Julie Jay: A tennis match is no place for a crying baby who is making a racket

The controversy surrounding a crying baby at the Cinncinati Tennis Open has once again ignited a debate around how far we should go to include parents and children at major sporting events

Raducanu was completely within her rights to draw attention to the distraction, which had, according to her, been going on for “like, 10 minutes”. The fact that the parent didn’t choose to leave with the child is, quite frankly, mind-boggling.

Last week, British tennis ace Emma Raducanu was trending on socials because of an interesting exchange of words during her match against world number one Aryna Sabalenka in the Cincinnati Open. Before serving, Raducanu stopped play and drew the official’s attention to a baby crying in the stands.

“It’s a child,” came the response from the umpire. “Do you want me to kick the child out of the stadium?”

The answer from Raducanu, and from the crowd, was a definitive ‘Yes’. If I had been there, I would probably not have had the courage to chime in like the Americans in attendance, but I would have certainly nodded my big Irish head in agreement. We might want to be inclusive of babies everywhere, but there have to be limits.

Nobody is going to ban babies from public venues outright, but there is an expectation that parents use common sense. A heavy metal mosh-pit is an equally terrible place to bring a baby, though, admittedly, I would prefer to listen to a baby crying than be subjected to a Metallica album. When parents refuse to use common sense, it places other people — in this instance Raducanu — in an uncomfortable position.

Turkish airline Corendon started offering child-free zones on its flights in 2023. For an extra €45, you can sit in the front of the plane, safely assured that you won’t be subjected to a tiny person watching Paw Patrol to your left. It sparked a bit of controversy when it was first launched, and I still don’t understand why. Personally, I would happily pay an extra €45 to be separated from the rest of my family. It’s only offensive if you expect everyone else to indulge you and your choices, but, the truth is, while parents adore their children, other people don’t have to.

All that notwithstanding, child-free people are not entitled to a child-free world, but they are entitled to child-free spaces. We all love our children, but that doesn’t mean we have to include them in adult-only activities, like going to a strip club or attending a tennis open. ‘But I want to expose my children to the game,’ might come the response, and to that I might suggest watching it at home, from the safety of your living room, where the only cries you will hear will probably be from parents as they mourn their former life, when they could go places on a whim.

Of course, it is wonderful to include children in sporting events, but attending a GAA match is not quite the same as attending a snooker championship or, as in this case, a tennis match. If Rory McIlroy were about to tee off, would he appreciate the cries of a baby penetrating his quiet concentration? Surely not, because if he is like most dads, the only reason he’s playing golf in the first place is to get out of attending a birthday party in a soft-play centre.

Raducanu was completely within her rights to draw attention to the distraction, which had, according to her, been going on for “like, 10 minutes”. The fact that the parent didn’t choose to leave with the child is, quite frankly, mind-boggling.

Before I draw the ire of tennis fans, I am aware that, generally speaking, spectators cannot leave the audience area during active play, but surely, in this case, they would have happily made an exception.

Child-free events exist because not everywhere has to be a suitable place for them; this is why you don’t find too many babies on stag-dos or hens. Of course, for the latter, if there is a baby in attendance, it is probably because their poor mother couldn’t find a babysitter or the father of the child is playing golf (please see above).

I have yet to be met with an eyeroll from fellow diners in restaurants when out eating with my children, but I’m sure it will happen someday, when I am probably feeling pre-menstrual and will no doubt lose the plot completely. And by lose the plot, I mean give them a bad look. If anyone gets upset about a baby crying in a restaurant, then they really need to get a grip, because babies cry in the same way that dogs bark, and I don’t see anyone complaining about the mini poodle the same eye-roller has sequestered in a handbag.

You can’t complain about babies and children in restaurants because, in doing so, you are complaining about parents, and parents need to eat, especially when they spend most of their day running after their mini-lunatics. Banning children means banning parents, but specifically mothers, because in reality it is generally a mother who is most impacted by child-free zones.

Unless, of course, you were silly enough to take your baby to a tennis open. In which case, you really do need to be removed, because the only racket attendees will want to hear is the one hitting the ball on the court.

The baby shouldn’t have been there, and the players were right to call it out. Despite ultimately losing her game to Sabelenka, in terms of social-media opinion, it was most definitely game, set, and match to Raducanu.