The facts on the television ratings for the 2011 Australian Open make for dismal reading. Almost as dismal as the men’s final. An average of 934,000 viewers in the five capital cities is 20 per cent down on last year’s Open, according to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald.
The drop in two years is an astonishing 36 per cent.
The women’s final between Kim Clijisters, in her sweat-drenched green outfit, and Li Na, out-rated the men’s final between the personable Novak Djokovic and the dismal, muttering Andy Murray by 21 per cent.
There were 300,000 viewers more for the women’s final than for the men’s final.
The men’s final, in viewers numbers, was down 42 per cent from last year’s final between Roger Federer and Murray. A 7 spokesman, interviewed by the Sydney Morning Herald, said that a “combination of the vagaries of the unknowns in sports and expanding viewing options” were probably to blame for the falling number of viewers.
I take the phrase “vagaries of the unknowns in sport” to mean that there was no Federer or Nadal or the Williams sisters in the men’s and women’s finals. If this is what he meant, the figures of last year’s men’s final, which involved Federer, suggests that there is some truth in the statement.
Some truth, but not the whole truth.
I would argue that there are a number of other factors that tend to make tennis hard to watch on television right now.
There is the air pollution of the shrieking and grunting of many of the leading female players. There are rules that would allow the umpires to shut up the grunters. But the authorities are so fearful of the celebrity players (who make up the majority of the grunters) that they refuse to do anything to stop this hideous practice.
The senseless on-court grunting is matched with the equally senseless match commentaries. Jim Courier and Sandy Roberts, in particular, tend to drive a viewer to distraction with their banalities.
Lleyton Hewitt was a breath of fresh air. John Alexander was missed. And why Channel 7 don’t make John Newcombe and Fred Stolle an offer they can’t refuse to do the main commentary is beyond me.
Then there are all the little things that happen on court, like the incessant ball bouncing before serves by players like Djokovic. I counted 13 bounces before a ball toss on one point before switching off in frustration and turning on the radio to listen to a commentary.
Multiply the number of bounces with the number of serves and you get so many bounces (over a 1000 in a long match) that counting sheep becomes supplanted as a fail-safe way of putting yourself to sleep.
Finally, Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer are to tennis what Tiger Woods was (past tense) to golf. They are magic doing what they do, absolutely watchable in their different ways.
Their presence was sorely missed in the final.
Nadal, the Gene Kelly of tennis, so relentless, courageous, athletic, energetic and powerful, and Federer, the Fred Astaire of tennis, effortlessly brilliant, suave, thoughtful and stylish. Both of them are totally watchable stars.
Djokovic and Murray are nowhere in the same class of watchability.
Djokovic has his incessant ball-bouncing and Murray must be the most lacklustre, boring and unwatchable top 10 player ever, with his mutterings and continual hang-dog look.
If he is finding it all too much to enjoy himself, we can’t be surprised that the viewers decided the same thing too by turning off their television sets in droves.
kim
Guest
channel 7 did use 7two to cover the sydney tournament during the floods in qld.they were also going to use 7two during the australian open.they mentioned the coverage would continue on 7two if it wasnt completed before the news at 6pm but the match did get completed.i cant remember which match though.im sure it was a womans match.
Hutchoman
Roar Pro
Jim Courier is an embarassment. To think this guy gets flown out here, no doubt "with all the trimmings" to provide the crapulance that fills the airwaves for 2 weeks beggars belief. He alone is a big reason I find it hard to watch the tennis.
ohtani's jacket
Guest
Might as well add something positive to another insufferable article. If you're looking for an alternative to the Channel 7 commentary, then I highly recommend AO radio on the official website. RG is probably my favourite of the Grand Slam radio coverage, but the AO one is also very good.
Roarr
Guest
I was expecting some better arguments than grunting and ball boucing to be honest.
jamesb
Guest
I think what channel seven should have done to make tennis more exciting, is they should had incorporated a countdown to big matches, like a cyclone yasi style countdown. That would bring the viewers back. I wonder if Today Tonight ever thought of it?
TimD
Guest
To be honest, I think it has less to do with the quality of commentary, and more to do with the quality of matches. I would say apart from Djokovic there were few stand out matches or players in this tournament. Federer was patchy, Nadal was down on form and health and the tournament lacked the blistering bolter we have seen in Tsonga and Baghdatis in the past. Murray grafted his way through the tournament and then crumbled in the final and the worlds top 5 players are the only ones who ever looked likely to win the tournament. The Final was merely a predictable end to a predictable tournament, lacking the drama that is required to drive any sporting competition.
John Hunt
Guest
Two Words: Cheap article. Once again bagging commentators and blaming them for the downfall of sport. You are better than this Spiro. Even though you bag Jim Courier he had the best idea to deal with time wasting; having the 20 sec shot clock on court to monitor time between points.
Twatter
Guest
I think most sports consumers no what there after in a product and to watch the tennis nowadays its just boring endless ralies where one player is waiting for the other to hit the net or hit the ball out. I watched Mc Enroe vs Willander and there was skill still involved with those guys and there fifty. Please no more Aussie Kim it makes some of us cringe.
Justin
Guest
Never said the standard was better or worse its just not as enjoyable to watch due to a lack of variety in styles...
AngrySeahorse
Guest
It was hard to get into the mens final because anyone who saw Murrays previous game knew he'd pulled up with a leg strain and was going into the final not 100%. From that I predicted he wasnt going to do so well and ended up watching the cricket.
Brian
Guest
Interesting although the base year your using is 2009 when Federer played Nadal over 5 sets in the final. So I wouldn't be surprised if 2009 was much higher than say 2008. More interesting would be the viewers over the tournament. Other than that lack of Aussie firepower could be hurting. Overall attendance was down ever so slightly from 653,000 to 651,000 which suggests a decline but not anywhere near as rapid as the finals TV figures suggested.
Judge Smails
Guest
They did use 7Two for tennis a little bit, only for the matches that were running over the 6 o'clock news. They should use it all day long. There is plenty of matches for Foxtel too. Give 'em the boys and girls comps.
Malibu77
Guest
The commentators aside, I thought the coverage this year was better than usual. At least they gave scores frequently from the other courts and showed the night sessions live (in Sydney anyway). But showing on delay to QLD and WA is a disgrace. It should be mandatory that it be shown live Australia wide. Foxtels coverage in the first week was excellent I thought and good that they could show matches from Hisense Arena as well as the 3 Show Courts. And all at the same time with the magic red button! Agree also on the comments on Lleyton Hewitt. His comments display maturity and intelligence and he also spoke well during the ABC Four Corners program about a year ago on the state of Aus tennis.
Mick
Guest
Taxpayers foot the bill for every sport australia. I reckon they should be able to use 7two, 7hd (or whatever it is now) to show games
Mick
Guest
I am in the same boat, I have deleted channel 7 from the tv so I can skip straight past it & will rescan for next year's aussie open. How sandy roberts gets to commentate is a reflection of channel 7 attitude to the game
manfid
Guest
i hardly agree 100% for what i read on internet... but damn you get too close. federer and nadal are rating boosters, no doubt... i watched nba to see jordan, i had not seen any nba game since then. could not agree more with the damn djokovic bouncing ball... i tooo, many times had switched channel, because is frustating watch him bouncing a ball countless times (even federer had enough in the semi) if officials need to stop women grunting, they should be a maximum bouncing ball rule, also time between points... i understand that after a 25 rally the guys take sometime, but others get an ace or quick point and go for the towel... how much you sweat watching the ball pass you... and others like nadal make such a ritual to serve, or take minutes between points. in fact many like to see federer games, because he is the only to no make time, he constantly play fast, as in no dead time between points, no hundreads time bouncing ball, no ritual to serve, and if get an ace or make one, move fast to next point... how may games federer won in less than 2 minutes (more when his serve was in the good days) many players take 2 minutes just to serve
Elisha Pearce
Expert
I'm not using it as an excuse for not watching, because I watched tennis for 75% of the nights it was on. But this one phrase shows the valid point that we need to have Australian's competing well to keep ratings up: "Aussie Kim". That explains a lot doesn't it? I mean media are trying to create a champion for Australia to follow and even make a Belgian sound Australian because she was going out with one? I don't need to be reminded of who she went out with in the past to help make up my mind whether to watch or not. But apparently the people with jobs in media think there are those out there that need ANY Australian connection to bother watching.
clipper
Guest
Three main reasons for the drop in ratings: - 1, No Federer (and to a lesser degree, no Nadal) 2, Early exit of Australian players, which means a lot of people would not have kept up their interest. 3, A resurgent England playing in the Cricket, which gives a boost to the Cricket ratings. Does anyone know the world wide ratings - whether they have gone up or down? (obviously they would've gone up in Britain, Serbia, Belgium and China)
sledgeandhammer
Guest
Sorry, but tennis has never been played at a higher standard than it is today. People that drone on about the good old days are sadly mistaken. The tennis final wasn't the best, mainly because of Murray's insipid display. The main problem is channel 7 - too many ads, Bruce banging on about AFL, and Jim Courier who bashed Federer for losing a close semi, but didn't have a bad word to say about Murray during the one sided final.
Justin
Guest
People are sick of base liners v base liners. There is next to no variety in either mens or womens tennis. Its just who can hit hardest and quite frankly it is pretty damn boring. All the rest about commentators and who is in or out of the draw is just masking the fact the game is not as enjoyable to watch now compared with 25 years ago... and I'm only in my mid 30s