Just Say No to On-Court Tennis Coaching

Tennis has finally left behind the shackles of tradition and decided to move forward into new territory with technological innovations and significant rule changes. The most visible such change has been the use of instant replay on line calls, making the famous Hawk-Eye an instant hit.

Even the scoring system is undergoing major fluctuations. In ATP doubles, there has already been the brief (yet foolish) experiment with shortened sets. Finally a more conventional, but still innovative, format has been adopted. No-ad scoring will be used in games and tie-breaks will replace the third sets. Furthermore, competition formats are even going through some revamping. ATP will experiment with round-robin formats at tournaments that guarantee more playtime for the tournaments' big-time stars.

All in the name of attracting new fans, making the game more fan-friendly. I say, "great!"

Hey, I am all for making it more attractive to the common fan. By all means, let's carry it a step further. Let the fans scream during exciting points and do not make it an obligation for the fans to be completely still and quiet before serving up the point. When a player requests for the fan in seat 34, row F to stop adjusting his sunglasses, instruct the umpire to tell the player "play on." Don't even put the idea of "names on back of shirts" on the table. Go ahead, and make it a rule beginning yesterday!

Many of these new ideas, whether they are on the table or already being implemented, are interesting, exciting, and fresh. They alter the environment and the atmosphere for the fans, help them focus better on the match being played. They do all that without endangering the nature of the competition itself, which consists of a one-on-one encounter (two-on-two in doubles) between two players' combined physical and mental skills related to tennis.

Except one: on-court coaching. Luckily, it has yet to make it past the "discussions" or "experimental” phase. God save tennis if it becomes a full-time part of the game.

On-court coaching alters everything about the nature of the tennis match. It is no longer a one-on-one battle. Those "one's" can now be held by hand, be told to keep their mouths shut, and baby-sat through a match.

Let's speculate for a moment. Let's imagine that on-court coaching has been allowed all through the open era. Now think back in time and remember some of the past champions — Rod Laver, Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors, John McEnroe, Boris Becker.

Think of the impact that on-court coaching would have had on the image of these past champions in our minds, and in the media. Would we think of Pete Sampras in the same manner if he always had a coach by his side during matches? I am fairly certain that some media would have mentioned over and over again how fantastic a job his coach sitting on the chair was doing in making sure Sampras keeps his head in the match.

I am one hundred percent sure that the coach would have taken a good portion of the credit in Pete's gut-wrenching five-set quarterfinal victory over Alex Corretja in the 1996 U.S. Open. But we know better, don't we? Pete became ill, threw up, yet found a way all by himself to will himself to victory under the lights, in the biggest tennis arena in the world. And no one else but him deserves the credit for pulling out that historical match.

Throughout his career, Bjorn Borg was able to remain (at least appear to be) cool as ice throughout his matches. The world of tennis admired for his mental toughness and emotional control on the court. It was part of his aura, persona. McEnroe said that Borg was "the biggest character in tennis without ever having one." Now, let's speculate one more time and travel to our hypothetical world. Let's imagine that his coach, Lennart Bergelin, was able to sit by his side on the court. Would we not hear commentators saying things like, "Great job by Lennart for keeping his pupil Bjorn under control during this bad call?" Would we think of Borg the same as we do now? I think not.

If you allow coaching, what's next? Can the coaches also argue line calls on behalf of their players? Can the players receive a point penalty if the coach acts like an idiot? It may sound funny now, but if on-court coaching begins, at first it will be a passing comment or two by the coach to the referee. Then soon enough, it will be coaches complaining that "if we can talk to our players, why can't we talk to the referees?"

What if the coach is an animated individual and gets more attention then the player? Will Adidas pay him more money to wear its new clothing line on the sideline than the player? Oh, and what if a top-10 player gets passed over for a wildcard, and a top-75 player is accepted because he/she happens to have a coach with a very animated coaching style that will put butts in the seats during a tournament? Will there be a dress code for coaches? Will it be too much like a college basketball game where fans come to watch Bobby Knight on the sideline and not the game?

Can you imagine how some obsessive parents, declaring themselves as coaches, would take advantage of such opportunity and turn the match into a nightmare for their child who may not want them there, but who may not have the guts to tell them? Imagine a breakdown and a fight between son/daughter and daddy during a tennis match because one has a short fuse and the fuse gets blown by a sensitive comment. In the case of Anastasia Myskina or Tommy Haas, the coach on the sideline does not even have to be a relative. Yell and scream at them all you wish! They abuse them even now, while the coaches sit quietly in the stands.

On-court coaching would give the advantage to the top players who can afford a full-time coach. Lower ranked players would now have one more obstacle against them. This is not like professional team sports. We are not talking about teams or franchises trying to fill their arenas to make money, hence they have the right to buy the best coach that they can afford. Tennis is an individual sport and the players are out there for themselves.

A tennis match needs to be decided solely on the abilities of the players involved, and no one else. A tennis match does not need to be more than a duel between two skilled athletes on opposite sides of the net. The player needs to get all the credit and bask in his glory after he wins a tournament or a match and not have to share the spotlight with another individual. The player and no one else needs to salute the crowd immediately after shaking the opponent's hand.

Last question regarding our hypothetical world: how foolish would all the on-court coaches and their players have looked facing Roger Federer while he was without a coach for a full year?