Last week, the Italian Tennis Federation banned Simone Bolelli from national team events after he chose to focus on tour events in Bangkok and Tokyo rather than make himself available for Davis Cup duty. Italy were due to face Latvia, led by Ernest Gulbis, on clay on home soil. The Italians prevailed 3-2 and preserved their spot in Europe/Africa Zone I.

However, Bolelli’s absence from the team has been harshly punished. The consequences of which mean that Bolelli is no longer allowed to represent Italy in Davis Cup or at the Olympics, in addition to being ineligible for wild cards from his Federation for certain tournaments.

Bolelli has maintained that he made his intentions clear to captain Corrado Barrazzutti well in advance of the tie and expressed surprise and disappointment at the Federation’s decision. There are conflicting reports about how this situation arose; one is that Bolelli wasn’t happy that clay rather than a hard court had been chosen for the tie. Hence his decision to skip it while Italy counted on Andreas Seppi, Potito Starace, Filippo Volandri and Fabio Fognini.

Regardless of the speculation, the angle I’d like to explore here is the obligation of Davis Cup participation. As a Davis Cup fan myself, I am generally not in favour of players picking and choosing when they do and don’t play Davis Cup. As I see it, Davis Cup is a commitment that is more long term than one tie here and one tie there. It’s about wanting to represent your country, rather than representing yourself alone on tour week in, week out.

However, there are always at least two sides to any story and I can appreciate that circumstances arise for certain players at certain times in the season when playing Davis Cup at a particular location on a particular surface just isn’t remotely in line with a player’s personal schedule and interests.

There are some players who have consistently put their own schedule and career on hold for the sake of representing their nation - notably David Nalbandian, Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick. There are others, most notably Roger Federer, who has often skipped Davis Cup ties in order to rest and recuperate while in search of personal glory in the form of Grand Slam preparation or just simply season preparation in general.

As stated, I appreciate Federer’s situation in the recent past and the argument of the ‘bigger picture’ in the form of Grand Slams as opposed to Davis Cup success, which does not rate on the same scale of achievement. But at the same time, my admiration for those players - whether they are at the top of the game or not - who are always available to play for their nation, is always heightened. They see a ‘bigger picture’ too, one that involves the success and future of their nation in tennis rather than their own interests on the tour.

Whether it’s a Davis Cup final or a Europe/Africa Zone Group II tie, if playing for your nation is something a player values, then he (or she in the case of Fed Cup) will always be liable to offer their services.

That brings us back to Bolelli, a player whose Federation assisted him in his junior years, and now that he is a top 50 player, the Federation naturally want to benefit from the blossoming of his ability in order for Italy to progress at Davis Cup level.

Some will say Bolelli owes Italy nothing, that if he wants to focus on his own career, it’s his right to do so. It’s hard to disagree with that, especially in a sport that is for the most part as individual as tennis is. On the other side we have the Federation, who have invested time and money in a young talent only to see him turn his back on them when called on.

In this particular case, Italy had the players they needed to gain a vital victory, but in future there will surely come a tie when the Italians will very much want Bolelli on board. As Seppi was quoted as saying following the verdict "The ban is quite harsh and also punishes the other Italian players." Seppi’s point was that if Italy want to get back into the World Group, it would clearly help to have a player like Bolelli at their disposal. The ban is indefinite, so for the time being Bolelli’s future as a national representative is non-existent.

One wonders also whether even if the ban is reversed, that the damage has already been done between Bolelli and his Federation to make his desire to participate in future ties lukewarm to begin with.

Where do you stand on the issue – are Italy right to take the stand they have or should they have been more understanding of Bolelli’s situation given they had a capable enough group of players to win the tie?