Patrick McEnroe fires back at Donald Young. Oh great. Tennis wars.
In the event you missed the lighting of the fuse, Young was a bit Sunday when the USTA rejected his father’s request that it just hand Donald the American-designate wild card into the French Open, and instead moved forward with its usual playoff to see who gets the free ride in.
Young went to his social network account and wrote . . . Well, actually, I can’t tell you what he wrote because we’re trying to keep this space clean. But there was a capital letter F involved, directed at the USTA, followed quickly by “their full of (something).”
Before I get into the meat and potatoes of this silly controversy, two things struck me as (a) grammatically annoying and (b) somewhat hilarious.
One was Young’s misspelling of the word “they’re.” Donald, listen up. This coaching isn’t going to cost a dime. You’re attempting to use the contractive form of “they are” here. Thus, “they’re.” What you’ve done, and frankly I find it disturbing because we’re talking some very fundamental English grammar here, is use the possessive pronoun “their.” Completely wrong.
Still, that gaffe was trumped Monday by Patrick McEnroe, head of the U.S. development program, who was blasting back on behalf of the USTA, when he commented that “I was obviously taken aback by the language. . .” that Young used.
Taken aback? You grew up with John McEnroe and this language took you aback? I don’t think so.
Bad grammar and incredulous remarks aside, the problem here is Young’s, not the USTA’s, and McEnroe, who detailed all the help the USTA has attempted to give Donald over the years, was quite correct in calling the kid on the carpet during a long phone press conference.
I don’t want to revisit all of Young’s missteps over the years. I’ve written enough about him and, if you’re really interested, you can Google my name and Young’s.
At age 21, he should have figured out long ago that, as much as his mother and father have helped him over the years, they can take him only so far. He’s old enough to make his own decisions and he ought to thank mom and dad for their help and make the break.
One story, I think, sums up the relationship between Donald Sr., his wife and the USTA. In July of 2007, I watched with great happiness as Donald defeated No. 1 seed Vladimir Ignatic of Belarus to win the Wimbledon junior title. This is a very big prize for a junior and, of course, mom and dad were there, along with David Nainkin, one of the most under-publicized coaches in professional tennis. Nainkin, working for the USTA, had been working with Donald exclusively all year.
I shook David’s hand and congratulated him. “Nice coaching,” I told him. Nainkin had one request. “Please don’t refer to me as the coach,” he pleaded.
I knew exactly what he was talking about. Even though Nainkin was primarily responsible for Young’s junior success, his parents had insisted to the USTA that “we’re in charge” when they accepted Nainkin’s help in exchange for financial help.
Young’s career has been very up and down. In 2008, he had a more or less sustained visit inside top 100, but only three weeks ago broke top-100 again and is now at No. 95. I guess he felt he deserved a wild card into the French.
The USTA disagreed and, as it has with the Australian Open as well, scheduled a playoff among the best Americans whose ranking won’t get them directly into the main draw, to see who gets the card.
Young exploded. McEnroe fired back. Hopefully, it’s over. Frankly, this controversy is consuming more time than it’s worth.