On-court coaching
The WTA has announced that it's to trial
This is a *dreadful* idea. Some players will like it (players who are insecure, have coaches, and are tired of hearing after a loss, "If you'd just..."). Some players will hate it (players who have overbearing parents they can't get to shut up and whose only peace is on-court; players who don't have coaches at all).
Why it's so bad: the most appealing thing about tennis other than the grace of the game itself (often missing in today's biff-bang-bash-wallop) is the fact that players are out there on their own. *They* have to win it. Whatever preparation they've done off-court, with whatever advice, *on* court it's up to them to figure stuff out and make it happen. Coaches have a place on-court in team events such as Fed Cup. But not in tournaments.
A lot of people have said in recent years that the no-coaching rule can't be enforced, therefore it's silly to have it. But in other contexts we often have rules or laws that can't easily be enforced; there is a big difference between encouraging something by making it explicitly legal and discouraging something by making it against the rules. Still, this is the reasoning under which the ATP made appearance fees legal some years back (thereby making it financially extremely difficult for tournaments outside the Masters Series). AFAIAA, no serious attempt has been made to enforce the rule. It isn't, actually, that hard. Assign someone to keep an eye on the coaches -- ideally, part of the umpiring team.
Much has been written lately about on-court coaching, with Pennetta's coach during her match at Wimbledon and Sharapova's father in all her matches the most notable. Are we really just making rules for Sharapova now?
wg