Tennis veteran and multiple Wimbledon champion Andy Murray recently voiced strong criticism regarding a decision made during a high-profile match at the All England Club. The incident occurred during the clash between Italy`s Jannik Sinner and Bulgaria`s Grigor Dimitrov on Centre Court.
At a critical juncture, specifically before the start of the third set with Dimitrov leading comfortably 6-3, 7-5, tournament organizers elected to close the retractable roof. This move, made despite seemingly fair weather conditions, drew a pointed reaction from the Scot, who is no stranger to the nuances of playing on Centre Court.
Taking to social media, Murray didn`t mince words about the organizational choice. He described the decision to close the roof as “absurd.” His primary point of contention wasn`t the existence of the roof itself – a modern marvel designed to combat London`s unpredictable rain – but its application in that specific moment. “Absurd to close the roof,” Murray tweeted. He immediately questioned the timing and necessity, stating, “There was at least an hour of daylight left… could have played more than one set.”
Murray`s remark highlights a subtle but significant tension at Wimbledon. While the roof guarantees play, preserving the tournament schedule and ensuring fans see matches concluded, its use when conditions appear perfectly playable fundamentally changes the environment. Wimbledon is, at its heart, an outdoor grass-court Grand Slam. Closing the roof transforms the arena into an indoor setting, altering light, temperature, wind (or lack thereof), and potentially the bounce of the ball.
For players locked in a competitive battle, a sudden shift from outdoor to indoor conditions can be strategically disruptive. Momentum, rhythm, and comfort levels can all be impacted. Murray`s “It`s an outdoor tournament!” adds a touch of wry emphasis to this point, suggesting a preference for preserving the traditional element where possible, rather than defaulting to indoor conditions when daylight persists.
Coming from a two-time champion who understands the intricacies of grass-court tennis and the unique Centre Court atmosphere perhaps better than anyone, Murray`s perspective carries considerable weight. His label of “absurd” serves as a high-profile critique of a decision that many might view as an unnecessary interruption to an outdoor sporting event under the open sky, even if it offers technological convenience.
Ellis Thorne 
Percy Harlow