Left field

Agassi’s confessions could have knock-on effect for Serena

Andre Agassi’s decision to open his soul and tell the world he took drugs and then hoodwinked his governing body, the ATP, into believing his failed drugs test in 1997 was a mere mistake could not have come at a worse time for Australian and Wimbledon champion Serena Williams.

While Agassi has been condemned by players and pundits alike for tainting the image of his sport, tennis authorities have come under fire for not investigating the matter thoroughly and believing Agassi’s lies.

One of the accusations against the ATP was it brushed the whole episode under the carpet as it could not afford to ban one of its biggest draws on the men’s tour.

In light of the Agassi debacle 12 years ago, Williams knows she could be in for some stiff punishment from the International Tennis Federation (ITF) even though the cases are so different.

Williams is in many ways the face of women’s tennis as she has won more grand slams than any other active player – her tally currently standing at 11 – and is also the world number one.

But her foul-mouthed rant at a lineswoman during her U.S. Open semi-final defeat against Kim Clijsters has left the ITF, who run the four grand slam tournaments, facing a real dilemma.

Should they make a stand by banning one of the sport’s biggest stars from taking part in one or more grand slam tournaments? Or should they simply hit Williams with a larger fine than the $10,500 she was handed at Flushing Meadows so that tournaments do not suffer financial consequences by the no-show of the biggest names in women’s tennis.

Sportswrap: redemption special

Click on the video above for our latest look at the week’s sporting highlights, including an interview with Andre Agassi (in full Edith Piaf mode), the thoughts of Michael Phelps on his trial by textile and the almighty scrap for the last nine World Cup places.

As always, Sportswrap is presented by Owen Wyatt, written by Kevin Fylan and produced from our Canary Wharf HQ.

So many whys in Agassi affair

“I was worried for a moment but not for long. I was actually excited about telling the world the whole story,” Andre Agassi said.

Except this was no ordinary story. One of the greatest players to have graced a tennis court had just revealed that he had taken drugs and then lied to the ATP about the circumstances surrounding his positive dope test in 1997.

The eight-times grand slam champion took the recreational drug crystal meth 12 years ago when his career was floundering – he found himself playing on the challenger circuit after sliding down the rankings to 141st in the world.

Although the substance may not be performance enhancing, the question on every tennis fan’s lips since the news broke is “Why?”

Why did Agassi take it? Why did the governing body of tennis clear him of any wrongdoing? And why did he disclose this bombshell now when he had effectively got away with it?

It is hard to believe that a popular sportsman who made over $31 million in prize money and several times that amount in endorsement deals would want to drag his own name through the mud just to get some publicity for his autobiography.

But that is effectively what he has done.

Should Agassi face action for drugs confession?

Eight-times grand slam winner Andre Agassi left the tennis world in a state of shock on Wednesday when he admitted using the recreational drug crystal meth and lying to men’s governing body the ATP to escape a ban.

In his autobiography “Open”, the American candidly describes being introduced to the drug in 1997 and the moment when he was informed he had failed a drugs test.

International Tennis Federation (ITF) president Francesco Ricci Bitti said he was “surprised and disappointed” by the revelations and World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) chief John Fahey called on the ATP to “shed light” on the circumstances that allowed Agassi to escape sanction.

Should there be any punishment against the retired 39-year-old?

PHOTO: Andre Agassi of the U.S. looks on during an exhibition tennis match against compatriot Pete Sampras at Venetian Macao in Macau October 25, 2009. REUTERS/Bobby Yip

Wimbledon roof is great, but pity those left out in the cold…

As Wimbledon closed its new retractable roof over Centre Court for the first time in a drizzly southwest London on Sunday, the gap between the haves and have-nots grew wider.

Spectators and organisers hailed the new innovation, which will ensure Centre Court ticket holders will never again go away without seeing a match, but the rest of the soggy Wimbledon grounds provided a stark reminder of what it will be like for the majority of players and fans who walk through the All England Club gates next month.

Until this year, there was not much a player such as world number 100 Sergio Roitman would have in common with the likes of Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal at Wimbledon. Except when it rained that is. No matter who you were, if it rained you were stuck in the locker room.

Not anymore. The chosen few lucky enough to be scheduled on 15,000 capacity-Centre Court will never again have to wonder exactly when the rain gods will let up. But since Wimbledon has another 18-odd courts that are used during the two-week long championships, the majority of players who make up the 128-strong singles draw will be left high and dry — or in this case soaking wet — when the heavens open.

Andre Agassi, who was given the honour of being one of the first players to test the conditions under the new multi-million dollar structure, dismissed suggestions that the roof would create a class divide.

“From a players perspective you could argue that those scheduled on centre court have a distinct advantage but you could also argue that those who have been scheduled on Centre Court have earned the right to have that opportunity,” the American told reporters.