Tennis News You Can Use
A local tennis center in my area, Hurst Tennis Center, was delayed in reopening after the COVID-19 shutdown. I have subsequently learned that part of the reason for this is because the municipality was considering shutting down the facility and using the land to expand the adjacent water park. As it turns out, the tennis center is a cost rather than a profit center for the city.
The facility re-opened as a test case for changing the fee structure and restructuring the contract with the operator to operate the facility more like a business. It is clear from the City Council Work Session minutes where this was discussed that there will be future evaluation of the facility in upcoming budget workshops.
I listened to the city council meeting that was conducted immediately following the work session where the future of the tennis center was discussed. While there was no additional information on that topic, it was clear from the reviewing the live streams of recent Hurst council meetings that COVID-19 has created a financial burden on the municipality. Tax revenues are down significantly. Budgets were tight to begin with.
I hope that this isn’t a sign of things to come. I am sure that a lot of local governments will be making some tough budgetary decisions in the near future. It would be hard for me to argue that a tennis facility is an essential service over other things like water, sewage, and emergency services.
That being said, I personally completed a “Request for Action” with the city of Hurst advocating for continued use of the facility as a tennis center. I also took this as an opportunity to reach out to the two local Community Tennis Associations (CTAs) that claim the tennis center within their geographically defined area. I received a response from both CTAs and very positive engagement. That is a great sign.
I also reached out to the USTA Texas North Texas community services liason to see if there was an appropriate way for the section office to engage. As I discussed in “Job Cuts at the USTA,” I suspect that the USTA is facing their own tough choices right now, so I am not sure how much that will even be possible.
Meanwhile, there is still a local strain on court availability. A couple of facilities have still yet to reopen after the COVID-19 shut downs. Other tennis facilities in the area have additional restrictions on play that essentially cuts down on the available court time. Additionally, one local tennis center sent out an angry email last Saturday that indicated that men’s league play was suspended due to visiting team player indifference to social distancing.
As a strategic imperative, having all the local courts booked by league play might seem like a good problem to have, but it chokes off the pipeline of prospective new players. There has to be some slack, but that seems to be rapidly evaporating.
One of the CTAs that engaged with me on this topic had been in close contact with the operator of the Hurst facility. It was reassuring to hear that there had been subsequent interaction between the facility operator and the city and it seems like the timelines for the next evaluation have been pushed out a year rather than the three months which was initially thought to be the case.
At the same time, it has made me consider how precarious managed court availability is in the area.
24 hours later, and I am kicking myself for not titling this post “Don’t Stand So Close to Me.”
Here is a copy of the “angry email” sent to my team captains.
Dear Captains:
I am suspending Saturday morning men’s league play at STC effective immediately. I am uncomfortable with players coming from other facilities who do not follow the rules as laid out. I have no desire to be here watching these matches every week. While your teams may be able to follow our guidelines I do not want to put you, me or my desk staff in charge of policing players from other facilities.
Our ability to host matches this fall will depend on the cooperation of the other teams. I am not convinced that we can safely bring players from other facilities to STC if there are still a large number of cases in our area. I realize that people have varying degrees of concern about Covid-19 but my job is to protect my staff and the other people who play at the facility.
Thanks,
Mia
But why punish all teams for the actions of one (or a few)? It’s as though a parent grounds one child because another has behaved. If the 4.5s misbehave, boot them, don’t punish the 3.0s and 3.5s.
This is a fair point. It just seemed simpler to suspend “flex matches” altogether. I just felt it put everyone in a difficult position. Without a set format it was difficult as a facility to manage. If 2 teams had a match on the same day I often wouldn’t know until that week. Given the summer heat it made staggering the match times more challenging and this contributed to our issues. Our teams weren’t sure how many matches were left to play or even how many courts were needed. Opposing teams cancelled matches on Saturday when court time is at a premium. Given the rising number of cases in our area it just seemed prudent to limit access to the facility at this time.
As the author of the “angry email” regarding men’s league play I would like to clarify our decision to suspend men’s league play. This decision was not made lightly and was certainly about more than social distancing. A reasonable request was made for players of both teams to wait on our back deck until all the players had arrived. This allows the teams to submit a complete roster of the players who were in attendance, a requirement for contact tracing. We requested that players warm up with their opponents only, instead of the usual team warm up followed by a match warm up. Players from the opposing teams consistently came in and were rude to our front desk staff, asking for their court assignments and getting upset when they were told they needed to wait. Players hung out in our pro shop, blocking the exit for other players with their bags and equipment, despite being asked to wait outside and being told their was a limit to the number of players that could be in the pro shop at any given time. Players routinely left the deck and started warming up with each other, despite our request not to do so. Last week I had a junior lesson that had requested a court without any players on the court next to them. The league players went out onto that court and upset the player and her parents. One week players blocked the back entrance as they socialized, forcing junior players to walk through a group of men who were not wearing masks. Several players came in without masks, and jokingly pulled up their shirts to cover their mouths when they were told we had a mask requirement. I am a strong proponent of men’s league play at our facility, and I have worked hard to give these teams court time on our busiest day of the week. But I cannot control the behavior of opposing teams, who consistently gave me a hard time about what are very simple rules that are not the dissimilar from other facilities. I was opposed to the idea of “flex matches” for USTA play this summer because I felt it burdened the team captains and the facilities. I agreed to host our teams out of a sense of duty to them. I have an obligation to our staff to not have them “harassed” (word choice by my front desk person) every Saturday that a match is taking place. I realize that people have varying degrees of comfort with precautions against the virus, but I just assumed that reasonable people would accept reasonable rules.
Thanks for sharing your perspective. I personally am very comfortable with the safety rules that STC has put in place. Currently I am most comfortable playing at STC and Wagon Wheel. I too have directly experienced player indifference to safety protocols.
My angle on including this information in the post was to highlight that COVID-19 is putting further pressure on court availability. I respect and support the challenges facility operators are facing and the associated decisions that are made.