Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

A new subforum created to discuss Sania Mirza. As a lot of the other tennis player threads were getting overloaded, thus a new forum to discuss Sania Mirza

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Atithee
Member
Member
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by Atithee »

Jay, in my mind, this is a classic case of a "solution looking for a problem." You must realize that not even one person (as far as I know) except you has defended this action in this forum. At least this vigorously. It says a lot and is probably the only time I know that it has happened. Not even the one person I thought would defend it for sure. And you have made so many assumptions in this matter (very unlike you) to justify Naseema's selection that it boggles my mind.

Oh, I was saying that Naseema goes to events (other slams, Fed cup etc.) only when Sania is playing. I think you interpreted this as other events at the London Olympics. But maybe not.

I'll put it this situation in another way -- Let's say Sania was not playing at the Olympics and two other women were representing India in tennis. Since it is so important to have a support woman, and Niru was not asked, and Manisha is busy with her Mittal trust duties, would you still advocate that Naseema should be sent as the team manager because she is the NEXT best choice? Would Naseema go?

You say you don't care anymore if I agree. Fine. I also don't care if you agree either and, yes, neither of us is likely to change the other's opinion. But, I do care overall. As JIC said, two wrongs don't make a right no matter how wrong the other wrongs are. If this argument was ONLY about whether women players need support staff, you'd not get a disagreement from me. As I have repeatedly said, I am actually more bummed about three support staff being sent for four men, especially one for Somdev.
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 34750
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jayakris »

Atithee wrote:I'll put it this situation in another way -- Let's say Sania was not playing at the Olympics and two other women were representing India in tennis. Since it is so important to have a support woman, and Niru was not asked, and Manisha is busy with her Mittal trust duties, would you still advocate that Naseema should be sent as the team manager because she is the NEXT best choice? Would Naseema go?
Atithee, I'm not sure what my answers would prove, because I never said that Naseema is good for anybody else but Sania (and in this case the doubles partner who got a wildcard because of Sania).

Anyway, in your scenario, I wouldn't pick Naseema. If neither women player has a regular support person on the tour, I would quite probably ask for the mother of one of the two, if she has at least traveled with the player on some tennis events abroad and has managed some activity of the player. That is if I don't think anyone else exists who would be better than a mother in that situation. I wouldn't talk about some perceived principle that only a tennis expert should go, if I feel that the so-called experts could well be of no use at the Olympic village, compared to even a non-tennis-expert mother who has at least some idea of how things work.
But, I do care overall. As JIC said, two wrongs don't make a right no matter how wrong the other wrongs are. If this argument was ONLY about whether women players need support staff, you'd not get a disagreement from me. As I have repeatedly said, I am actually more bummed about three support staff being sent for four men, especially one for Somdev.
Two wrongs might need to be there, if we are lookng for results. When it comes to Olympics, as long as we don't screw up the chances of any deserving person, more than all the principles, what I will look for is what would get us medals. If Naseema would help more than somebody else, sure as hell I will go for her. This is basically where we disagree, come to think of it. You just don't like the principle of calling a non-tennis person as "manager" or whatever. I don't care one damn bit what she is called.

For that matter, I do know that almost all of you have opposition on principle (or what you see as a lack of it in this case), as none is really saying that somebody else should have gone or anything. Even the money spent by GOI is not that exorbitant for most of you. I know. But you all just hate it because it just isn't right, for you. That is why it is said that "even the appearance of impropriety should be avoided". But I will drop all such thoughts and do what it takes if it would help in some way in improving the medal chance (as long as there is nothing illegal and there is no cheating or stealing or upsetting another deserving person's chances or anything like that). I happen to feel strongly that it is more helpful than most other options, and you all don't feel that strongly. That's about it.

Jay

PS: I see what you said about Naseema traveling only with Sania. Also agree that we both make assumptions. I make positive assumptions that Naseema would probably help at least Rushmi also, and would be decent enough to know that she should "manage things" at least to the extent she can, if GOI is paying her as a manager. Your assumption is negative on it. Who knows who is right!
User avatar
gbelday
Member
Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2003 12:44 am
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: NJ

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by gbelday »

jayakris wrote: When it comes to Olympics, as long as we don't screw up the chances of any deserving person, more than all the principles, what I will look for is what would get us medals. If Naseema would help more than somebody else, sure as hell I will go for her. This is basically where we disagree, come to think of it. You just don't like the principle of calling a non-tennis person as "manager" or whatever. I don't care one damn bit what she is called.
This is what I meant as well. Jai and Atithee -- a couple of days ago you guys had asked me whether I was joking when I said something along these lines. I wasn't. Sorry, I got busy and didn't get a chance to come back and post (though I was reading a bit)
User avatar
Atithee
Member
Member
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by Atithee »

Boy, as much as I want to stay away from this, I get dragged back in. Deserving, you say. Let me tell you, no one deserves a medal. Now, let us get serious. Sania is not good enough to be in the singles and could not qualify for doubles. While some have called her wildcard entry a right, not even deserved, no one deserves a wildcard either. Anyway, I am happy that she got in. Now, India has a higher chance of beating Iran in volleyball than Sania winning a doubles medal. That leaves us the mixed doubles. My question is if she even deserves that one. I mean, if we win a mixed doubles medal, would it be because Sania is so superior to other females in that event, or is it that her male partner is so much better that she might end up on the winning side. Ok, it is a team effort, but nobody deserves a medal or any trophy, title, or anything. You make best efforts, show a steely drive, do whatever it takes. I do not see Sania doing that. She always seems to be demanding things. Her career has been full of let downs for me. A part of greatness is keeping yourself injury free. That is why Federer is miles ahead of his contemporaries in my book. Sania has a solitary singles title eons ago and many doubles on the tour, even some slams (cannot remember if there are some slam doubles titles though, not counting the juniors). I salute her for being our best female tennis player ever. A trailblazer and inspiration for Indians -- both women and men. But, on a world stage that are the Olympics, she is nobody, at least today, and, hence, does not deserve anything.

I have never objected to Naseema being with Sania at the olympics. Every parent should do their best to enable their child to achieve the highest honor they can. My one and only objection has been and remains about taxpayers bearing the expense of her trip.
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 34750
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jayakris »

Atithee, a question. Ok, let us say that AITA gets the message and decides not to pay for Naseema. You were already against three trainers for men. Of the men, the one with the least chance is Somdev, who is only in one event and has not payed match in half an year or more, and is among the last 4 entries, even based on his ranking before injury - sp most probably he will be done after the first day. So the natural one to also drop with Naseema will be his trainer, Milos. To me, it doesn't look like it would affect our medal chances much. Let us instead send, say, our Fed Cup coach, Rico Piperno. Would you be fine with that arrangement? We would save the money for Naseema, and we would have a support staff of 4 people for 7 tennis players - which is not so unfair compared to other contingents and doesn't look exorbirant. Would that all look fine for you? Would that stop you from being angry? :)

For that matter, would all the rest of you who are upset at seeing Naseema being sent, be fine with that, and will you all cheer Sania towards a possible medal if this can somehow happen?

Jay
User avatar
PKBasu
Member
Member
Posts: 36869
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 6:04 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: New Delhi / Kolkata
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by PKBasu »

I haven't really been following this latest storm in a tea-cup. But from a cursory reading, there seems to be a lot of agitation over Sania's (or perhaps AITA's) choice of Sania's mother (Naseema Mirza) as her support person for the Olympics. Sania has now qualified for two events at the Olympics. Either she can pick her support-person (like all the other men in the tennis team have done) or she cannot. If she cannot, someone needs to tell me why she cannot pick her support person. Throughout her pro career, Naseema and Imran Mirza have been Sania's key support-persons, so it is natural that one of them will accompany her to the Olympics as well.

As for the objection about "taxpayer money" being used to pay for support staff, the key question is whether AITA, IOA or the government of India actually picks up the tab for this. If it is AITA, I don't think taxpayer funds are really involved (except very peripherally). It is certainly pertinent to ask whether the person demanding that taxpayer money not be used is a taxpayer in India himself. A lot of taxpayer funds (and IOA funds) used to go toward paying for useless officials to accompany Indian sports teams in the past -- and I daresay some of this will happen this time as well. But if the principle is that one sportsman is allowed one support person, I don't see what the problem is with Sania's (or AITA's) picking one person (from among the two) who has been Sania's main support-person on the professional tennis tour throughout her career.
User avatar
Atithee
Member
Member
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by Atithee »

I will always cheer for Sania and anyone playing under an Indian flag. I do hope that she wins a medal at the Olympics and wish her the best. And, if AITA is indeed spending the money they raised and it is not taxpayer money that is being spent on Naseema, then, I have no qualms. I would still not agree with their choice, but it is their decision and I will leave it at that. In this case, I believe the trip is funded by the taxpayers. If it is not, please pardon my diatribe.

If you look at my list of top ten certainties in Indian sports, I am against sending a huge delegation with Indian team for any sport. We should spend the extra money only for those people who have produced medal winning performances recently and have a realistic chance of winning a medal. Spare no expense in that. But, sending a pseudo-qualified person, even for that, is not acceptable. I read somewhere that US Olympic association budget is $170 million and I already posted a link For how even "deserving" candidates struggle to make it to the olympics. In fact, the US Olympics selection is cruel. No matter how good you are, if you don't make it at the Olympic trials, many times, you lose out even on an olympic berth. India's ambitious Olympics budget, if I recall correctly, was about $50 million this year, not counting the Mittal Trust etc. Pretty good in comparison to the US budget considering the chasm between the expected results. At least use it for the athletes, not for a huge support staff and politicians on a junket. For most Indian athletes, as I alluded to earlier, it is just the experience. Let them have it and save your precious budget for only the few who have shown that they can win a medal. But, on to tennis below.

So, the answer to your question is that one manager and one staff is all I'll send for the entire tennis contingent. If Rico is that person, I am OK. If the elite players feel that they need their personal staff to produce their best, take them on your own dime. If you weren't at the olympics, you would probably be playing somewhere anyway and aren't this type of year around support staff contracted for the year anyway? So, you'd be paying for their service anyway if you were not playing at the olympics. And, the reward from various me too entities in India for winning a medal is likely more than any doubles title Prize money these tennis players are foregoing for the sake of the country. Of all the people, I have least tolerance for spending money on tennis support staff, let alone the nearest best qualified mom!
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 34750
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jayakris »

Atithee wrote:I am against sending a huge delegation with Indian team for any sport. We should spend the extra money only for those people who have produced medal winning performances recently and have a realistic chance of winning a medal. Spare no expense in that.
So, basically you will "spare no expense" only for Deepika, 2 shooters, Susheel, may be a couple of boxers andnobody else, right? Only those are really top-3, if I am not mistaken. Not even Saina, or Mary Kom. I don't agree with your criterion, but I have to accept that, though with a really funny feeling when you say that the title winner and finalist of the latest two successive best MxD events in tennis are not even a medal contendor (because I can come up with a logic for you that they will not be seeded in the top-3).

But that is pretty much madness, to set such a high criterion and to focus on just about 6 people and hope for getting even 2 or 3 medals. But you have your opionion.... I would wonder why you want to send even those players though. After all, they cost money, 7 times as much as what your tennis staff of 1 would cost. None is a medal contendor "for sparing no expense". Then why send them? Just send anybody who is top-3 in their event. Period. An Indian ontingent of 6 or 7 players and a couple of trainers. Done. The hockey team should just sit in Patiala.

No, you didn't answer my above question right. But the question is irrelevant if you say that you will only send on support person for a 7-member tennis contingent.

And by the way, please don't buy the sob stories from the US contingent about USOC only spending 170 Million. There are tons of sponsors for so many of those sportsmen, and they pay. In every Olympics we see some few sportsmen's "sad stories" like that. It doesn't make US sportsmen end up at the medal bout of a wrestling event without a trainer to give a massage like Susheel ended up with. It doesn't happen. Most of our sportsmen don't have the non-federation sponsorship like US Olympians. Don't even try to make the case for that.

But if you say that you will require any professional sportsmen who represent India to spend money commensurate to what they normally spend from sponsorship, if they want to represent India, I am fine with that criterion, though. In fact I would go so far as to say that it should have been done with the tennis folks way back. The waste I saw of money for the so-called tennis training of so many players, did not sit well with even me - the biggest Indian tennis fan there. Giving money to LP and MB while they made 10 times as much already, made no sense. They should have been asked instead to pay for their support staff, whom they normally pay anyway. They can do that much for the country, for the honor of playing for India. But then, who will pay for Vishnu and Rushmi who make no money? I suppose that is the 1 support person you are giving. OK, fair enough, on that too. If you (or GOI, IOA, AITA etc) had set such rules way back, I wouldn't have laughed at it. But to see so much money wasted in tennis for so many players who didn't even have a chance to ever qualify, and then to hold back pretty much the airfare and 10 days of per diem for one support staff would be ridiculously stupid. But you want to correct the wrongs NOW. Fine, again. What else can I say? [really, I am not disagreeing with you in this matter at all, and I am not being sarcastic here]

But the cheering that you said you would do for Sania - you might want to just keep it to yourself. All she needs is to read the last 5-6 posts from you here to know how vacuous that cheer is (as you seem completely dismissive of any chance of a medal for her, and is rather unconvinced of her deserving to even be there, as she didn't "qualify" on her own, I think). Many of us fans would just ask you to shut the hell up, if we are anywhere near you giving any cheer. Seriously :) ... I will buy you a beer after that because you were only sticking to your high principles/criteria, but I won't let you cheer the players and upset them!

Jay
User avatar
Atithee
Member
Member
Posts: 5843
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 9:14 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 10 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by Atithee »

I never said we are not a contender in mixed doubles. I did say that it is not just because Sania is so great on her own because I take an exception to the allusion that she is a "deserving" medal candidate. My main argument was about the word deserving.

If you read my previous posts, I have stated several times that India's best chance to win a tennis medal is in mixed doubles. I never said don't send a huge contingent of players. I never said pick only top three in their event. Saina is very deserving to get what she feels is right for her. I have only said that we should not send large support contingents for athletes who are going mostly for an Olympic experience.

Jay, you have this uncanny habit of creating totally unrelated arguments. I do not help either by writing too much supporting arguments.

For someone who has never owned a tennis racket, you definitely know a lot about the unique needs of tennis players. You have already been nominated as the Davis Cup captain in this forum, how about taking over the job of the Olympic tennis team manager too? At least you'll not shut me up in the stands that way when I am cheering.

And, no thanks for your beer. If you have not already, please read the meaning of the word vacuous. This kind of name calling is uncalled for, especially for a moderator.

Vacuous | Define Vacuous at Dictionary.com
dictionary.reference.com/browse/vacuous
lacking in ideas or intelligence: a vacuous mind. 3. expressing or characterized by a lack of ideas or intelligence; inane; stupid: a vacuous book. 4. purposeless ...

The vacuous Sania fan who is hiding to escape Sania's wrath lest she reads my posts.
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 34750
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jayakris »

Wait a minute. You can't just list the 3rtd and 4th meaning of "vacuous", and say that I was disrespecful. The first meaning of "vacuous" in my Oxford dictionary (and the online dic I just checked), is - "1. without contents; empty". I have only known that meaning of vacuous, as it comes pretty much from "vacuum". In other words "hollow". I meant nothing more than that meaning. It's news to me actually that the word actually had a second meaning of "stuipid". Anyway, come on... I didn't mean any disrespect to you. I will never say that somebody like you is stupid or unintelligent. I just said that a cheer would be hollow - that too for a specific reason that I stated. If you say that my assumption was wrong on how you feel about Sania's chances and that you had written much on that before, then it wouldn't be a vacuous cheer!

But what you just wrote WAS confusing, which is what made me respond. You said "We should spend the extra money only for those people who have produced medal winning performances recently and have a realistic chance of winning a medal. Spare no expense in that." Then you said "one manager and one staff is all I'll send for the entire tennis contingent". Doesn't that mean that you are not spending exta money for tennis players, Sania included, and that you are indeed sparing expenses? Doesn't that immediately mean that you just didn't think that any of the tennis payers really had a medal chance, as you want to give them anything special. How else would I take it?

Atithee, I am not trying to play on words. That is just how your latest posts sounded to me... But if it was untintentional or I misread, then I have no reason to shout over your cheers

... But then I will come back to the same question that I have been asking. What ARE you willing to give the players who have some decent medal chance (basically to place them on an even footing with those players they are against). Why wouldn't you give the player what might help her, whoever the hell that is, as long as it is not an exorbitant expense? For that matter, LP, MB and RB who all have some medal chances, should all get that consideration. If you still say one manager and one staff, then I again will get only confused. But that is fine too :)

Jay
User avatar
PKBasu
Member
Member
Posts: 36869
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 6:04 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: New Delhi / Kolkata
Been thanked: 8 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by PKBasu »

It is not "name-calling" to say that a cheer would be vacuous. Absolutely no need to get defensive about this, Jay.

If Sania -- winner of numerous Commonwealth Games and Asiad golds, two Slam MxD titles -- is not a legitimate contender for a medal at this Olympics, I don't know who is. All the fuss by MB and LP over which of them would partner her was precisely because that was the medal (the one partnering Sania Mirza in MxD) that was likeliest. People are going into all sorts of contortions over a minor matter (of who has been chosen as her support-staff) -- trying to claim that she is not a legitimate medal contender (a manifestly ludicrous claim). This is a useless discussion over a trifling matter, and really should stop now!
User avatar
jayakris
Moderators
Moderators
Posts: 34750
Joined: Mon Dec 16, 2002 7:24 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5
Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact:

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jayakris »

Actually I later thought of one of the more common uses of "vacuous" which is in the phrase "vacuous threat" .. There it really is nothing but "hollow" or "empty". That is really all the word is, most of the time. I think the meaning of "stupid, unintelligent" comes up only when one says that somebody is vacuous. Or something like "somebody's analysis was vacuous".

Anyway, we are doing the above discussion mostly because there isn't a whole lot of sports going on.. And we have entrely too much time to waste :)

Jay
jic
Member
Member
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2011 12:17 am
Antispam: No
Please enter the middle number: 5

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by jic »

This debate seems to have adopted the principle of "why use 10 words to make my point when I can use 1000 words." :p Personally, I read the first few lines, skim over the rest, and then my eyes glaze over... and then I perk up when I realize that some one feels slighted and then the debate goes in a whole other direction.

Look, Sania is the best female tennis player India has. But I have no great hopes of her medaling in this Olympics - although I do harbour faint hopes for her and Lee in the mixed.

The issue with her Mom being funded by Indian tax payers rankles me for a number of reasons. One of the main sticking points for me is that I am disappointed in what I see as the lack of hard-nosed professionalism in the way Sania has conducted herself throughout her career when it comes to having the right support staff, and not just going with people she was comfortable with. This is anothe example of it. So fine, take Mommy. But to appoint Sania's Mommy as the darn Manager of the 2-woman contingent is freakin' funny, rationalizations aside.

Anyway, I'm glad the debate happened, even if it changes nothing, including every one's views on the subject. The debate is important, in my view, because I believe it changes the energy with disparate views being aired. It will be a long time before, if ever, before Indian tennis has the professionalism required to have a strong contingent on the world stage. In the mean time, us fans will need to get our thrills purely from freak talents that emerge from the huge population and shine on the world stage purely due to their God-given gifts, no thanks to smart, hard-nosed professionalism.
User avatar
arjun2761
Member
Member
Posts: 7332
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 2:26 pm
Please enter the middle number: 1
Location: US
Been thanked: 7 times

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by arjun2761 »

This is a really vacuous debate from all sides and a case could be made that would justify several meanings of the word. :D
User avatar
kujo
Authors
Authors
Posts: 3040
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2004 11:26 pm

Re: Sania Mirza - General Discussion of non-tennis matters

Post by kujo »

http://www.thehindu.com/sport/article36 ... epage=true
Olympians complain of gender discrimination
The women’s team was assigned seats in premium economy for the 13-hour flight to Paris while the nation’s under-23 men’s team was up front on the same flight.

“It should have been the other way around,” 2011 FIFA women’s world player of the year Homare Sawa told Japanese media after arriving in the French capital. “Even just in terms of age we are senior.”
“Over the years it’s been a multitude of (reasons given) the men get better funding, so they’ve been able to do it; the men are bigger so they need more space,” she told the Sydney Morning Herald. “It’s been a bit of a sore spot, especially since the women are much more successful.”
Wow, unbelievable!
Post Reply