They Did Not Qualify and They Are Playing Anyway. Who Decided That?

A place in a competition is given by the organisers to a competitor who did not qualify through the normal route, whether that route is ranking, previous results or a qualifying event. A small number of such places is set aside in advance, so the practice is part of the published rules rather than an exception to them. The decision rests with the organiser, is usually made by a committee, and is generally not required to be explained. In some competitions the term also describes places allocated on results to teams that did not win their group.

The recipients fall into predictable categories:

• •Players returning from long injury with no current ranking
• •Promising young competitors from the host country
• •Former champions whose ranking has fallen
• •Local competitors who sell tickets
• •Competitors whose presence attracts broadcasters
• •Occasionally somebody the organisers simply owe a favour

The justification is that a ranking is a crude instrument and that organisers know things it does not. A player out for a year with an injury has no ranking and may be one of the best in the field, and a rule that excludes them serves nobody. A tournament needs an audience to exist at all, and a local competitor in the draw is worth a great deal to that. Young players need entry to high level competition to develop, and a strict ranking system makes that circular, since they cannot rank without playing and cannot play without ranking.

Competitions that take the criticism seriously have added constraints, and comparing them shows what the objections are understood to be. Some cap the number available and publish the cap well in advance. Some publish criteria, restricting the places to injury returns and to competitors below a stated age. Some reserve a portion for the host country and the remainder for anybody, which separates the commercial motive from the developmental one. Some require a committee decision to be recorded with reasons. None of these removes the discretion, which is the point of having the places at all.

The objections are equally solid and they concern who is displaced. Every awarded place removes one from somebody who earned it through a qualifying event, frequently a lower ranked competitor for whom that appearance would have been the most significant of their career. The decisions are opaque and the criteria unpublished, which invites suspicion whether or not it is warranted. Commercial considerations are rarely stated openly and are obviously operating. And the practice concentrates opportunity on competitors who are already well known, which is the opposite of what a qualifying system is for.

Places awarded by organisers rather than earned admit injured returners, local favourites and commercially valuable names, and a small number is set aside in the published rules. The defence is that rankings are crude and that tournaments need audiences and need to develop young players. Each place removes one from somebody who qualified, and the criteria are almost never published.