When the dust settled and only four women remained in the 2011 Ladies’ Wimbledon draw, you could practically hear the pennies falling into Nike’s piggy bank. Four Nike-sponsored European blondes, ranging from 1.78m to 1.88m, clad in chaste white and beating each other breathless on the rain-soaked Wimbledon grass in what is basically the Victorian version of mud wrestling.
With the relatively early departure of the living-legend Williams sisters, Chinese superstar and French Open champion Li Na, and last year’s losing finalist Vera Zvonareva, these four semi-finalists were the best the sponsors – and fans – could hope for. On one side, we had three-time major winner and world’s most famous female athlete Maria Sharapova against a huge hitting German comeback kid, Sabine Lisicki. On the other, we had fourth-ranked Victoria Azarenka against the loveable lefty Petra Kvitova – a surprise Wimbledon semi-finalist last year. Of the four semi-finalists, Kvitova somehow seemed a bit out of place, like the smart, awkward girl on the sorority sidelines. Her wide-eyes, husky frame and shy use of English (surely someone could interview her in Czech) all added to her small-town-girl-on-the-big-stage image.
While European economies may be falling like dominoes, this Wimbledon represented a showcase of European talent. Sharapova hails from Russia, Lisicki from Germany, Azarenka from Belarus, and Kvitova from the Czech Republic. Of the four, Sharapova’s career, and image, are the most illustrious. While Sharapova was the youngest semi-finalist at the French Open, she was the oldest semi-finalist at Wimbledon at the ripe old age of 24. The other three ladies are all 21 years of age. This is exactly what the women’s game needs – an injection of young, fearless talent.
Photo: Maria Sharapova of Russia reacts during her final match against Petra Kvitova of the Czech Republic at the Wimbledon tennis championships in London July 2, 2011. REUTERS/Stefan Wermuth.
The semi-finals were relatively straightforward affairs, with Sharapova surviving 13 double faults to beat Lisicki 6-4, 6-3 and Kvitova overcoming a mid-match walkabout to defeat Azarenka 6-1, 3-6, 6-2. A final between the glamorous Sharapova and the goofy Kvitova was set.
The match Kvitova and Sharapova engaged in will not be remembered as one of the great finals – up there with Venus Williams vs. Lindsay Davenport in 2005 or Steffi Graf vs. Jana Novotna in 1993 – but neither was it a blowout like last year’s final, when Serena Williams demolished Zvonareva. Instead, Kvitova played sturdy, bold tennis to take down an erratic if determined Sharapova.
The key to the match was aggression. Sharapova, normally the aggressor in her matches, was forced to play defensively as Kvitova’s heavy shots soared deep into the corners. Kvitova finished the match with a 19-10 edge in winners clearly indicating she was the more forceful player. Most impressively, she did not show any signs of nerves. In a game that has seen countless emotional meltdowns in big finals over the last few years, it was incredibly refreshing to see a first-time grand slam finalist close out a match with poise and nerve. Ironically, she did so in the same way Sharapova won her 2004 Wimbledon title, when, as the heavy underdog, she knocked out Serena Williams 6-1, 6-4 without even blinking.
When Kvitova hit her last serve – an ace – to win the match 6-3, 6-4, she fell to her knees with a look of delight. But not disbelief. There were no tears, no adrenaline-fuelled climbs through the stands to find her shell-shocked loved ones. In a beautiful mix that only women’s tennis can provide, Kvitova looked like that awkward teen and an expectant champion all at once.
Naysayers will point to this result as evidence that women’s tennis is in a state of disarray. But Kvitova, with her beautiful mix of power, recklessness and skill has all the tools to become a legend of the game. If she doesn’t, so what? If nothing else, it was wonderful to see the goofy girl become queen for a day. DM
Main photo: Petra Kvitova of the Czech Republic celebrates after defeating Maria Sharapova of Russia in their final match at the Wimbledon tennis championships in London July 2, 2011. REUTERS/Toby Melville
Watch Pauli van Wyk’s Cat Play The Piano Here!
No, not really. But now that we have your attention, we wanted to tell you a little bit about what happened at SARS.
Tom Moyane and his cronies bequeathed South Africa with a R48-billion tax shortfall, as of February 2018. It's the only thing that grew under Moyane's tenure... the year before, the hole had been R30.7-billion. And to fund those shortfalls, you know who has to cough up? You - the South African taxpayer.
It was the sterling work of a team of investigative journalists, Scorpio’s Pauli van Wyk and Marianne Thamm along with our great friends at amaBhungane, that caused the SARS capturers to be finally flushed out of the system. Moyane, Makwakwa… the lot of them... gone.
But our job is not yet done. We need more readers to become Maverick Insiders, the friends who will help ensure that many more investigations will come. Contributions go directly towards growing our editorial team and ensuring that Daily Maverick and Scorpio have a sustainable future. We can’t rely on advertising and don't want to restrict access to only those who can afford a paywall subscription. Membership is about more than just contributing financially – it is about how we Defend Truth, together.
So, if you feel so inclined, and would like a way to support the cause, please join our community of Maverick Insiders.... you could view it as the opposite of a sin tax. And if you are already Maverick Insider, tell your mother, call a friend, whisper to your loved one, shout at your boss, write to a stranger, announce it on your social network. The battle for the future of South Africa is on, and you can be part of it.
The ancient Greeks believed trousers to be "ridiculous". The Romans shunned them on account of only barbarians wearing the garment.