The pandemic has created a lot of villains in the sport, particularly world number one, Serbia's Novak Djokovic. 

"Don't meet your heroes" should be extended to "don't ask them for their opinion on the COVID-19 pandemic", as these opinions seem to have changed the community's opinion on one of the best players to ever grace the sport.

Whether you see him as a speaker of his own mind or ignorant, he is definitely outspoken and not so diplomatic. 

In August 2020, Djokovic and Canadian player Vasek Pospisil announced the creation of the Professional Tennis Players Association (PTPA) following a fallout with Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) chairman Andrea Gaudenzi.

Both left the ATP Players Council and have since received support from other players for a breakaway association.

And only at the ongoing Miami Open has the PTPA seen a resurgence in coverage following the infamous rant of Pospisil during his match with Mackenzie McDonald of the United States.

Pospisil was reprimanded for swearing during the match, costing him a point which gave McDonald the first set.

This all came after a number of racket violations - not just a frustrated smashing against the court, but also included the Canadian lobbing his faulty racket.

Chair umpire Arnaud Gabas, much like the rest of us, seemed stunned at his behaviour, akin to a teenager having a tantrum.

In response to Gabas' query to Pospisil about his behaviour, the world number 65 stated: "An hour and a half yesterday, the chair of the ATP, f*****g screaming at me in a player meeting for trying to unite the players - for an hour and a half.

"The leader of the ATP, get him out here."

When Gabas asked why they needed to do that, Pospisil replied: "f*****g a*****e", presumably towards Gaudenzi.

Gabas warned him again for his language, telling him to speak to Gaudenzi off court if he had any issues.

Following more swearing, Gabas again asked him to control his language, ending the discussion with Pospisil threatening: "If you want to default me, I'll gladly sue this whole organisation."

In short Pospisil acted like a brat during this match, while McDonald, who evetnaully won 6-3, 4-6, 6-3, seemed baffled by what was going on.

Yesterday, Pospisil issued an apology for his actions during the match, admitting he "disrespected the game" he loves.

Whether intentional or not, this incident has put the focus back on the PTPA and its goals.

Initially, Djokovic and Pospisil will sit as co-Presidents for a two-year period and is planning to govern with nine Board members, to be elected annually. 

This group will focus on representing the top 500 men's singles and top 200 doubles players.

If you don't completely understand who to back, join the club - players on both sides of the argument have made fair points for and against.

Djokovic and Pospisil's aim seems to be more head-on than that of other players, with the pair promising the organisation stands for players' rights and seemingly at loggerheads with the ATP.

Complaints over pay for players ranked between 250 and 500 has been a major talking point, with some suggesting the ATP is hording so much of tennis' wealth.

Before the pandemic caused many tournaments to cut prize money, the Grand Slams significantly improved prize money for those in the early rounds by more than 10 per cent in most round singles and doubles rounds in 2020 compared to 2019.

Global inflation averaged at around three per cent in 2019.

However, further down in the ATP 250 tournaments, players are often paid less than £1,000 ($1,400/€1,200) for being knocked out in the opening round.

I would quite fancy being paid a four-figure sum to be soundly defeated at a game of tennis, but then, would I still be happy if I had to fly out to Turkey and pay for my own accommodation? 

And herein lies the problem - there is an uncomfortable allegiance between some of these PTPA backers, with some being intentionally distant from Djokovic and Pospisil. 

Canada's Felix Auger-Aliassime has supported the idea, but has been cagey with what he backs at the moment, while his compatriot Milos Raonic stressed he didn't "want to pick fights" with the governing body.

The faces of the ATP are Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal, who both sit on the Players Council and heavily oppose the breakaway. 

Federer's words of uniting and not dividing seem of little substance, but Nadal's elaboration on the rise in prize money suggests he believes that a breakaway will do more harm than good.

"So if we compare the tour today through five, six, seven, eight years ago, the improvement in terms of the income that the lower-ranked players have are significantly higher, no?" said Nadal at the ATP Finals - and he has a point.

Even in small competitions like the ATP 250 series, prize money - this year excluded - generally has increased above inflation. 

However, the question is, was this enough in the first place?

My biased love for Andy Murray aside, the three-time Wimbledon champion has expressed his opposition to the PTPA, but not from an establishment perspective.

Also sitting on the Players' Council, Murray said he was uninterested in a players union that was not inclusive of those on the Women's Tennis Association circuit too.

He mentioned he was not against unions, but was also keen to give the current regime time to implement better pay and rights for players.

Really, all sides seem to be have valid points, but responsibility lies with the two organisations to do their part.

The ATP has to be proactive in securing better support for those lower-ranked players with improved prize money and work on fixing the relationship.

The PTPA has to focus its efforts on uniting players under one roof and work with ATP - there is still a degree of ambiguity about its plans going forward and if it will extend past being a players' union.

Unions have worked well in the past, with the likes of the National Basketball Association Players' Association, but it requires cooperation.

If the likes of Pospisil are just throwing metaphorical rackets, very little will be done.