Keep up the GREAT work you're doing Ben. Really appreciate your commentary and willingness to bring important issues like this to light. Another excellent article following your piece on Adidas and their gender disparity in sponsorship between the men's and women's players. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you! 🥇
Thanks for consistently covering this issue. Zverev is fast becoming, in the absence of Carlos Alcaraz, one of the dominant figures in the sport. He could have won his second grand slam in a row by the end of the day. That makes scrutiny and accountability ever more important. Sadly, not enough journalists are offering comparable scrutiny - Zverev has a habit of shutting off access or ending interviews to those who bring up the allegations against him.
I’m constantly having to explain why I don’t support Zverev to my casual tennis watching friends - ie, Wimbledon only - so, whilst I agree with the remarks about the presenters not being Journalists, there are plenty of other avenues by which the BBC could contextualise his history; Newsnight, Panorama etc. Great work as ever, Ben
I agree with you completely. It’s so frustrating to have to explain what he’s like to my friends. Let’s remember: what he did to Olya was frankly attempted murder. I know there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, blah, blah, blah. Just witness his extremely petty behavior towards Sam Querrey after HE JUST WON HIS FIRST GRAND SLAM! How did his brother Mischa turn out so normal?
And it is for this kind of reporting that I subscribe to your newsletter. I was appalled that no mention was made during the Fery match, the first of Zverev matches that I watched.
A lot of us won't know how TV coverage goes because we won't be watching the final. Fortunately we had a dramatic women's final with two admirable opponents. No deep investigative journalism required.
Yes! I fast-forwarded to the last game/tie-breaker of each set just to hopefully see Sinner win the set. Other than that, I had no interest.
The women's final had everything that I could want. Incredible grit by Muchova at the end of the 2nd set and Noskova in the 3rd. Touching speeches by both too.
I appreciate your the work you do advocating for accountability through your journalism. It’s disappointing to also hear silence on some of the British based podcasts specifically as they discuss the current and upcoming matches. The silence they are maintaining will become more and more difficult. Let’s see how this continue to unfold if he makes a deep run here in the U.S.
Another great piece. I had to explain this situation to a friend during the Fery match - she's like so many in the UK who only tune in during Wimbledon. She then went off to read some articles about it, and it understandably changed her view of what she was watching. Are reasons ever given as to why freelance assignments aren't published, or are they many and varied?
Like other commenters, I would like to thank you for your continued work on this issue, Ben. I am disappointed that the TV outlets never mention his complicated off court be. I can’t watch his matches anymore because doing so makes me really angry. In addition to the abuse allegations, his arrogance and occasional on court antics (see the Paul Bunyan act with the umpire’s chair) leave me cold. Someday Zverev will retire, or fade from the top of the tour, and I won’t have to skip watching semis and finals when he is playing.
I realize I am the outlier here. And Ben, I fully respect that you have some skin in this matter. But what is the end game that you seek? Good or bad, we don’t hear about every player’s non-tennis biography in each and every tournament. Rising to his first Grand Slam; winning on the same court of his devastating injury; overcoming his serving yips; stepping up the aggressiveness of his forehand. That is what is relevant for a broadcast coverage of a tennis match. Yes, a tennis match, not a documentary. The print media can certainly create a news story for its readers. But again I would ask; what is the end game? The difference between Zverev and Thomas Partey is that the latter has yet to go on trial. His charges are outstanding and hanging over him. Zverev’s has been adjudicated. The resolution may not be to our collective satisfaction, but like it or not it is over. None of us have to like Zverev as a person. We can choose not root for him. Strictly speaking as a tennis fan, one has to respect how he has raised his game to its current level. When I watch him play, that’s all I want to hear about.
I agree and also recognize that I am an outlier. I should start by stating that Zverev is the player I dislike the most, both for his persona (the allegations being a big part of it) and his style of play. However, on one case, she does not want to prosecute and the ATP decided that there was no sufficient evidence. And on the other, the case was terminated with the conclusion that Ben mentioned. Indeed, unsatisfactory but that’s that, there will be no verdict of guilt or innocence, so any discussion beyond mentioning that, will go nowhere. You cannot accuse him of anything, nor can he be treated as an innocent. He will have to bear that, and that is already the case, but nothing more can be done. Hence I find the expectations that anyone should discuss the case a bit excessive.
I'm sorry but I don't think it would be good journalism to continue repeating unproven accusations from the past (because this is what they are, whether we like it or not) every time we have to deal with someone on a professional capacity.
Neither disproved or proved according to the German court- and yet Zverev settled out of court. Paying money to victims and charities does not look good for protesting innocence. The allegations are from 2 separate women who didn’t know about each other.I presume you would say that it’s “unprofessional “to report the allegations against Andrew Windsor too, right? What will you say if a 3rd comes forward and a 4th. Or a whistleblower.?
I said "unproven", not disproved. And in my book, you are innocent until proven guilty.
The German legal system is a bit different, in essence he has paid trial expenses (which are proportional to someone's income).
It is ridiculous to affirm "the two women didn't know about each other": they both were in a relationship with Zverev, and accusations were widely publicized.
The 2 women were strangers to each other during their respective relationships with Zverev. Sharypova came out with allegations on instagram less than 24hrs after Patea revealed she was pregnant by Zverev and not planning to be with him anymore. Patea at that point hadn’t given any reasons yet.
Innocent until proven guilty is a specific legal term - we do not need to apply in our private lives. Especially when so much evidence is in the public domain (see also ; Greenwood, Mason)
Then you have lost me. If you arbitrarily decide who is innocent and who is not based on who knows what evidence or else, then anybody could be deemed guilty of anything out of thin air. I'm not interested in your world.
So if I punch you in the face, but the CPS decide not to press charges because there were no witnesses….I just didn’t punch you? Is that your logic? Because people do horrible things to each other every day without a court deciding if they did or not.
Your world seems like one where bad people get to live consequence free until they are legally convicted of something. That seems like a worse world to me.
Well, you probably know for sure if I punched you in the face or not. In this case we have no idea what really happened. That makes a huge difference.
If you have got a problem, that's what the justice system is there for. I will not condone litigating legal matters in the press, where there's no due process, no lawyers, no discovery, no rules of procedure, no decisions on admissible evidence, threat of perjury, confrontation of witnesses, no nothing... just because it suits you best.
So endlessly grateful to you Ben for consistently and professionally covering this topic. I found watching the men’s final an emotionally exhausting watch and am grateful that Sinner’s top level is, and will always be better than Zverev’s.
I hosted a watching party at my tennis club today. All but one people knew about the allegations. All were ABZ despite the Sinner/drugs thing which also came up a little.
Tennis fans mostly know.
But yes, the casual viewer wouldn’t and the BBC commentators are very much ‘establishment’ - no chance they would rock the boat.
One interesting conversation though with someone who works with German TV on how unpopular both brothers are…
Ben really appreciate this story and your brave reporting on Zverev BUT as you continue to address the tv problem around Zverev , an idea for your consideration: TV networks that show the slams and their commentators are not journalists (much as they might want to convey that idea, or have done something resembling reporting in other venues). They have paid for the rights to these events and they are promoting them. I wish they did real reporting — as you prove there are plenty of great stories to cover. But I think this is category error to expect these networks to go warts and all on their commentary. Just a thought. keep up the great work
Keep up the GREAT work you're doing Ben. Really appreciate your commentary and willingness to bring important issues like this to light. Another excellent article following your piece on Adidas and their gender disparity in sponsorship between the men's and women's players. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you! 🥇
Thanks for consistently covering this issue. Zverev is fast becoming, in the absence of Carlos Alcaraz, one of the dominant figures in the sport. He could have won his second grand slam in a row by the end of the day. That makes scrutiny and accountability ever more important. Sadly, not enough journalists are offering comparable scrutiny - Zverev has a habit of shutting off access or ending interviews to those who bring up the allegations against him.
I’m constantly having to explain why I don’t support Zverev to my casual tennis watching friends - ie, Wimbledon only - so, whilst I agree with the remarks about the presenters not being Journalists, there are plenty of other avenues by which the BBC could contextualise his history; Newsnight, Panorama etc. Great work as ever, Ben
I agree with you completely. It’s so frustrating to have to explain what he’s like to my friends. Let’s remember: what he did to Olya was frankly attempted murder. I know there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, blah, blah, blah. Just witness his extremely petty behavior towards Sam Querrey after HE JUST WON HIS FIRST GRAND SLAM! How did his brother Mischa turn out so normal?
Show your friends the Acapulco video and they will understand :)
And it is for this kind of reporting that I subscribe to your newsletter. I was appalled that no mention was made during the Fery match, the first of Zverev matches that I watched.
I am glad you keep raising this. The standard you walk past is the standard you accept - it appears so many have very low standards
yes. the time to talk about this, especially whilst unsatisfactorily unresolved, is all the time.
A lot of us won't know how TV coverage goes because we won't be watching the final. Fortunately we had a dramatic women's final with two admirable opponents. No deep investigative journalism required.
Yes! I fast-forwarded to the last game/tie-breaker of each set just to hopefully see Sinner win the set. Other than that, I had no interest.
The women's final had everything that I could want. Incredible grit by Muchova at the end of the 2nd set and Noskova in the 3rd. Touching speeches by both too.
Bravo, this guy drives me nuts, my blood pressure is sky rocketing, hyperbole, sure but you know what I mean.
The ATP is protecting an abuser, shame. Almost Trumpian behavior.
Whoops can I be sued?
I appreciate your the work you do advocating for accountability through your journalism. It’s disappointing to also hear silence on some of the British based podcasts specifically as they discuss the current and upcoming matches. The silence they are maintaining will become more and more difficult. Let’s see how this continue to unfold if he makes a deep run here in the U.S.
The Tennis Podcast did mention it in their preview of the men's final. (I don't listen to any other British based podcasts.)
Another great piece. I had to explain this situation to a friend during the Fery match - she's like so many in the UK who only tune in during Wimbledon. She then went off to read some articles about it, and it understandably changed her view of what she was watching. Are reasons ever given as to why freelance assignments aren't published, or are they many and varied?
Like other commenters, I would like to thank you for your continued work on this issue, Ben. I am disappointed that the TV outlets never mention his complicated off court be. I can’t watch his matches anymore because doing so makes me really angry. In addition to the abuse allegations, his arrogance and occasional on court antics (see the Paul Bunyan act with the umpire’s chair) leave me cold. Someday Zverev will retire, or fade from the top of the tour, and I won’t have to skip watching semis and finals when he is playing.
I realize I am the outlier here. And Ben, I fully respect that you have some skin in this matter. But what is the end game that you seek? Good or bad, we don’t hear about every player’s non-tennis biography in each and every tournament. Rising to his first Grand Slam; winning on the same court of his devastating injury; overcoming his serving yips; stepping up the aggressiveness of his forehand. That is what is relevant for a broadcast coverage of a tennis match. Yes, a tennis match, not a documentary. The print media can certainly create a news story for its readers. But again I would ask; what is the end game? The difference between Zverev and Thomas Partey is that the latter has yet to go on trial. His charges are outstanding and hanging over him. Zverev’s has been adjudicated. The resolution may not be to our collective satisfaction, but like it or not it is over. None of us have to like Zverev as a person. We can choose not root for him. Strictly speaking as a tennis fan, one has to respect how he has raised his game to its current level. When I watch him play, that’s all I want to hear about.
But, we do hear about the players off court lives during TV commentary. All the time. Good and bad.
I have never watched a Pegula match without being told about her billionaire parents (to pick just one example).
I agree and also recognize that I am an outlier. I should start by stating that Zverev is the player I dislike the most, both for his persona (the allegations being a big part of it) and his style of play. However, on one case, she does not want to prosecute and the ATP decided that there was no sufficient evidence. And on the other, the case was terminated with the conclusion that Ben mentioned. Indeed, unsatisfactory but that’s that, there will be no verdict of guilt or innocence, so any discussion beyond mentioning that, will go nowhere. You cannot accuse him of anything, nor can he be treated as an innocent. He will have to bear that, and that is already the case, but nothing more can be done. Hence I find the expectations that anyone should discuss the case a bit excessive.
I'm sorry but I don't think it would be good journalism to continue repeating unproven accusations from the past (because this is what they are, whether we like it or not) every time we have to deal with someone on a professional capacity.
Neither disproved or proved according to the German court- and yet Zverev settled out of court. Paying money to victims and charities does not look good for protesting innocence. The allegations are from 2 separate women who didn’t know about each other.I presume you would say that it’s “unprofessional “to report the allegations against Andrew Windsor too, right? What will you say if a 3rd comes forward and a 4th. Or a whistleblower.?
I said "unproven", not disproved. And in my book, you are innocent until proven guilty.
The German legal system is a bit different, in essence he has paid trial expenses (which are proportional to someone's income).
It is ridiculous to affirm "the two women didn't know about each other": they both were in a relationship with Zverev, and accusations were widely publicized.
The 2 women were strangers to each other during their respective relationships with Zverev. Sharypova came out with allegations on instagram less than 24hrs after Patea revealed she was pregnant by Zverev and not planning to be with him anymore. Patea at that point hadn’t given any reasons yet.
Innocent until proven guilty is a specific legal term - we do not need to apply in our private lives. Especially when so much evidence is in the public domain (see also ; Greenwood, Mason)
Then you have lost me. If you arbitrarily decide who is innocent and who is not based on who knows what evidence or else, then anybody could be deemed guilty of anything out of thin air. I'm not interested in your world.
So if I punch you in the face, but the CPS decide not to press charges because there were no witnesses….I just didn’t punch you? Is that your logic? Because people do horrible things to each other every day without a court deciding if they did or not.
Your world seems like one where bad people get to live consequence free until they are legally convicted of something. That seems like a worse world to me.
Well, you probably know for sure if I punched you in the face or not. In this case we have no idea what really happened. That makes a huge difference.
If you have got a problem, that's what the justice system is there for. I will not condone litigating legal matters in the press, where there's no due process, no lawyers, no discovery, no rules of procedure, no decisions on admissible evidence, threat of perjury, confrontation of witnesses, no nothing... just because it suits you best.
So you are inferring that they colluded with false allegations. With the motivation of what exactly?
I am not inferring anything of the kind. I am just saying it's unreasonable to believe Patea was unaware of Sharypova's allegations.
And I'm sorry, but I've got some work to do, there's a Wimbledon final going on.
Ausgang
I think you are referring to Zverev, not Sinner.
Thx- Correction
Believe the women, they don't lie. Why would they? For the public shaming from the likes of you, more legal action against them?
Or are you just a Russki bot, Zverev is as German as my ass.
So endlessly grateful to you Ben for consistently and professionally covering this topic. I found watching the men’s final an emotionally exhausting watch and am grateful that Sinner’s top level is, and will always be better than Zverev’s.
Thank you for doing what you can to keep this issue on the radar. It means a lot.
I hosted a watching party at my tennis club today. All but one people knew about the allegations. All were ABZ despite the Sinner/drugs thing which also came up a little.
Tennis fans mostly know.
But yes, the casual viewer wouldn’t and the BBC commentators are very much ‘establishment’ - no chance they would rock the boat.
One interesting conversation though with someone who works with German TV on how unpopular both brothers are…
Ben really appreciate this story and your brave reporting on Zverev BUT as you continue to address the tv problem around Zverev , an idea for your consideration: TV networks that show the slams and their commentators are not journalists (much as they might want to convey that idea, or have done something resembling reporting in other venues). They have paid for the rights to these events and they are promoting them. I wish they did real reporting — as you prove there are plenty of great stories to cover. But I think this is category error to expect these networks to go warts and all on their commentary. Just a thought. keep up the great work