It’s ‘For the Looks of the Game’ Only

There is nothing wrong with England that a cold shower wouldn’t cure.

I’m not talking about a rain shower. If form holds over the next two weeks of the Wimbledon championships, which began this morning, we will see plenty of rain. I’m talking about a cold shower as in, “Calm down, concentrate on the forehand, not foreplay.”

Whatever happened to the phrase, “No sex, please, we’re British?” If you look at tennis photographs--or should I say pinups?--in London sports sections, they’re all sex, all the time. (OK, to be fair, half the time, but still . . . )

Of course, I buy the newspapers for the articles. But even some of those make you wonder if the All England Lawn Tennis and Croquet Club isn’t a cover for some strip club. It’s as if everyone wants to write like Bridget Jones.

If there is any redeeming quality to the coverage, it is that it is equal. The men are as likely to be turned into sex objects as the women.

In its Wimbledon special section, the Evening Standard gave “Babe ratings” to players of both genders.

U.S. Open champion Marat Safin of Russia (“Says Scotland is one of his favorite holiday destinations. Must like mists and glens and that sort of thing, so obviously a romantic”) and Australian Pat Rafter (“Prone to ripping his shirt in excitement, and exciting his female fans in the process”) were the only men who rated five hearts on a scale of five.

Austrian Barbara Schett (“Tall, toothy stunner with bleached blond highlights. . . . Tragically, is a Whitney Houston fan.”) was the only woman rating five hearts.

Anna Kournikova rated 10.

(“Crap at tennis and not playing at Wimbledon, but we couldn’t leave her out. Some say she looks too much like Boris Yeltsin to be really pretty. . . . We just drool.”)

Did we mention she isn’t playing at Wimbledon? She has a stress fracture in her left foot that has prevented her from playing since February, but you wouldn’t know it from the media coverage devoted to her new fitness video and sports bra.

It used to be that she didn’t have to win to attract attention. Now she doesn’t even have to play.

This absorption with tennis players’ bodies, especially the women’s, is hardly a new phenomenon at Wimbledon.

According to Peter Seddon’s book, “Tennis’ Strangest Matches,” Lottie Dod caused a twitter in 1887 by winning in a calf-length skirt. But, since she was 15, it was ruled that she was a girl--not a woman--and, thus, it was acceptable for her to show her ankles.

Suzanne Lenglen was considered daring in 1919 for wearing a one-piece cotton frock and stockings rolled down to her ankles. Joan Lycett didn’t wear stockings at all during her loss in the final in 1931, which the Times of London called “shocking.” Told by officials to put some on, she said, “But I haven’t got any.”

Gorgeous Gussie (Gertrude Augusta) Moran displayed frilly underwear beneath her tennis dress in 1949. How significant was that? Seddon wrote that her choice of panties symbolized “the official ending of wartime austerity and Wimbledon pomposity.” Still, a potential scandal was averted when Queen Mary, then 84, used the heat as an excuse to miss the Center Court debut, in the doubles final, of Moran’s controversial knickers.

A couple of decades before, Helen Wills had accelerated King George V’s heart rate by changing her sweater between sets. What would he have thought of Anne White’s skintight bodysuit in 1985?

But we have never seen an era such as today’s, when, according to an essay in the Evening Standard’s weekend magazine, female tennis players have become the new supermodels. “ . . . Miraculously, show biz, soap and a healthy dose of sex appeal entered the game with the arrival of a bunch of brash, bratty teenagers,” Stuart Husband wrote. Out with Naomi, Claudia and Christie. In with Anna, Martina and Venus.

Is all of this talk of things other than tennis good for tennis?

It is certainly good for tennis players, at least in regard to their bank accounts.

As Venus Williams said the other day after appearing as a runway model in a fashion show (seriously, she and a group of models were displaying Reebok’s new women’s tennis line), “Actually, in a good way I think sport has advanced, especially for women. People are investing more dollars and it’s going quite well.”

But the more that economic opportunities off the court increase, the less some players seem to respect the sport. They definitely respect each other less than they did in the Billie Jean King-Rosie Casals and Martina Navratilova-Chris Evert eras.

“It’s not only the Williamses, it’s all the top players,” Evert said at the French Open. “They’re all going every which way, only thinking about themselves. Everything’s coming apart at the seams. There has to be some unity, some sense of loyalty and some sense of responsibility.”

Don’t worry, Chris. We in the media can be counted on to expose this crass turn of events--with accompanying photographs.

I must confess that I searched my own soul the other day when Carol Midgley from the Times of London chastised us by writing, “There are so few women’s sports that grab the nation’s attention that newspaper editors practically faint with gratitude when they get an excuse to use a pair of shapely legs in ankle socks to brighten up [the] sports pages.”

She then took on men in general, writing that “ . . . they can stare freely at a woman’s knickers while claiming to be studying her return of serve.” Ouch.

But I concluded that I am not guilty. I could never be accused of exploiting this situation, unless, of course, you count today.

*

Randy Harvey can be reached at randy.harvey@latimes.com

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Wimbledon Facts

* When: Today-July 8

* Where: All England Lawn Tennis & Croquet Club

* Men’s singles winner prize money: $721,025.

* Women’s singles winner prize money: $649,300.

TV

TNT; Channel 4 (beginning this weekend).

* Women’s semifinals: July 5, 1 p.m. (delayed)

* Women’s final: July 7, 6 a.m.

* Men’s semifinals: July 6, noon

* Men’s final: July 8, 6 a.m.