Jamie Murray said “vendettas” and “people out for their own gains” prompted him to resign from the ATP Player Council.
Murray was one of four people along with fellow players Robin Haase and Sergiy Stakhovsky and coach Dani Vallverdu to stand down after a seven-hour meeting on Friday evening.
It was the latest political flash-point in a turbulent year, with the ousting of executive chairman and president Chris Kermode in March followed by the eventual resignation of board member Justin Gimelstob after he pleaded no contest to a charge of battery in a California court.
The council has been split on a number of issues, with president Novak Djokovic on one side and Murray, Haase and Stakhovsky among those taking issue with the direction in which things are heading.
Murray, who had been a council member for three years, said: “The first two years I really enjoyed, felt like I was able to accomplish quite a lot of things.
“Obviously the last year it’s kind of got political, people out for their own gains I think, a few vendettas perhaps out there as well. For me, we’re not accomplishing anything here.
“I was kind of fed up sitting in these six, seven hour meetings and coming out of it and we’re not talking about the tennis, we’re not talking about the tour. I was like, ‘I’m not going to waste my time with that any more’.
“I think there’s a few people out there in various positions, or not in positions, that are kind of trying to grab power and kind of push their own agendas, which personally I don’t believe in that route and it’s not something I really want to be attached to.
“There’s a lot of good people out there that want the best for tennis but it seems to me that there’s a small minority that maybe disagree with things.”
American Gimelstob had initially held on to his post as a player representative but, by not contesting the charge and therefore accepting guilt, his position eventually became untenable, with Andy Murray and Stan Wawrinka among those to speak out.
Gimelstob is particularly close to Djokovic, who was put in an uncomfortable position in his post-match press conference on Wednesday when he admitted he had not read the victim impact statements in the case.
The world number one said he would read them but refused to revisit the topic after his third-round win over Hubert Hurkacz.
Jamie Murray said: “Justin’s done a lot of good things for the players.
“I’ve seen how hard he worked for the guys and he got a lot of players into action and created awareness for them about they could be earning more money and that the tournaments could be potentially giving more money but I think there’s other stuff as well that I don’t agree with. I just don’t want to be a part of that.”
It was a disappointing day on court for Murray as he and Neal Skupski lost in the first round of the men’s doubles 2-6 7-6 (2) 3-6 6-1 6-4 to Ivan Dodig and Filip Polasek after the match had been called off for bad light on Thursday with the British pair leading by two sets to one.
The defeat means the prospect of a third-round meeting between the Murray brothers is over.
Jamie split from his partner of three and a half years, Bruno Soares, after the French Open to pair up with Skupski but they have not yet hit their stride.
Murray said: “It’s obviously disappointing but it’s not like I lose faith in the partnership because we lost one match. I’m excited about the partnership going forward. I think he’s got a lot of potential.”
Murray at least won his mixed doubles opener, with the Scot and American Bethanie Mattek-Sands beating British duo Joe Salisbury and Katy Dunne.
Both Murrays will have to get to the final to meet in the mixed, with Andy’s first-round clash alongside Serena Williams postponed until Saturday.
Jamie said of the high-profile couple: “I think it’s great for the draw. It’s put a lot more spotlight on the mixed doubles draw than perhaps there normally is. I just hope they get out and compete.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here