The Stockholm reverse and the new storm that has hit Indian tennis

The only surprise in the 0-4 defeat against Sweden in the World Group 1 Davis Cup tie in Stockholm last week was the Indian team not winning even a set. However, the noise surrounding this tie is unusually heavy and quite jarring, with accusations and counters.

What has not gone down well is the fact that the 29-year-old Sumit Nagal, ranked No. 82, lamented the lack of depth in Indian tennis in a podcast with his mentor Somdev Devvarman.

India’s chances would have been enhanced had Nagal played in Stockholm. But there was still no guarantee as he had lost twice to the Swedish No. 1 Elias Ymer and had beaten him only once on clay, this year. The Davis Cup tie was played on an indoor hard court.

Ramkumar Ramanathan, India No. 2, showed up and competed as well as he could; as former captain Mahesh Bhupathi put it nicely, Ramkumar turns up for National duty irrespective of his form or how he feels.

This is not the first time Nagal has opted out of Davis Cup. He did that in India’s previous assignment, against Pakistan in the World Group 1 playoff in Islamabad. However, the inadequacies of Indian tennis were not exposed then as Ramkumar and company cruised past Pakistan 4-0 when Zeeshan Ali was both captain and coach.

Despite pulling it off against the neighbour, there was no chest thumping. In contrast, Nagal took credit (during the podcast) for helping India clinch the World Group 2 tie against Morocco in Lucknow, winning both his matches.

The fact remains that Nagal has won only four more rubbers, two against the lesser-known Pakistan players in 2019 when Aisam Qureshi and Aqeel Khan refused to play on neutral ground in Kazakhstan. One other victory came in a dead rubber against Norway. His only notable win was against August Holmgren in three sets in the World Group 1 playoff last year against Denmark.

Nagal may have had genuine grouse, especially after not being nominated by the AITA for the Australian Open wild card this year. However, as Nandan Bal, the chairman of selectors, put it succinctly, Nagal should have understood that he was playing for India, not the AITA.

With mounting criticism, the AITA chose to defend itself, and suggested that Nagal may have missed the Sweden tie on purpose despite all the persuasion. To find fault with the Indian system — however genuine — ahead of a match in which he was seemingly injured was quite unbecoming of Nagal, the country’s No. 1 player.