No shock in Federer scheduling claims but Laver Cup row is more problematic

It is rare to see Roger Federer flustered or short-tempered but both those sides of his personality were on show in London this week, and how revealing they were.

Everyone knows (including the man himself) that he gets to play when and where he wants in every tournament he enters. He has earned it. He is not only the biggest draw in tennis, he has been one of the genuinely major stars of international sport for nearly two decades.

As his defender Craig Tiley said of accusations that the Australian Open had consistently allowed Federer to play there in the evening, away from the southern summer heat, and almost always in the familiar surroundings of the main court: “The fans demand his appearance in the big stadiums and our broadcasters naturally want his matches to air in prime time. I don’t think there’s a tournament director in the world who’s not going to take those factors into account when setting the schedule.”

Or TV executive. Or tennis fan. Or smart advertising executive. Or high-end sponsor.

And, even though the argument might not have unequivocal support in the locker room, Federer is on a different level from his contemporaries. Winning 20 majors probably has something to do with that, but he is also “Roger”. That is what he is called. Rarely Federer – except in the colder environment of media discussion, like here. We have to keep at least some distance.

It will not come as a shock to readers, however, to learn that a good number of tennis writers are unashamed Federer fans, some to the point of drooling blindness. Those are voices rarely worth turning to in debates such as this one, because they go immediately back on their heels and start braying as if you had stolen their favourite teddy bear.

Closer to reality was the whispered observation from a players’ agent at the O₂ Arena this week: “When tournaments go looking for players, there is a list. It starts with Roger, then Rafa [Nadal], then Novak [Djokovic]. It has always been like that and it always will be.”

Well, until they retire. And that injects urgency into their thinking. Everyone in the game knows they will only have these players for a little while longer as a trio, perhaps two years if they (and the rest of us) are lucky. If they leave tennis together, at the Tokyo Olympics in 2020, say, it will be the most glorious farewell.

It is doubtful Djokovic will retire by then, highly likely that Nadal will have got the last drop of resistance out of his aching bones and muscle, and almost certain that Federer will attempt to sign off by winning the one trophy that has eluded him in his 20 years in the game: an Olympic gold medal in the singles. Andy Murray would love to be there to stop him, to win an unprecedented third gold – but that is a discussion for another day.

Right now the story is Federer, as it often is. He probably has to beat Kevin Anderson on Thursday to guarantee a place in the semi-finals of the ATP World Tour Finals for an incredible 15th time in 16 visits.

And, if he wants to play his match on the roof of the O₂ Arena, they’d probably let him.

More problematic, however, and less satisfactory is the issue of a conflict of interest Federer might have in his relationship with Tiley, the Australian Open and the successful Laver Cup, which lit up Chicago in its second edition this year.

Tiley’s entrepreneurial instincts have persuaded him to involve Tennis Australia in the Laver Cup, an obvious fit for a venture trading on the name of Australia’s most revered player. But, when Julien Benneteau, the former French Open doubles champion, touched on this partnership between TA and Federer, the Swiss bridled. It’s all very well having a go at him for scheduling favours in Melbourne, but to imply that they came on the back of his business arrangement – and to the perceived detriment of the struggling Davis Cup - was too much for Federer, who dismissed it as if swatting a backhand winner.

Federer, keen to “move on”, as they say, said: “I don’t feel like I need to comment on this. I’d rather put it to rest rather than adding to it so you guys got something to write about. Thank you, guys.”

It spiked a response from Tiley, too. “Tennis Australia is justly proud of the success of the Laver Cup, in which we certainly have a share, along with the USTA and other partners,” he said in answer to queries from the British media. “It’s been one of the most successful new tennis events in recent times, showing the sport in a new light and attracting new fans. I’d say the success of the Laver Cup has been seen as somewhat of a ‘disruptor’ to the men’s game.”

He added: “We run our events to the highest standards and reject as well as challenge any claims to the contrary.”

So, move on we all do. Except maybe not as smoothly as before. Tennis is going through turbulent times and this might not be the last we hear of this awkward little problem.