What happened in January 2022 with Novak Djokovic in Australia was the most ‘complicated’ experience of his life. Rafael Nadal may well still be playing in 2025. And the current Davis Cup situation ‘hurts’, because the story should not have ended like this. Who says all this? Craig Tiley, CEO of Tennis Australia and director of the Australian Open, in an extensive interview with CLAY in which he warns of a danger.
‘Tennis must not become complacent,’ says the 62-year-old South African, who is watching with interest the moves by the ATP and WTA with the “Tennis Ventures” project and is cautious about predicting the role in the sport’s power of someone very important in tennis – Roger Federer.
India’s absence from the ATP circuit is also analysed by Tiley, head of a tournament that consistently ranks among the most beloved by players and spectators.
– What can we expect for the Australian Open 2025?
– We have a mandate that a minimum of 50 per cent of the site for the fan needs to change every year, which is big, because some things you cannot change. You cannot change permanent buildings, courts, that kind of stuff, but that’s included in that. So we’re constantly pushing the experience, and we’re currently working with the team on some very transformative and innovative fan experiences and also a combination of player experiences with them. We’ve got a list of about 50 of them, but we make a final decision, and we’ll pick our top five, and then we’ll go and execute on those top five. And that’s the normal pace or the normal program we go through each year. So you can be guaranteed you’ll see some more transformative things. This past year we tested crowd movement during the games. We tested the bar on the court, which probably took a few days to get used to, but then the fans loved it. Just trying to bring the fans and the players a lot closer together. We built a whole lot more shade for our fans on all the courts, because we have an ultimate objective of having every seat in the shade. And so, you know, each year. We will do some things that give the fans a very different experience, and it’ll be no different for 2025.
– Do you foresee Nadal playing next year in Australia?
– Nadal, one of our great champions and one of the great champions of all time. He’s got a massive fan base in Australia. I’m one of them. It’s all dependent on Rafa’s health, but we would love to see him, he knows he’s always welcome, and we’ll make whatever opportunity we can make for him to be able to play.
– But you know about tennis. What’s your gut feeling?
– My gut feeling is that I don’t want to predict what he’s going to do, but my gut feeling is driven by my own hope. It’s going to be entirely up to him. But I hope we see Nadal more this year and next year. As long as he feels like he can compete at this level and do what he can do so well, then I think he’ll play because he loves the game. But that’s my opinion.
– The Australian Open has been a successful tournament for Nadal, and at the same time, a bitter tournament, because he could have won many more titles.
– Yeah, if you take the number of times, not just this round, but the number of times he’s in the finals or just on the brink of winning it, and that didn’t happen, it would have completely changed the number of Grand Slams that he won. So, I always look at that when you look at the success that Novak and Roger and Rafa have had. He’s had some brilliant success. Still one of my favorite finals of all time is him and Medvedev. It was a great final, great match. Both played good tennis. And the way Rafa came back was unbelievable. That was a special weekend forAustralians because, of course, Ash Barty won the women’s title on Saturday night. And then Rafa won on Sunday night. When you put Rafa in the stadium, people come. And they come to watch him play and compete. They love his attitude to people and love his attitude to competing. So, I hope, I’m hoping optimistically that we will see him.
– Do you still remember that it was in Australia 2012 when there was an argument between Nadal and Federer? Nadal said in the press room that Federer was always trying to end as a gentleman, while the others got roasted…
– It was a weird moment in this story that unites both. Yeah, I know what you’re talking about. You know, they are very close friends. And I know that. For a fact, we are a business partner with Roger and his company and teammates. And we’re also partners with Rafa and his company. So, we work closely with Roger and Rafa. They’re special friends. And like any relationship, you’re going to have high moments and low moments and in the middle moments. And I think that’s all part of strengthening the relationship. The great thing about those two is that it’s a good lesson for everyone. If there’s a point of difference in something, you can go and talk about it with each other. And you understand each other’s point of view. I mean, I wish many world leaders would do the same thing today. We need that. We need that. And they’re both good examples of great leaders, great people. I could be nothing but absolutely complimentary with both of those two on dealing with them. And I can say the same for Nadal.
– If you had to describe the tennis product today, what would you say?
– I think we’ve got a good product. I can talk well from the Australian Open and the summer to the Australian Open. January is one of the most watched times of the year for tennis because the Australian Open is in a time zone of India, China, Japan, Southeast Asia. And the audience there is huge.
– And people are thirsty for tennis.
– And people are thirsty for tennis. It’s summertime. It’s the beginning. All the players are playing. So, on the calendar, January is one of the richest months in prize money. One of the most watched months. And it’s a great way to launch the season with full stadiums and a lot of excitement. The sun is shining in the summer. You know, you come down every January. And so, I think that, so from that perspective, I think that product’s good. You often hear from the playing group that it’s playing the number of events they’ve got to play in the off-season. But I know everyone’s trying to work on a solution. And you’re probably going to lead to the question about, like, you know, how the Grand Slams and the Tour’s work together. And I just, you know, all I can say at this point is just there’s ongoing conversations.
– Coming soon! But I also wanted to ask you about the Davis Cup, you’re very critical about what happened to the Davis Cup.
– Yes.
– Why? What do you see there?
– I was a former Davis Cup captain. And I coached Davis Cup players. And I coached Davis Cup players. And I saw when nations like South Africa were able to host a country like Australia or, you know, Serbia and what it did having a full stadium shouting for their nation and what it did for the tennis in the country. And how you bring these superstars or great players into your country and play against them at home in the home and away. And some of my personal best moments in tennis. I have been playing away matches when the crowd’s completely on the other team’s side. Playing home matches and the crowd’s completely on your side. And the energy on that match. And so I was always in favor and still remain in favor of a home-and-away format. And I believe that the Davis Cup should have more home-and-away games. And I think they’ve just got to sort out how often that needs to be and what it looks like commercially. But people can sort that out. But I will never change my position because that will work. You can make it work, work commercially in my opinion and I just think that… So the problem was not the format but the business model, the ITF. You take away that home and away element of it. I think we should have worked harder on trying to find a commercial solution for that element. Is my opinion, but it’s easy for me to say I’m sitting on the sidelines saying that. So I recognize that and people in behind the scenes working on it but I was critical, I worked hard, we were unsuccessful and in the voting defeated because I just thought it was not in the best interest of the of the support. And since what’s happened we were kind of right.
– If you see the number 180 in the world rankings in tennis, this guy struggles to make a living. If you take out the 180 best football or basketball or golf players, they don’t have a problem.
– That’s a problem for our sport, that’s a challenge for tennis. Players need to make more money. A healthy ecosystem works when you’ve got the right number of players making enough of a living, where they can afford a coach, can afford their travel and have us be able to set aside enough money to make investments for the future. It’s a performance related game, so you also got to get higher ranked and you get more opportunities. That still has to exist, but i’ve always know, from college coaching days, to pro coaching days, to running business, I’ve always advocated for greater compensation for the players. Fortunately I’ve been in a position in the Australian Open and leadership role where we can impact that, and one of the first things we did when I came to that role was dramatically increase compensation to the players.
– I’ve heard you speaking about your big hopes in the American market and Coco Gauff specifically. Is the U.S. even better than Europe in commercial terms?
– I think everyone’s different, but in different markets the U.S.A. is a very strong commercial sports market. It’s a very strong sports commercial market, very very mature, you’ve got two of the top sports leagues in the world in the NFL and the NBA there. So, when you get a superstar like Coco Gauff, who is a true superstar, and whose parents have done a brilliant job with helping guide her through the pathway, and she’s going to be an incredible superstar, she’s going to have incredible opportunities in the future. So I think it’s just how the U.S. is conditioned, I think, when it comes to sport.
– But quite often you read about the tennis crisis in America. Is it in crisis from your point of view?
– No, no. I’ve been around long enough to know that it’s an easy narrative. Often you can’t define a crisis just by the number of players you have in the top 10 or the top 100, because that’s the cycle that can change. I mean, what happens at Roland Garros, you know, the American-Australian players, we’ve got De Minaur in Paris, reaching the quarterfinals. But he could have lost in the first round, and then there’s a crisis in Australia. I never buy that. I’ve never bought that. As long as you have investment in grassroots tennis and people playing the game and good people making good decisions on the game, you’re always going to be successful. We’re very lucky in tennis. There’s a lot of people in Australia, for example, you know, it’s the second most participated sport, and it’s the most watched sport.
– More than footy?
– Well, I mean… If you took January, footy doesn’t have a global audience. We in tennis have a global audience. But year-round is football. It’s AFL. But soccer and tennis are the two most participated sports in Australia by a long way. And so we’re very lucky with that. So it’s very important to the Australian people. Our numbers have gone up every year. So we’re in a healthy environment. But I think the sport globally is healthy as far as participation. And we’ve got pickleball and paddle are all ongoing challenges for tennis, but they’re good challenges.
– That’s what I wanted to ask you about. What’s the biggest danger? What’s the biggest danger for tennis right now?
– I think the biggest danger is complacency. Are the leaders thinking that what we’ve got is satisfactory? Because the world is moving so fast. The one constant that’s changed post-COVID where everything is speed. So we need to have a sport that’s agile, can adjust and can move. So if we rest on our laurels and are complacent, we’ll lose. So that’s the one. The second thing is that it’s a very disaggregated and decentralized leadership and management of the sport. It does better when it’s together. So the leaders have to find a way for more to be together. It makes a lot of sense for the players, for the tournaments. Together you not only have greater protection for each other, so you protect from disruption. But you also have the opportunity to do more things. And the third thing is ensuring that we continue to support the pathway, getting young kids with a racket in their hand.
– Again, ¿no tennis crisis?
– We’re lucky in tennis, look at the great champions. We’ve got a game now, with Coco coming through with the ego on the woman’s side, the way Jannik and Carlos emerged. Everyone thinks, oh, Roger Federer, Rafa, Serena, Venus, they are gone! What’s next? I remember the years when Andre Agassi and Pete Sampras and Steffi Graf were gone, what are we going to do? Tennis is going to be a disaster! And even before that, there was one period, you know, where there was like three, four years where no one could kind of, I think Pat Cash won Wimbledon and, but no one could kind of dominate, so tennis will be fine that way. But we’ve got to make sure we use that to my third point, to keep investing in the pathway and getting kids to pick up the racket.
– This joint ATP-WTA project, “Tennis Ventures”. Is it a good idea?
– I don’t know enough about it, but what I do know, as much as you can, to work together, it’s going to be in the best interest for everyone. Successful sports have figured out ways to do it. Some sports don’t figure out ways and tennis, we’re very lucky. We’ve got good people leading it and we’ve got big opportunities ahead of us.
– This is also related to the Premier Tour project. Is this one a good idea?
– Again. It’s an attempt to bring people and everyone together and, and those conversations, all the stakeholders kind of are ongoing at this point.
– Change of subject: India, the biggest country in terms of population, but they’re not part of the tour. Do you see any solution for that?
– Well, they have great players. They’ve got some great players, there’s young players that are coming through as well. And it’s a big population, they do have a tenant. They have a tennis interest. It’s interesting you asked that question. We’re advocates for support in our region, in Asia. The Asian Tennis Federation has got some good leadership and we are working closely with them to promote tennis in India, in China, Southeast Asia, Korea, Japan. Those are your big five. So I think there’s not only plenty of players, but this is where tennis has a big upside. You know, you get a few more champions coming out of China and India, and then all of a sudden you have millions of more fans and that’ll happen. We’ve had some great ones and we’ll get some more.
– How would Australia receive a Masters 1000 in Saudi Arabia?
– We’ve been very clear on that. For the sport of tennis, having the season start in that way, in New Zealand, Hong Kong, Australia, it’s in the best interest of the players on travel. It’s in the best interest of promoting the Australian Open. That month of January, as I said before, was one of the most watched. And I think when everyone looks at that in a logical way, that makes the most sense. So let’s just keep making decisions on things that make the most sense.
– South America. Do they deserve a Masters 1000?
– Oh, it’s a hard one, you have to ask someone else that, because I’m not a decision maker on that. We work together with COSAT and the Brazilian Tennis Federation on, on promoting the Australian Open in South America. Andre Sá, who’s Brazilian, works for us, is the director of our player relations. He set it up and the two top Brazilian juniors that won it got a wildcard in the Australian Open. So, we work closely in South America. We’re going to do more work there because we think it’s another region like Asia. Southeast Asia, South America are great regions for growth. They’ve had great champions come out of there. I think that they’ve got events and I think it’s important to have events. What the level of those events are will need to be determined. What’s needed. But it’s important to have those events.
– We have Grand Slams in Australia and France, in the UK and the United States, but there’s no law that says that they have to be in those four countries and that they have to be only four.
– Yeah.
– Would you support in the future to have, for instance, six Grand Slams?
– I think we’ve got four really solid Grand Slams that have a hundred years of history. Can’t replace that history quickly. The money doesn’t do it either. We’ve also got to be mindful from the players perspective, what gives them an optimal schedule for their development. We’ve got four great assets. We’ve got many great assets in tennis. We’ve got four really big ones that, you know, they drive the commercial outcomes for the sport in many ways. And I think they’re good benefits for the fans and for the players. So, you know, you’ve got to be careful about shaking the tree on things that are working as well.
– You said that tennis, in fact, is split into several governing bodies. If there is a situation in the future where you all join in a common ground, would Roger Federer be the ideal CEO for that?
– I can’t answer that one.
– You won’t answer that one?
– No, I can’t. Cause I don’t know. I mean, I can’t give you an answer. I don’t know. And I don’t want to give my opinion on something I don’t know.
– Federer said that he will always be at tennis. He will be always supporting tennis and doing, loving tennis. So, you can imagine him as president of tennis worldwide.
– We’re lucky in tennis. We’ve got a lot of great people that are coaching their former players, coaching the game, former players, administering the game, you know, former players leading the game, playing different parts of it. It’s great when you’re going to meet with a manufacturer and there’s a former player. So, it’s a great ecosystem. It supports people coming through, but like everything tennis, like any sport tennis can do a better job. I love the game. It’s the only thing I know. And as you can see I don’t know all the answers to everything. We are very fortunate of where we are as a sport and position. We just got to, from a leadership point of view, keep taking good care of it, keep growing it. There’s always going to be threats, the future threat could be the economic conditions. Could be a war. Could be a pandemic. We’ve had that one. So, these are all things, but look how strong they’ve had out of the pandemic. Look how strong the Grand Slams have come out of it and the sports come out of it. So, I’m optimistic.
– You mentioned the pandemic. A couple of years ago, you had that situation with Djokovic.
– Yes.
– Was this the most bitter, sad, terrible situation in your sports life?
– No.
– No?
– No. Because what you read in the press and everything that happened around it and the death threats and everything. It always comes down to people and relationships. And we had great relationships with the players. I personally had a great relationship with Novak. We did as an organization. Novak and I spoke a lot and, and it was really unfortunate what happened. And I supported Novak through the whole situation, but there were many people that had much harder time than any of us had, because they lost family members. And so there were much more, much more dramatic things.
– But focusing on your own experience as a leader in sports, that was the most complicated situation, wasn’t it?
– Yeah. That was complicated, is the right word. In answer to your question, I think I’ve had lots of crisis moments, but that was probably the most complicated, the most pressure filled, and had the most attention globally. I was hearing from people that I hadn’t heard from in school since I was in primary school. Like everything in leadership, you just do your best to make the right decision.
– You said that Djokovic never blamed you. Just to understand, did you feel betrayed by the government? What happened there?
– Look, there were lots of things that were happening at the time. You know, there was one part of the government… I haven’t blamed anyone. Just to be clear. There’s no blame on anyone for that, I do think it was a very difficult time for everyone. It was a particularly difficult time for Novak on that and for the team that was managing it. It was a time where everyone had to do the number one thing everyone should do is support each other. That’s what you had to find in a situation. So when I look back at that now, it doesn’t do any good to lay blame. My mindset is about moving forward, I struggle looking behind. And so I struggle with bringing up what happened, and looking forward is really important. It’s important for the leadership and it’s important for future opportunities. I just look forward to, you know, this afternoon, tonight and tomorrow, and because time’s a great thing. You’ll get there.
