There is a lot of sacrifice that goes into winning a championship – and sometimes not just by the player. Often, family members have been moved down the priority list, friends have been ignored, and work has taken a hit.
Yet, as selfish as the champion has had to be in order to win, there is usually acute awareness both of the effect of the quest on others and of how many people actually helped make the championship happen. That’s one of the reasons why almost every champion admits to having daydreamed about the awards presentation. It is an acknowledgment not only of the player, but of all the others who contributed to the win.
What a shame, then, not to have any formal recognition after the big win. Last year, this frustration bubbled over with a number of letters to the editor from age-group winners who privately had to seek out their trophies. They felt that after all they had gone through, they deserved more notice.
So why does it not happen? Well, if you start to think about how it might be done, the logistics get quickly cumbersome. There are 13 men’s age group titles, five women’s age group titles, eight skill level titles and the Men’s and Women’s Open divisions. That’s a lot of awards. Plus, many of those titles are being played simultaneously, so it would be very hard for someone to be alert to the finish of each title (even for two or three people). And running the finals sequentially is just not an option.
Some people think that there should be a formal awards ceremony, but that is tricky, too. When, for example, do you do it? Don’t forget that the tournament is over a long weekend, and people often have plane reservations for long flights back home. If you wait until the conclusion of the Men’s Open final, there would be many problems with flight coordination. Not only is there a timing problem, but there is also a time problem.
The Academy Awards present only 15-20 awards during the actual telecast, and they have trouble finishing in under four-and-a-half hours. Thank goodness most squash players do not sing, dance, or tell jokes (at least not in public), but you get the point: 28 presentations and speeches could take awhile.
How, then, does one solve a seemingly intractable problem? Well, here’s one proposal.
The solution, it seems to me, is two-pronged and involves two different groups of people. The first of these is the final-match referees.
Each referee for the finals would need to take control the second the match is over. As the two players exit the court, the referee would announce something like: “Ladies and Gentlemen, before you leave, we’d like to give the two players an opportunity to say something. First, the runner-up…” Here’s the thing: no one is going to speak without being given “permission.” By having the referee offer up the chance, the players may say something to those who watched – even if the spectators are mostly family members.
The second group of people would consist of the Executive Director of the USSRA, the President of the USSRA, and a Master of Ceremonies. These three would conduct an abbreviated awards ceremony between the Men’s and Women’s Open finals, where every winner and runner-up would get public recognition and applause. There are a number of factors that would be involved in making this work:
First, it should become standard practice that this ceremony is where all trophies are received.
Second, the total time for the ceremony should be less than 20 minutes (which means, of course, that there would be no speeches here at all – just a handshake and a trophy).
Third, the roles are important – the Executive Director and President would be presenters of the trophies (one to the winners; one to the runners-up), while the MC would make sure that the whole thing keeps running quickly (which is why a professional MC would be necessary; if time really becomes an issue, trophies could be handed out to the winners only.)
Finally, the ceremony would end with a presentation to the two Women’s Open finalists (who would be offered the chance to speak) and an introduction of the Men’s Open finalists.
The nice thing about this two-pronged plan is that it would allow people to say something to the people that matter, it would give public recognition for a truly worthy accomplishment, and it would encourage people to stay to watch the Open finals. An added benefit is that it would allow the daydreams of future champions to continue -- and that might be the most important reason of all.
