Emma Raducanu humiliated Donald Trump-supporting Wimbledon ace who caused storm this week
Emma Raducanu humiliated Donald Trump-supporting Wimbledon ace who caused storm this week
Maria Sakkari made headlines for her fiery on-court clash last weekend, but the Greek tennis star was left to rue her words by Emma Raducanu at Wimbledon last year
Maria Sakkari has stirred up controversy with her on-court antics
(Image: Rob Newell - CameraSport, CameraSport via Getty Images )
Emma Raducanu once embarrassed a controversial tennis star who attended US President Donald Trump's inauguration gala at Wimbledon.
Greek tennis star Maria Sakkari found herself in the spotlight for the wrong reasons last weekend after she was involved in a foul-mouthed confrontation at the Bad Homburg Open in Germany.
The 29-year-old took issue with Yulia Putintseva after beating the Russian-born Kazakh 7-5, 7-6 in the competition's third round. Tensions spilt over post-match as the players clasped hands over the net, with Sakkari seemingly unhappy with the handshake.
She told Putintseva to "act like a human being,' to which the latter responded by saying she had, before instructing Sakkari to "go f*** herself". Visibly taken aback, Sakkari replied: "What?!"
Putintseva gestured with her arms outstretched, having possibly been left upset by Sakkari's reaction to winning an epic tiebreaker.
She then kept gesturing for her opponent to walk away, with Sakkari instead following her rival to her chair and demanding: 'F***ing hell, I'm what?' before brutally telling Putintseva: 'Nobody likes you.'
Article continues below
Sakkari is no stranger to fiery behaviour on the court, having also clashed with Danielle Collins in Montreal back in 2023. After hitting a ball into the stands, Collins complained about the action to the umpire.
Sakkari, while preparing for her second serve, responded: "It didn't even hit anyone. It was on the ground." Collins refused to back down as she stated: "Shut your mouth, shut your mouth.'
That only served to escalate the argument, with Sakkari adding: "What's your problem? I didn't hit anyone. I framed the ball," to which Collins said: "You hit the ball into the stands, Maria. You almost hit someone."
Sakkari even tried to unsettle British No. 1 Emma Raducanu before their third-round match at Wimbledon last year, suggesting it wouldn't be an easy encounter for Raducanu against a top-ten player.
Emma Raducanu dismantled the Greek tennis star at Wimbledon
(Image: Getty )
However, Sakkari was left to rue her words as she was defeated inside 92 minutes with a score of 6-2, 6-3, making 31 unforced errors in the process.
Article continues below
Remarkably, Sakkari and her boyfriend, Konstantinos Mitsotakis, were spotted at the inauguration gala for Trump ahead of his second presidential term earlier this year. Mitsotakis gained an invitation to the event due to his father, Kyriakos Mitsotakis, being the Greek Prime Minister.
They were invited by Congressman Konstantinos Bilirakis, representative for Florida. Mitsotakis, whose grandfather was also the Prime Minister of the country, has been dating Sakkari since around 2020.
Raducanu, meanwhile, was overcome with emotion after coming from behind to beat Ann Li in the first round at Eastbourne earlier this week. The world No. 38 has been struggling with back spasms and was forced to pull out of the Berlin Open last week. Raducanu showed resilience by recovering after losing the first set and securing the win, giving her some much-needed confidence in the build-up to Wimbledon.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
19 minutes ago
- The National
For the sake of tennis, one player in particular must rise to the top
You can have all the quality in the world spread across the field but if there's no rivalries, there's no hook. Which, in turn, means no interest or, at least, much diminished interest from the public. One particularly intense, beautiful and hugely competitive rivalry is exactly why men's tennis thrived to the extent it did for a decade-and-a-half from the mid-2000s. That rivalry was the Roger Federer - Rafa Nadal match-up. Across all of sport, there have been few rivalries which have produced quite as much interest, tension, joy, heartbreak and world-class sport as the Federer-Nadal version. It's why there was such a visceral feeling of devastation when first Federer, then Nadal retired. How would men's tennis ever recover, it was asked? Inevitably, though things move on and already, there's a new rivalry that has seamlessly replaced Federer and Nadal as the most compelling head-to-head in tennis. Jannik Sinner and Carlos Alcaraz have filled the vacuum created by the departure of Federer and Nadal and they are, indisputably, the new stars of men's tennis. Of the last eight grand slam tournaments, the pair have won seven between them, with only Novak Djokovic breaking up the monopoly. Sinner and Alcaraz are the biggest names in the sport and, by some margin, the two best players. Their French Open final earlier this month was one of the greatest matches the sport has ever seen. Some have suggested it's the very best ever, although I wouldn't go that far. Alcaraz prevailed in Paris a few weeks ago, and it's the Spaniard who leads the head-to-head 5-2, but it's Sinner who is number one in the world. Whatever the statistics, though, what is clear is that, providing serious injury does not derail the career of either man, it's Alcaraz and Sinner who will dominate men's tennis over the coming years, perhaps even for the next decade. (Image: Andy Cheung/ Getty Images) A rivalry of this quality is, objectively, a good thing for the sport. But for the good of tennis, one man in particular from this duo must prevail. That man is Carlos Alcaraz. There's a number of reasons why it's so important that Alcaraz and not Sinner becomes the next real tennis great. The first reason is down to the style of their tennis. Alcaraz is, to my eye anyway, a far more flashy, skilful and compelling player to watch. The Spaniard has considerably more flair and variety in comparison to Sinner. The Italian is, it cannot be denied, a phenomenon on the tennis court. So consistently outstanding are his ground strokes, he's almost robotic-like. The sparsity of his unforced errors is remarkable. And the quality of his hitting is perhaps the best the sport has ever seen. But, for me, watching that style of tennis for a prolonged length of time, no matter how high quality it is, just isn't all that interesting. Give me variety, flair, imagination and creativity any day of the week, even if it results in quite a few more unforced errors. Alcaraz is the defending champion at Wimbledon (Image: Getty Images) The second reason is personality. Alcaraz is a far more compelling character than Sinner. The Italian is, on the face of it, a nice guy. It's almost impossible to find anyone who has a bad word to say about him, and he certainly comes across in the press as an amicable, friendly and genuinely decent guy. He also, though, is quite boring. Alcaraz in contrast, has a personality that shines through. He seems like a young guy who can't quite believe his luck that he's living this life. There's something very endearing about his youthful exuberance, with the way he celebrated his French Open victory with the Roland Garros ball kids the perfect example of just what's so likeable about the Spaniard. The final reason is perhaps the most pertinent for me. Earlier this year, Sinner served a doping ban. The details of his case are somewhat convoluted but, to simplify it, Sinner claimed that his trainer had a banned substance on his hands and when treating the Italian, the substance transferred to Sinner and caused his positive test. The Italian was banned from tennis for three months but there was considerable outcry over the alleged preferential treatment he was given and the leniency in allowing him back on tour after such a short suspension. His return was, conveniently, just in time for the French Open meaning the world number one didn't miss a major tournament during his time on the sidelines, nor did he lose his number one ranking. While Sinner wasn't unjustly 'let off' with anything, he was, it seems, treated very favourably as a result of his lofty standing within the sport. The outcry over the unfairness of his treatment was entirely justified because when you compare how fast his infringement was dealt with, as well as his lenient punishment, it's hard to argue that his doping case was handled in a comparable way to the cases of his lower-ranked peers following doping allegations. I don't believe Sinner is a prolific doper, not even close. I actually think his explanation for his positive test is entirely plausible. But I do think it's not a good look for any sport to have a doping conviction on the record of the top player. It's hard to see any way in which this new era of men's tennis isn't the Sinner and Alcaraz era. Tennis will benefit from this pair dominating; they're both outstanding tennis players and will, in all likelihood, move the game on even from the remarkable standard that Federer and Nadal set during their time of dominance. With Wimbledon beginning tomorrow, only a fool would bet against the prediction that we're heading for yet another Sinner-Alcaraz final. Objectively, this would be positive for the sport, particularly if the Wimbledon final is another classic in the way the French Open final was but in this head-to-head, I'll always be willing the Spaniard on. So while having this duo at the top of the game is a good thing for tennis, what will be really good for tennis, for so many reasons, will be if Alcaraz prevails, and emerges as the top dog.
Scotsman
21 minutes ago
- Scotsman
Gaelic officialdom is failing to engage with its existential crisis
The Scottish Languages Bill is simply a rehash of the status quo, writes Professor Conchúr Ó Giollagáin, the co-author of a landmark study published in 2020 Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The remaining Gaelic communities in Scotland are in the final stages of their absorption into the UK's dominant culture of English monolingualism. The recently passed Scottish Languages Bill suggests nothing of consequence to counteract this troubling situation. From the Gaelic perspective, the Bill is an unfortunate example of legislation that deteriorates as it moves through the various parliamentary stages; its final version is weaker than what was originally proposed. As we saw from many of the parliamentary debates, this poorly drafted legislation put Scotland's parliamentarians in the invidious position of feeling obliged to support a less-than-optimal parliamentary response to the critical situation of the Gaelic communities. Cognisant of its weak relevance to societal reality, the parliamentarians could only muster a lacklustre ratification, rather than a much-needed ringing endorsement of a new departure in Gaelic affairs. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A sign in Gaelic and English on a road in the Isle of Harris in the Outer Hebrides | Getty Images Excepting Scots, the Bill is a rehash of the status quo. It is, therefore, largely pointless. Much of what is proposed could be achieved without recourse to such a bureaucratically cumbersome legislative approach. As the Bill's provisions are intended to be mostly symbolic and performative in their implementation, it is reasonable to enquire what justifies the legislative expense, time and official effort in devising a Bill that evades social reality. It is apparent that the Bill was initiated to address the challenges posed by Soillse's 2020 Gaelic Crisis in the Vernacular Community sociolinguistic evidence, but the Bill fails to respond coherently and credibly to the documented reality of Gaelic community demise. What has led to this hapless situation of proposing a variant of the official approach which led to the crisis in the first place? The failure in the Bill to prioritise support for fragile Gaelic communities is largely to blame. The official and academic failure to engage sincerely with the reality check which the Gaelic Crisis evidence engendered is also implicated in this misguided legislation. The book's evidence was subjected to an irrational academic and official antagonism in which custodians of existing Gaelic promotion colluded to ensure that the Gaelic Crisis perspective would be denied a fair hearing. In censoring the Gaelic Crisis, these custodians have merely reasserted a version of what constitutes Gaelic promotion while at the same time refusing to accept any responsibility for its societal failings. They have washed their hands of any linkage between their institutional power and the consequences of official inertia. The efforts of the MSPs to focus the parliamentary debates on the Gaelic Crisis evidence are to be especially commended, given the hostility of Gaelic officialdom to it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In discounting the challenging lived reality of Gaelic speakers, the Bill was destined to veer back towards the ideological rigidities of established promotion efforts. Its social denialism is exacerbated by reiterations of official pieties and reassertions of symbolic appeals to the importance of Gaelic to a sense of Scottish culture, despite the obvious constraints on that social culture in supporting actual and viable Gaelic communities. The reality is that the Gaelic Crisis evidence has never been properly considered or debated in Scottish academia, in official language bodies or in governmental circles. Five years on, nobody in these key sectors for Gaelic affairs has sat down with the authors for an in-depth discussion on the implications of their research for the sustainability of Gaelic in Scotland. The Bill is an undemocratic reaction to the Gaelic Crisis, rather than an engagement with its evidence leading to its integration into policy developments. The Gaelic affairs power class in Scotland decided to enact a Languages Bill despite the demise of Gaelic communities, rather than instituting strategies to assist the Gaels in their current predicament. The official rejection of the third-stage amendments tabled by MSPs Pam Duncan-Glancy, Michael Marra and Ross Greer were instructive. The common denominator in these amendments was to propose strategic indicators of community agency and progress. This rejection would suggest that the status of 'Areas of Linguistic Significance' is to be adhered to more in a symbolic rather than in a practically productive manner. In the absence of a clear strategic intent, the Bill is more likely to generate a cottage industry of navel-gazing language politics, rather than offering practical help to a language community in existential crisis. The policies that emerged from the 2005 Act failed to generate much traction among the Gaels. Given the irrelevance of this Bill to the social circumstances of the Gaels, it is likely that this legislation will become the sociolinguistic equivalent of a religious liturgy for a non-existent congregation. In practical terms, the legislation amounts to a rebuff to the remaining Gaelic communities. In this situation, it might be wise for council and community leaders, Gaelic activists in the Gaelic districts and representatives of other Gaelic networks to call a Gaelic community summit to identify sources of practical and societal support, outwith the political sphere, which can bolster the remaining capacity. Besides availing of the limited opportunities from the Bill, it is clear that the Gaels are going to require a bespoke fund to support their collective efforts to reverse the current trajectory towards social erasure. The terminal decline of native-speaking Gaelic communities can be the only possible outcome of anaemic and untargeted official Gaelic promotion. Gaelic is in dire need of community protection rather than more symbolic promotion.
BBC News
24 minutes ago
- BBC News
Alcaraz & Sabalenka among Wimbledon title hopefuls
Wimbledon 2025Dates: 30 June-13 July Venue: All England ClubCoverage: Live across BBC TV, radio and online with extensive coverage on BBC iPlayer, Red Button, Connected TVs and mobile app. Qualifying is complete. The pristine grass courts lie in wait. The strawberries have been picked. The queue is wait is over - Wimbledon returns on world's best tennis players have descended on SW19 for the 2025 Championships, ready to battle for one of the sport's biggest what to look out for. Alcaraz chases three-in-a-row feat Carlos Alcaraz will bid for a third consecutive Wimbledon title after beating Novak Djokovic in the past two finals on Centre Alcaraz, who overturned a two-set deficit to beat world number one Jannik Sinner in one of the all-time great French Open finals in June, is only 22 years old but already has five meanwhile, continues to pursue an outright-record 25th major singles title, having tied Margaret Court with his 2023 US Open 38-year-old Serb has been thwarted recently by the new stars of the men's game, with Alcaraz and Sinner sharing the past six majors between them. Italy's Sinner will hope to bounce back from his Paris heartbreak, with Wimbledon the only Grand Slam where he has yet to contest the final.A semi-final loss to Djokovic in 2023 represents his best SW19 run after his quarter-final exit last preparations this time were cut short by a second-round Halle Open loss to the in-form Alexander Bublik, who could be a threat after his title triumph number four Jack Draper leads Britain's hopes in the men's draw, with Jacob Fearnley and Cameron Norrie also aiming for deep runs on home soil. Another wide-open women's draw? Not since 2016, when Serena Williams was champion for the seventh time and second year running, has a player managed to win back-to-back women's singles titles at year, Barbora Krejcikova triumphed to follow in the footsteps of Czech compatriot Marketa Vondrousova, who 12 months earlier became the first unseeded player to lift the Venus Rosewater number one Aryna Sabalenka, who has reached the final in five of the past six slams she has contested, has yet to reach the Wimbledon showpiece Belarusian, 27, is a three-time Grand Slam singles champion but has been runner-up in the past two major finals, at the Australian Open and French Open. Roland Garros champion Coco Gauff arrives as one of the main contenders, but she has never progressed beyond the fourth round in year's runner-up Jasmine Paolini, the Italian world number four, will look to go one step better this former world number one Iga Swiatek - who beat Paolini handily in Bad Homburg on Friday - and 2022 Wimbledon champion Elena Rybakina will also hope to number one Emma Raducanu leads home hopes in the women's draw, where she is joined by Katie Boulter and Sonay Kartal, who have both spent time in the world's top 50 of Raducanu has been handed a difficult draw. Former champion Marketa Vondrousova is a possible second-round opponent, while Sabalenka is likely to be waiting should she reach round three. Who else is aiming for Wimbledon glory? Britain's Henry Patten will attempt to retain the Wimbledon men's doubles title he won with Finland's Harri Heliovaara last enter as the second-ranked pairing in the world, behind only El Salvador's Marcelo Arevalo and Croatia's Mate defending champions in the women's doubles are Czech Katerina Siniakova and American Taylor Townsend, the top-ranked pair in the will have high hopes of success in the men's wheelchair competitions. Alfie Hewett won the men's singles at his home slam for the first time last year to complete a career Grand Slam - and then retained the doubles title alongside compatriot Gordon year's runner-up Martin de la Puente and Japan's world number one Tokito Oda are Hewett's main rivals as he attempts to defend the the wheelchair women's singles, Dutch marvel Diede de Groot will look to add to her record 23 singles titles as she pursues a seventh Wimbledon title - and a fifth in a Groot, whose Wimbledon win last year gave her a 15th successive singles major, subsequently spent eight months out after undergoing hip surgery following her Paralympic silver medal. Japan's Yui Kamiji has won the past two Grand Slams, with De Groot in the early stages of her return to competition.
