The obtuse rants of those who lament Abodi's absence from Sinner's victory

On the same topic:

It's well known, even understandable, that the King of Spain hasn't had anything institutionally important to do since the Tejero coup, so much so that the charming Juan Carlos, to distract himself, ended up hunting elephants in Botswana, and it didn't go well for him. His son Felipe, between one Catalan secession attempt and another, could perhaps address the Sánchez government's scandalous affairs, but that's low-level politics, nothing institutionally relevant. He, too, has nothing to do in Madrid. But King Felipe, more than elephants, loves tennis. He just named his idol Rafa Nadal Marquis of Llevant in Mallorca, and as a fortunate sovereign, he was immediately able to replace him on the court with another Spanish grandee, Carlos Alcaraz , whom he's crazy about. Having no particular protocol commitments back home, he even followed him to the victorious Roland Garros final in Paris last June. And punctual and composed, noblesse oblige, it was also Sunday at Wimbledon, where, however, its champion lost. Noblesse oblige, his presence in the United Kingdom also had a touch of protocol: he was seated next to the Prince and Princess of Wales, fellow blue bloods and one day his equals on the throne. End of the inane institutional-geopolitical debate among us over the lack of Italian institutional presence in the Centre Court gallery where Jannik Sinner triumphed. What were the anodyne Minister Abodi, someone who would have disappeared among the high society of Wimbledon like a total white man chasing a white elephant, or the athletic Luciano Buonfiglio, the new president of the Italian National Olympic Committee, with fifteen years more experience than Don Felipe, supposed to do there?

And yet, since Italy is the land of chattering ineptitude and pedantic nonsense, the idiotic controversy of the day has erupted on social media over the supposed national tragedy of the lack of even a minor member of government, or of governance and sport . A flurry of phrases like this: "Today at Wimbledon there was no one from the government," "we have a government of idiots," "the question arises spontaneously: why wasn't anyone from the government or sporting institutions present at Wimbledon?" It arises spontaneously: in obtuse minds, evidently. Then from there it spills over to the many politicians who don't know what to do on Sundays, all the way to the newspapers. The summary of the Stampa piece, just to give you an idea of the level: "While Alcaraz thanks King Felipe VI, who came to support him in the stands, the Italian champion has no one from the institutions at his side. Controversy on social media." Where "controversy on social media" is considered the tombstone of journalism. That would be it, were it not for the fact that even people who are usually well-informed about the facts, yet in a mood for easy anti-government polemics, have ended up in the general nonsense. We'll leave them anonymous. They can't fathom that there wasn't an institutional reason for the Italian government to be in London . Or perhaps they think Abodi should be present every time Sinner plays in a Grand Slam final? Not even King Felipe has anything to do with that. But above all, if Italy's honor required a presence that would show respect to the King, why didn't the crafty ones take it out on Mattarella? Afraid of getting a Quirinale punch in the face?

More on these topics: