SF Examiner: Future looks bright for Bay Area sports teams

By Art Spander
Special to The Examiner

SAN FRANCISCO — The Niners’ offensive line is in trouble. The Giants are not going to catch the Rockies. The Raiders are still the Raiders, unable to beat the Chargers. Now, that’s out of the way.

It’s the nature of our business to complain, usually for good reason. But it isn’t that bad, people. The Niners are undefeated, and who cares if it’s one game and they’ll probably lose to Seattle. They’re undefeated.

The Giants remain in the pennant race. Surely after those constant water-torture defeats on the last road trip and then the bashing by the Dodgers — wasn’t San Francisco’s strength pitching? — they don’t have a legitimate chance. But they remain in the pennant race, and it’s the middle of September.

Who knows how to approach the Raiders, who again feel they were mishandled by the unofficial Conspiracy Committee the NFL created specifically to taunt them. Oakland is better than it was, if incrementally. So accept that and, as Serena Williams says, “Move on.”

There’s always something out there to grasp, something to make us believe anything is possible. Didn’t Y.E. Yang beat Tiger Woods? Didn’t Juan Martin del Potro beat Roger Federer? Didn’t Cal beat Western Washington Central State, or whatever that poor little institution is called?

We’ve been informed the Niners are going to play ugly football this season. So be it. That billboard with Mike Singletary says, “I want winners,” not, “I want guys who are pleasing aesthetically.”

The Niners’ rhetoric is borrowed from our pal Al Davis. You know the line, “Just win, baby.” Not, “Just be artistic.” In Oakland, the problem the past six years — as in San Francisco — was not how the performance looked, but how the scoreboard looked. The Raiders are the guys who came up with the Immaculate Deception, a play that was as unattractive and effective as any ever subsequently banned by the league.

Things are turning. The Niners probably will get to .500 for the first time since 2002. That also was the last year the Raiders had a winning record, and while they’re probably not going reach that small pinnacle, they should be improved, which unquestionably the Giants are. Once again we reach back to March. It looked like a reheated version of recent seasons past, if more experienced. In spring training, the idea the Giants would be alive two weeks from the end of the season would have been cause for disbelief. Also for great rejoicing.

The great baseball axiom of what might have been will vex Giants fans through the winter if, as it appears now, the team will not make the postseason. Why not dwell on what was? And what may be?

In theory, the Giants were next year’s team. Suddenly, two months into the season they got a jump on the time schedule. They’re not as good as the Dodgers, not quite as good as the Rockies. But they’re better than most everyone predicted they would be.

What will the Niners and Raiders be? The forecasts are for mediocrity or worse. But the first weekend was encouraging. And if you need a reason to dream the impossible dream, there’s always that tennis player Juan Martin del Potro.

Art Spander has been covering Bay Area sports since 1965 and also writes on www.artspander.com and www.realclearsports.com. E-mail him at typoes@aol.com.

- - - - - -

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Spander-Future-looks-bright-for-Bay-Area-sports-teams-59416577.html
Copyright 2009 SF Newspaper Company 

CBSSports.com: Start smiling, Argentina, your son has done the improbable

By Art Spander
The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com    

NEW YORK -- It was the night disbelief took over center court, the night fantasy overcame logic, the night Roger Federer lost control, the night a dynasty tumbled.

There's a new champion in the U.S. Open, Juan Martin Del Potro, who's still a few days from his 21st birthday but already has come of age in tennis.

Del Potro, the 6-foot-6 guy those homeboys from a meatpacking town in Argentina have nicknamed the Tower of Tandil, indeed towers over all the improbability of sport.

In an upset that must rank among the great ones ever, the Jets beating the Colts in Super Bowl III, Buster Douglas knocking out Mike Tyson, Del Potro defeated Federer, 3-6, 7-6 (5), 4-6, 7-6 (4), 6-2, to take America's tennis title.

When Federer, the reputed finest player in history, winner of the last five U.S. Opens in succession, hit the final shot wide on Monday night, Del Potro flopped on his back as much in bewilderment as elation. He had done what nobody believed could be done.

"My dream done, it's over," Del Potro said. "When I lay on the floor, many things come to my mind. First, my family and my friends and everything. I don't know how I can explain, because it's my dream."

No explanation is needed. We learned what we needed from the longest men's final in 21 years -- 4 hours, 6 minutes -- a brilliant display of forehands and courage, embellished by the chants, "Oh-lay, oh-lay, oh-lay, ohhhhh-lay," and the cheers of 24,821 who packed Arthur Ashe Court.

Federer, winner of a record 15 Grand Slams, was supposed to make it 16, was supposed to tie Bill Tilden's 85-year-old mark of six straight U.S. titles. It was a cinch, the 28-year-old Federer against a kid who until Monday had never been in the final of a Slam.

But something went wrong. Or went right. Del Potro, a bundle of nerves, barely could get a ball over the net in the first set. This was going to be painful. And it turned out to be. For Federer.

"I thought I had him under control the first two sets," Federer said. Already this year the one they call the Swiss Master had won the French Open -- finally breaking through -- and Wimbledon. He was going to be the first in 40 years, since Rod Laver, to win three Slam tournaments in succession. Except he didn't.

"I should never have lost so many chances," he said. "It was just a pity. I think if I win the second set, I'm in a great position to come through. Unfortunately I don't win that, and that was it."

Del Potro won that, on a tiebreak. Federer sounded like most of the men who have faced him through the last five or six years, implying what might have been, talking about the should haves and could haves. That's not the language of a champion.

"It's one of those finals maybe I look back and have some regrets about," said Federer, "but you can't have them all, can't always play your best. He hung in there. In the end he was just too tough."

Federer's failing was what normally is his strength, the serve. He was successful on only 50 percent of his first serves, compared to 65 percent for Del Potro. And while Federer had 13 aces, he also had 11 double faults.

And so for the first time, someone other than Rafael Nadal, whom Del Potro knocked out in Sunday's semifinals, beat Federer in a Grand Slam final. And now, another Argentinean has won a Slam. Guillermo Vilas won four major titles in the 1970s, including the 1977 U.S. Open.

Don't cry for them, Argentina. Stand up and cheer. The soccer team may not make the World Cup, but Del Potro is atop the world of tennis.

"I thought Juan Martin played great," said a gracious Federer. "He hung in there and gave himself chances and in the end was a better man."

In the beginning, however, you wondered if he would win a set. Not until the middle of the second set did Del Potro even have a break point, and when he got the break, Federer, as usual, broke right back.

But Del Potro fought Federer and also fought himself, winning both battles.

"When I won the second set," Del Potro said, "I think if I continue playing the same way, maybe I have chance to win. But after I lost the third set, after going a break up, I start to think bad things, you know. It was so difficult to keep trying. But the crowd helped me a lot to fight until the last point. I have to say thank you to everyone for that."

Federer didn't want to thank the people who developed the electronic line decider known as Hawk-Eye. He's never liked it. And when a Del Potro shot Federer thought was out was shown on the big screen to be in, Del Potro prevented Federer was taking a two-sets-to-none lead.

Later, in another incident, when Del Potro was going to ask for another ruling -- each player has three challenges -- he delayed and then didn't request electronic verification. Federer came over to the umpire and grumbled, "The guy has two seconds [for a decision] and he takes 10."

When chair umpire Jake Garner told Federer to be quiet, Federer, out of character, yelled back, "Don't tell me to be quiet. I'm going to talk. I don't give a spit what you say." Federer didn't say spit.

Federer had won 40 straight matches in the Open since he was beaten in 2003 by David Nalbandian. He's from, yes, Argentina. They're doing something right down there.

For the last year-and-a-half, Del Potro, who entered the Open ranked No. 6 in the world, has been doing a lot right. The question was when he could win a big one. We have the answer.

"At the beginning of the match, I was so nervous," said Del Potro, who added that he couldn't sleep the previous night and couldn't eat breakfast Monday morning.

He can dine now. He took the winner's trophy and $1.85 million in prize money and bonus money. He also took the glory, at least temporarily, from Roger Federer. If it wasn't unbelievable, it certainly was remarkable.

- - - - - -

http://www.cbssports.com/tennis/story/12207912
© 2009 CBS Interactive. All rights reserved.

CBSSports.com: Mommy dearest: Clijsters caps amazing two-week run at U.S. Open

By Art Spander
The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com

NEW YORK -- Mamma mia, can that young lady play tennis.

In a summer of marvelous sports stories, from Tom Watson's great run at the British Open to Derek Jeter overtaking Lou Gehrig as the Yankees' all-time hit leader to the ascent of Melanie Oudin, maybe nothing compares to that of Kim Clijsters.

Out of competition for two years to marry and give birth, Clijsters stepped from the past, an accidental tourist with an effective forehand, and won the U.S. Open.

In a match no one would have foreseen two weeks ago when this tournament began, Clijsters on Sunday night defeated teenager Caroline Wozniacki, 7-5, 6-3, then fell to the court in tearful bliss.

A tournament that's been battered by a literal storm, rain delaying the women's final 24 hours, and a figurative one, the expletive-filled tirade by Serena Williams in losing her semifinal to Clijsters, came to a poignant conclusion before 23,351 fans at Arthur Ashe Stadium.

Among those fans, in the loosest definition of the word, was Clijsters' 18-month-old daughter, Jada Elly, happily chomping on a pacifier in a nanny's lap while her mother overcame Wozniacki's offsetting moon balls.

In a sense, this also was a title defense for the 26-year-old Clijsters, the Belgian who won the championship in 2005, was unable to defend in 2006 and then retired from tennis in 2007. Or so she thought.

But after playing in a requested exhibition last spring with Tim Henman against husband and wife Andre Agassi and Steffi Graff to inaugurate the new roof at Wimbledon, Clijsters remembered the joy of the game, hustled to get into shape and returned to the women's tour -- with child and husband Brian Lynch along for the ride.

This U.S. Open was only her third tournament after the comeback -- she was able to enter on a wild card given because of her reputation by the U.S. Tennis Association. Then she wins. It's a script too unbelievable but very acceptable.

"I don't have words for this," said Clijsters, who then joked, "I'm just glad I got to come back to defend my title of 2005.

"This is so exciting for me. This was not really in our plan. I just wanted to get back into the rhythm of playing tennis. I have to thank the USTA for giving me the wild card to come back here."

Wozniacki, the first Danish woman to get to a Grand Slam final, was the No. 9 seed. She's a fashion-model blonde who enjoys the attention and plays a counter-punching game that threw off Clijsters for a while. The 19-year-old Wozniacki won four straight games in the first set.

But she was in uncharted territory. And even if Wozniacki had played and won more matches on tour in the last year while Clijsters only a few months ago was playing housewife, not tennis, Kim's experience showed. Winners never lose the skill or the drive that made them winners.

Four other mothers had previously won Grand Slams: Hazel Hotchkiss Wightman, Sarah Palfrey Cooke, Margaret Court and, in 1980, Evonne Goolagong Cawley.

"I didn't think it could happen again," said Mary Carillo, the astute TV commentator. "But it did. Amazing."

Because of the weather problems, both women's semis were held simultaneously late Saturday night. And while Clijsters was beating Serena on Ashe, Wozniacki was whipping Yanina Wickmayer next door at Louis Armstrong Stadium -- before only 500 fans.

So, before a very full house at Ashe, she thanked the crowd, in English, Danish and Polish -- her parents immigrated from Poland before she was born. Then, maybe feeling sympathetic to Wozniacki or maybe just a bit confused, USTA president Lucy Garvin introduced Wozniacki as the champion, drawing chuckles from both Wozniacki and Clijsters.

Clijsters earned $1.6 million for the victory and said, understandably, it's been a great two weeks in New York but she couldn't wait to return to the domestic life.

"It's the greatest feeling, being a mother," said Clijsters. "I just can't wait to spend the next few weeks with [Jada]. We tried to plan her nap a little later today.

"When I played my first round here two weeks ago, it meant so much to me. How warm the people were. It embarrassed me. But it helped me keep my focus. I had to keep fighting, especially the last few matches."

On the way, Clijsters, unseeded, defeated both the Williams sisters, Venus in a strange fourth-round match with a 6-0, 0-6, 6-4 score, and then Serena in an even stranger match, Serena losing because of a code violation for cursing a line judge. That was enough drama for a while.

Before she won the 2005 Open, Clijsters was known as someone who collapsed under pressure. And Sunday night she admitted to a bit of nerves during the final game.

She overcame those nerves and the two-year layoff. She's the once and current champ and arguably the mother of the year.

- - - - - -

http://www.cbssports.com/tennis/story/12201999
© 2009 CBS Interactive. All rights reserved.

RealClearSports.com: Serena Should Have Said She Was Sorry

By Art Spander
For RealClearSports.com

NEW YORK -- What's the problem with saying you're sorry, with admitting you were wrong? To err is human, we've been told. So you make your mistake and tell everyone it was a mistake. Unless you're an athlete.

You've seen those phony statements, concocted by agents, where the individual deftly steps around the issue, never point-blank says, "I screwed up, and I'd like to say I'm sorry.''

Which is what Serena Williams should have said.

She's one of two or three best tennis female players in the world, arguably the best. But Serena embarrassed herself, embarrassed her sport during a U.S. Open semifinal.

Lost control. Lost the match. Was mad at herself and, in a expletive-filled tirade, took it out on a lineswoman who even Serena later conceded only was doing what she is paid to do.

A foot fault is a rare call in tennis. It occurs when a server touches the baseline with either foot. Despite denials that she never foot-faults, and seemingly is only guilty in New York, Serena has been called many times in her career.

When she was called in the U.S. Open semi was a problem, down a set to Kim Clijsters, losing 5-4 in the second set and 15-30 in the game. Foot fault. Suddenly it was 15-40, suddenly it was match point.

Suddenly Serena Williams, defending champion, 11-time Grand Slam winner, turned into an immature, foul-mouthed tennis brat.

She held a ball in her left hand, a racquet in her right and extending the left arm told the lineswoman, "I'm going to stuff this (bleeping) ball down your (bleeping) throat.''

In the NFL or the NBA or baseball, that threat would result in instant ejection. What it got Serena was a code warning, which, added to the warning she received for bashing her racket to the court in the first set, cost her a point. And at 15-40, that point meant game, set and match to Clijsters.

Whether a foot fault should be called at that juncture is a legitimate question, the same as whether a foul should be called in basketball in a tie game and a man driving to the basket and a second on the clock. But whether Serena disgraced herself is not a question. She did.

What she didn't do was apologize. In the post-match interview, a rather insincere Serena Williams, insisted, "I didn't threaten. I didn't say . . . I don't remember anymore. I was in the moment . . . I don't think it's necessary for me to speak about it. I've let it go. I'm trying to move on.''

So someone wondered if the lineswoman deserved an apology, and Serena, in her haughtiest voice, answered, "An apology for? From me? How many people yell at linespeople? . . .Players, athletes get frustrated. I don't know how many times I've seen that happen.''

That's no justification. Serena confided she has a temper, which is not an indictable offense. Serena confided one of her heroes was John McEnroe, notorious for his language when berating officials.

But Serena is almost 28 years old, supposedly a role model, as well as a fashion model. She's always placing a bottle of Gatorade next to the microphone during interviews to promote one of her endorsements. You think the company likes one of its stars swearing like a street punk?

Tennis is personality-driven. It is Serena Williams and Roger Federer who bring the attention. This isn't exactly inmates-running-the-asylum material, but the players have control. Even when they're out of control.
They are the lifeblood of their sport. They can get away with virtually anything.

Serena was fined $10,000, but she wasn't suspended. Having her beaten before the final of the Open was bad enough. She was the last American standing in American's championship. Not that she would have been standing even if she didn't go into her diatribe.

Clijsters, three months out of retirement, was outplaying Serena. Serena knew it. Serena was angry at herself. She took out it out on the lineswoman, of whom later Williams said, "If she called a foot fault, she must have seen a foot fault. I'm not going to knock her for doing her job.''

She didn't knock her, she trashed her. It was shameful. Then Serena had second thoughts. Then Serena was contrite. But she wouldn't apologize.

"It was a tough day,'' Williams justified. "I didn't play my best.''

Asked if she regretted losing her head, if briefly, Serena said, "I haven't really thought about it to have any regrets. I try not to live my life saying, ‘I wish, I wish.' I was out there and fought and I tried and I did my best.''

Her best was not very good. What we wish is a woman of Serena Williams' talent and reputation could say simply, "I apologize.'' We'd let it go at that.

As a reporter since 1960, Art Spander is a living treasure of sports history. A recipient of the Dick McCann Memorial Award -- given for his long and distinguished career covering professional football -- he has earned himself a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He was recently honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award by the PGA of America for 2009.

- - - - - -

http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/09/13/serena_should_have_said_she_was_sorry_96481.html
© RealClearSports 2009

CBSSports.com: Serena's shocking outburst continues bizarre Open

By Art Spander
The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com

NEW YORK -- The ending was bizarre. The result was stunning. Serena Williams was bounced from the U.S. Open, as earlier she had bounced her racquet in disgust, on a code violation for cursing a lineswoman.

It was a sorry ending to what had been a competitive match, with Kim Clijsters basically outplaying Serena and then standing in disbelief as Williams was told the point she was penalized was the point that gave Clijsters the semifinal victory, 6-4, 7-5.

Williams, the defending champion, was serving at 15-30 in the 12th game of the second set Saturday night when she was called by lineswoman for a foot fault, meaning Williams' foot was judged to be over the baseline.

Serena screamed at the woman, "I'm going to shove this [deleted] ball down your [deleted] throat."

The lineswoman reported Williams' comments to chair umpire Louis Engzell, who then called a second code violation, which -- added to the one assessed to Williams when she bashed her racquet in the first set -- resulted in a loss of a point.

That point gave Clijsters the game and thus the match.

"I don't remember what I said," was Serena's comment when asked how she addressed the lineswoman. "You didn't hear? I said something; I guess they gave me a point penalty. Unfortunately, it was on match point.

"I've never been foot-faulted, and then suddenly in this tournament they keep calling foot faults. I don't know why [the lineswoman] said she felt threatened. I've never been in a fight in my life. I didn't think I would get a point penalty."

And nobody thought Clijsters would become the first unseeded player in the women's final since Serena's older sister, Venus, in 1997. Clijsters, back from a two-year retirement in which she married and had a daughter, will face Caroline Wozniacki in Sunday night's final. Wozniacki beat Yanina Wickmayer, 6-3, 6-3, in the other semifinal.

The way things had been going during this Open, anything was possible. Play had been rained out completely Friday, and then more rain Saturday forced postponement or rescheduling of numerous matches, including the two women's semis.

Normally held on Friday afternoon on the main court, Ashe Stadium, the women's semis were pushed back and back and back. Finally, the Wozniacki-Wickmayer match was shifted to the smaller Armstrong Court, and, after a lot of drying with hot air blowers, the two matches began simultaneously around 9:20 p.m. ET.

Serena, the No. 2 seed, never seemed in the match. She was broken three times. Then she lost her temper.

"That was a tough day," Williams said. "I didn't play my best."

But she also gave credit to the 26-year-old Clijsters, whose speed and strength were the equal of Serena, if not superior.

"Kim played well," Williams said. "I wasn't surprised. I saw her play in Cincinnati, and she played incredible. I thought, 'Wow, this is someone to watch out for.' I think it's really good to have her back on tour."

Clijsters, from Belgium, was champion in 2005. She was unable to defend in 2006 because of an injury, then in '07 dropped out to get married and start a family. But when asked earlier this year to play an exhibition with England's Tin Henman against Andre Agassi and Steffi Graf, Clijsters got into shape in earnest. Now, in her third women's tour event after the return, she has surprised everyone.

Including herself.

"I'm in shock, really," was Clijsters' response when asked about reaching the final.

For Williams, a few days from her 28th birthday, the word is shocking. One moment she walks up to serve, the next she's being informed she's no longer playing.

"After she was called for the foot fault," tournament referee Brian Earley said, "she said something to the line umpire, who reported to the chair umpire. That resulted in a point penalty. It just so happens, that was match point."

Clijsters was as bewildered as Serena. Then again, while play went on, she was bewildering Serena.

"I came out of the blocks really well," Clijsters said. "I kept her on her back foot a little bit."

It was the front foot, when Serena was serving from the ad court, that did her in.

"If she called a foot fault," a contrite Williams said later, "she must have seen a foot fault. I mean, she was doing her job. I'm not going to knock her for doing her job."

When asked if she should apologize to the lineswoman, Serena said rhetorically, "An apology? For what? How many people yell at linespeople? "Players, athletes get frustrated. I'm sorry, but a lot of people have said a lot worse."

But not on this evening, in a semifinal of the U.S. Open.

- - - - - -

http://www.cbssports.com/tennis/story/12196880
© 2009 CBS Interactive. All rights reserved.