Laura Robson names the Wimbledon rule that should never change despite backlash

Daily Mirror

14 hours ago

Wimbledon organisers have attracted some criticism from players and spectators this year over the tournament's strict curfew, but Laura Robson believes it's spot on
Former British No.1 Laura Robson has come out in support of Wimbledon's 11pm curfew after it drew criticism from players and tennis fans. Wimbledon is unlike the other Grand Slams, which often continue late into the night, because it has a strict rule that it will not budge on.
American star Taylor Fritz needed five sets to see off the big-serving Giovanni Mpetshi Perricard in a first-round match that left him fuming at Wimbledon's curfew. Fritz was taken off the court before the curfew, despite believing he had enough time to complete his match – and he nearly fell foul of the rule in the next round too.
‌
Late finishes are ingrained in the culture of the US Open, Australian Open and French Open, but Wimbledon works differently. Play only starts at 11am on the outside courts and at 1.30pm on Centre Court and the 11pm curfew isn't about to be changed, despite moans every year from players who want to finish their matches and fans who are enjoying the action.
‌
It came into effect in 2009 when the All England Club put a roof on Centre Court, with Merton Council keen to reduce the potential impact on local residents. That is quite right, according to Robson, who is now working as a pundit and commentator at Wimbledon.
'No. Wimbledon follows [Merton Council's] rules and it is what it is,' Robson told Metro when asked whether the 11pm curfew should be changed. 'Honestly, I think tennis has become way too much of a late night sport. Why are we playing at 2am? Why are we playing at 3am?
'It's not normal and no other sport does it. Sure, you want to have the opportunity to finish the match. If it's 10.30pm and you're going to be 15 minutes over, of course that makes sense.
'In general I think the sort of backlash of playing at 1am is a nightmare for all of the players involved, all of the staff involved, all of the ball kids involved. So yeah, I'd like to see less of that rather than getting rid of the curfew.'
Fritz was dragged off the court well before 11pm against Perricard and was bemused by the umpire's decision. 'It was more just like I felt like we had the time to play. I was mentally in the head space of, like, we are finishing this match tonight,' he said.
‌
His US compatriot Ben Shelton was also irritated last week when bad light forced him off right at the end of his match against Rinky Hijikata. That was due to the darkness impacting the electronic line calling system, rather than the curfew.
"He had match point, didn't he?" tournament director Jamie Baker admitted the next day. "I would be pretty unhappy as well.'
Shelton himself understands the curfew. "I mean, it's tradition, I understand," he said. 'It's also in a neighbourhood. If it was in my neighbourhood and they're playing till 2 a.m. every single night and going completely ballistic, I'd be like, 'I probably don't really want to live here.' I completely understand the curfew, for sure."
‌
The curfew is basically set in stone, although there is a little wiggle room for common sense. Back in 2012, when Andy Murray was 5-1 up against Marcos Baghdatis in the fourth set at 11pm, he was allowed to serve out the final game to wrap things up at 11:02.
'The 11pm curfew is a planning condition applied to balance the consideration of the local residents with the scale of an international tennis event that takes place in a residential area,' Merton Council have explained. 'The challenge of transport connectivity and getting visitors home safely is also a key consideration.'