see it with the rugby and footballers as well they say as little as possible. Schooled, the lot of them.

But sports fandom can be a frightening place. Figure skating on reddit, effectively you are looking at a completely unhealthy obsession with stars, and young women in particular. Fans acting as though they are personal friends of skaters they have never met. It is incredibly creepy from my point of view. It has been for years. Might I mention Monica Seles?

I have sympathy for the Naomi Osaka. I think that we are compelled to make allowances in most jobs for health related issues. It has not happened here. You have absolutely no idea how horrible fans of one player can be to another player. I don't know to what extent it happens in the men's sports but there is an ex-figure skating champion still getting hate mail for daring to win a gold medal from the fans of the winner of the silver medal. Pretty sure tennis players are subject to a lot of abuse as well. I listened to an ex-colleague complain and abuse Andy Murray for the simple fact of her irrationally not liking him. Some people post this yo Instagram and FB pages.

The fact that you can earn a lot of money from being a sports star shouldn't mean you have to sacrifice your mental health. If you are a fabulous tennis player should you have to put up with the press when the press is largely parasitic to sports and sports stars?

Maybe, you know, the pressure could be rescheduled, in line with allowing players some recovery time.

That being said, the Gary and Paul O'Donovan post heat and final interviews in Rio are classics. But they are rare. Mostly, post event interviews are not to get insight.

bagpuss
Catbabel
Posts: 893
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2019 12:10 pm

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by bagpuss » Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:55 am

temptar wrote:
Wed Jun 02, 2021 9:08 am
I have sympathy for the Naomi Osaka. I think that we are compelled to make allowances in most jobs for health related issues. It has not happened here. You have absolutely no idea how horrible fans of one player can be to another player. I don't know to what extent it happens in the men's sports but there is an ex-figure skating champion still getting hate mail for daring to win a gold medal from the fans of the winner of the silver medal. Pretty sure tennis players are subject to a lot of abuse as well. I listened to an ex-colleague complain and abuse Andy Murray for the simple fact of her irrationally not liking him. Some people post this yo Instagram and FB pages.
This is the key point, I think. Whether interviews are of interest, or boring, or essential for sponsorship and thus the continuation of the sport, or any of the other discussion points, are all very interesting - genuinely, as someone who doesn't much follow sports but will watch occasionally, many of the posts here have increased my understanding of what goes on and changed my position somewhat as a result. But what is important in Naomi Osaka's case is that no allowance seems to have been made for her health issue. It is not clear, I don't think, whether that is because she and her team didn't approach this in the right way, or because regardless of how it was approached, the result would have been the same. We don't know what communications went on behind the scenes at any point in any of this, only what has been played out in public, so perhaps it would have been the case that if she approached the organisers and asked for allowances to be made in view of her health issues, then all would have been fine and she would have been spared the interviews for this event. Or perhaps she/her team tried that and were rebuffed and told that the interviews weren't optional and tough. Or perhaps they didn't do it properly because there was no defined policy for anyone to know what "properly" might be.

It's not an easy situation. In most jobs, an individual with a health issue can be covered for to some extent - workload shared around, a different role found within the organisation for the short- or long- term, the job role adapted to the person's needs, special equipment provided, etc. That's clearly impossible for a sports person when it comes to physical health so there's an established route for those circumstances - the person withdraws from the competition, with no penalty but with obvious loss of potential income. But for mental health issues, there is no established approach and I strongly suspect that few sports competitions' policies address it in any way, because mental health has been paid so little heed for so long. I hope that one result of all of this is that sports competition organisers at least have the conversation, consider what can be done, make policies so that it's clear to everyone what will happen in the situation where someone's mental health limits what they are able to do. Perhaps an alternative would be for there to be an option for the players' coach or other representative to do at least some of the interviews? That way the sponsors still get their screen time, the same information is shared, but the player themselves doesn't have to deal with the press directly. I don't know if this would work but it seems that it could be a viable alternative, at least for the earlier matches, maybe keeping the actual player interviews for the semis and finals - still tough as hell for the losers but less of a load than after every match? If there really are no viable allowances that could possibly be fairly made then at least that should be made clear up front so that someone entering a competition knows for certain that if a mental health issue prevents them from undertaking any part of a player's commitment then that will mean withdrawal in exactly the same was as physical health issues would. Maybe that is already clear but it seems likely that, at least for the French Open, it is not, as it's unlikely that Osaka would have tried to avoid the interviews in the way she did if it were.

I am probably missing something - as I said I'm not a close follower of any sport, and usually turn off before the interviews start when I do watch, as they're pretty well always even duller than a 5 day cricket match - so please feel free to point out any ridiculousness in what I've said.

User avatar
veravista
Snowbonk
Posts: 541
Joined: Mon Nov 11, 2019 7:29 pm
Location: Directly above the centre of the earth

Re: So how important is it to see sports players being interviewed?

Post by veravista » Wed Jun 02, 2021 10:13 am

Don't know about tennis, but with golf, any of the F1 series (including F2 & F3), Moto GP, World & British Superbikes doing pre & post round interviews are a legally enforceable part of the contract for participation - competitors can be and have been fined quite heavily for not participating or not treating it seriously. If you don't agree to it you don't take part.

Post Reply