The prize money dispute between players and Grand Slams will once again take center stage, this time at Wimbledon. The player group isn’t satisfied despite the record-breaking 20% increase that the SW19 has announced in their prize money for the upcoming edition. As a result, the players will now be staging a media protest at Wimbledon until the end of the first week till 5 July. And it is safe to say that the All England Club isn’t happy with the decision.

The All England Club (AELTC) has released a statement over the matter and stated that they are “surprised and disappointed” over the protest that the players have decided to stage. According to the protest, the players will only speak for a total of 15 minutes in press conferences and interviews with the host broadcaster.

“Players will limit their contractual media commitments at the tournament to 15 minutes — reflecting that Wimbledon currently pays slightly below 15% of revenues to players as prize money — for the duration of the first week of the Championships,” an advisory firm representing the players said in a statement.

“Following detailed consultation with players across both tours, player representatives have written to Wimbledon’s leadership to inform them of the planned action, while acknowledging the welcome recent 20% increase in prize money compared to last year’s Championships.”

Notably, the players had initially welcomed the massive increase in the prize money. The sum had been raised to £64.2 million (approximately $85.8 million). However, it ultimately fell short of the £71m (approximately $93.5m) figure that the players were pushing for.

The revenue share at Wimbledon currently stands at 14.4%, which is lower than last year’s US Open and this year’s French Open and Australian Open prize pool percentages. It is also lower than the 14.9% share that the players had received at the SW19 10 years ago in 2016.

While all the Slams have significantly increased the prize money on offer ever since the players had put forward their demands last year, none of them have so far been able to match the 22% revenue share that they had advocated in their first letter. While the players hadn’t decided to take any drastic step at last year’s US Open and this year’s Australian Open, their patience ran out at the Roland Garros.

After giving a strong statement against the $72.3 million amount that the French Open had announced as their prize money, the players had decided to stage a media protest. The 15-minute time limit that they had used is symbolic as it aligned with roughly 15% of the French Open’s projected revenue. Now they will stage a similar protest at Wimbledon.

This development comes after Debbie Jevans, the chair of AELTC, had openly condemned the protest that the players have staged against the Slams over prize money.

Debbie Jevans criticizes players over prize money dispute

“We’ve always been clear that we’re on the side of the players and we want to have a fantastic Wimbledon,” she had said during a press conference. “But using revenue to determine prize money, it just makes no sense. And we have said that to Larry Scott. Revenue does not take into account the contributions that we give. And as I’ve spoken about, we’re not-for-profit. We’re very different from an ATP Masters 1000 in that everything goes back in the sport.”

Though the SW19 had initially expected the players to be satisfied with the increase that they had announced in the prize money, it is now clear that the players won’t stop protesting unless their demands are met. While they are set to stage a media protest for the second time, they appear to be planning something bigger for the US Open.

According to a recent report by The Times, Jannik Sinner can be at the center of a major boycott that can take place at the final Slam of the year. The players are reportedly planning to boycott the mixed doubles event at the upcoming US Open if their demands aren’t met.

This boycott could pressurize the tournament organizers quite a bit over the prize money dispute and may work out in the players’ favor.