Discourteous Attack On Women Tennis Players

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28210, 23 February 1957, Page 5

Discourteous Attack On Women Tennis Players

A LTHOUGH the standard of women's tennis in Canterbury—or the men’s for that matter—is not nearly as high as that of the major North Island provinces, a severe attack made on the Canterbury women players in the latest issue of the “Canterbury Tennis Review” is not deserved. A thoughtful survey of faults and possible remedies would have been of benefit, but the abusive terms of the editorial in this publication are not.

“Watching them in action, which is only what it amounts to, one finds that they look quite pretty adorning the courts . . . their action in trying to pop a few balls over the net, accompanied by the appropriate giggles or sighs is really nothing like the game of lawn tennis,” says the article. “. . . we find a mixture of semi-retired matrons and schoolgirls doing battle . with each other, the young ones usually being made to look like rabbits by their older, more thoughtful and settled opponents,” it says, and ends by telling the competitions committee that it would be “well advised to look into this farcical competition before women’s tennis in Canterbury becomes a lost art.” Official

Abolition of the senior women’s; competition, as suggested by the; “Tennis Review.” appears drastic! for a major association with a; membership as big as Canter-; bury’s. Nor is it likely that the; substitution of a mixed cbmpeti-' tion would raise standards, as the; article also suggests. Mixed Play Mixed . competitions are well; known to be more inclined to! “social tennis” jthan any which are composed entirely of men; or women, and that is a good aspect of the game, but not for the top players of a province. As for mixed doubles providing the women with “the added hard play against men,” leading tennis; players of both sexes are known 1 not to attach nearly as much; importance to mixed doubles as they do to ordinary singles and doubles. The answer to raising standards lies rather in plenty of play, good coaching, especially among juniors, and opportunity for competition in strong tournaments. Many in Canterbury are working hard to this end with the use of encouragement rather than dis-

The basic principle that Can- c terbury women’s tennis needs improvement is a good one, but 1 the terms of this article are in- < defensible. This journal is called < the “Canterbury Lawn Tennis i Association Official Publication,” < presumably a medium for bring- 1 ing news and informed comment < to the players and followers of i the game. It is unusual to see the official publication of any organisation cutting the ground from under those who support it. The “giggles and sighs” reference is an unfair exaggeration, for generally the women express no more emotion over their shots than most men players. The reference to “semi-retired matrons and school-girls” is a discourteous way of describing experience and youth, which must be a feature of all senior women’s competitions in the Dominion if the game is to progress. Record Players who play a game for its enjoyment deserve better treatment; Canterbury women deserve more moderate criticism because of their performances in representative matches last season. In four representative matches —against Otago, a second Wellington team. South Canterbury and West Coast—the 11 senior women who took part lost only "three of the 22 singles matches they played and only one doubles out of nine. The record of the men representatives—although admittedly , they met stronger opposition—was not nearly as good.