Davis Cup in World of Trouble

Roger Federer didn't play. Rafael Nadal didn't play. Andy Roddick, Andy Murray, Juan Martin del Potro, Nikolay Davydenko. The world's top tennis players didn't play Davis Cup this past weekend. Message sent?

The reasons they gave were injury, poor schedule-fit, fast-approaching old age, a need to focus on individual needs. Here's the truth:

This was a boycott. The International Tennis Federation, which oversees the Davis Cup, is in a feud with the top players, and it's not going to end well for the ITF.

The Davis Cup doesn't fit anymore. The players have a hard enough time balancing the stress on their bodies with the unrelenting modern-day demands of the tour. To add four weeks of Davis Cup on varying surfaces in all parts of the world at the worst possible times throughout the year?

No way.

The ITF knows. It has gotten the message clearly from players who have asked for adjustments. Then, the ITF sent out its own message in return:

Too bad.

So someone asked Roddick at the Australian Open whether there was danger in smirching the grand history of the Davis Cup.

"It has been in the sport for a long time,'' he said. "You know, I wish there were a little more cooperation from Davis Cup, and then we would probably be a little bit more sympathetic to that question.''

It's hard to see what position of strength the ITF is coming from. Instead, this seems like a bluff that the players are finally calling.

There are always injuries, always legit reasons to sit out a tennis match if you don't consider it a priority. But why isn't the flag a priority?

Is tennis filled with selfish players unwilling to put country ahead of self? Well, to some extent, yes. Tennis is a selfish game.

Not everything is black and white, including the Davis Cup problem. But I'm going to agree most with the players on this.

They seem willing to compromise; the ITF does not.

The Davis Cup should be played over a two-week period, with all the countries together, every year. Matches should be best-of-three sets, not five.

Play it every year, or maybe even every other year like golf's Ryder Cup.

That way, there is anticipation involved, not just this perpetual, annual nine-month long Davis Cup season.

Already, a private investor is pushing the idea of all countries coming together instead of ties being played on home sites. The idea has a few goofy and awful twists, such as mandatory substitutions during matches.

But overall, many top players are intrigued. And that would be a competition separate from the Davis Cup, a tennis World Cup.

It's a great idea. And it would kill the Davis Cup.

In the World Cup, players would satisfy their fans' wishes to see their favorite players competing for the flag. Meanwhile, the players would be able to slice weeks off their grueling schedule.

Tick, tick, the ITF needs to get moving. The Davis Cup should jump on the idea while it still has time. Instead, reports in the New York Times are that the ITF will consider having best-of-three matches early on, and some other minor changes.

On the scheduling issue that matters to so many players?

It's off the table.

James Blake asked me at the Australian Open whether a tennis World Cup final in, say, Chicago would draw buzz if it were between Spain and the Czech Republic.

That's a good point, but it's a chance the ITF has to take. Instead, it is stuck in the wrong moment in history.

Sure, this setup has worked for generations. But today, the tour schedule is rougher, the travel is longer. The power in the game beats on players' bodies. Look how many players are already hurt this year.

Roddick, after playing for the U.S. team for years, decided to sit out this year to protect his knees. Serbia beat the U.S,. 3-2, and No. 2 Novak Djokovic did play. His five-set victory over John Isner Sunday was a great match, and nearly a breakthrough for U.S. tennis.

Meanwhile, David Nalbandian, risked re-injuring his surgically repaired knee by putting himself in for the final match Sunday. He helped lead Argentina to victory. And Chile beat Israel in a home tie following an emotional moment after the massive earthquake there.

The Davis Cup always has emotion and moments.

Meanwhile, though, Switzerland played Spain, and neither Federer nor Nadal were there.

Davis Cup must have the top players. Otherwise, what's the point?
Look, Davis Cup must have the top players. Otherwise, what's the point?

Already, Davis Cup isn't relevant toward showing what country is best. Players from all over the world face off regularly on tour. They'll do it again this week in Indian Wells. Calif.

Davis Cup does provide a chance for fans and players to rally for their flag openly. I still think Davis Cup can matter again.

That requires change. For now, the ITF dares players not to play for their countries. Go ahead, the ITF's theory goes, see how that plays back home.

On top of that, the ITF points out that some of the smaller countries fund their tennis federations almost entirely from the money they get from home Davis Cup matches. If changes lead to all matches on site, then the smaller countries will lose revenue, right?

Not necessarily. They can share revenues of a World Cup, which theoretically could include much bigger TV dollars.

So the Davis Cup went on as usual this past weekend, only with a bunch of second-tier players.

The boycott worked. If not, then the Davis Cup is dead.

E-mail me at gregcouch09@aol.com