- This topic has 79 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
I could only really watch the first set of Federer-Karlovic, but to me the term "Kamikaze" seemed more apt to describe the Croat today. It took an awful, awful long time for him to realise that, no matter how big his serve, he simply couldn’t afford to chase it in indiscriminately against a player of Federer’s quality. One of the biggest demonstrations of why serve-and-volley tennis is on the wane on grass IMO.
As for Murray, he looks to have landed on his feet for the second successive round- given his record against the American (amongst other reasons), I’ll bet Roddick in five would have been Murray’s dream result in the other quarter final from his half!
Grays, maybe it’s normal i wouldn’t know but i just thought there would be a better flow to these games if people would stop shouting names when the players want to serve. Sometimes they have to take a step back and wait.
I wouldn’t dispute that – I was only really drawing to the attention the fact that it’s been evident (and in the Hewitt example arguably worse) outside of Murray games this tournament, too.
Incidentally, I noticed Murray was turning to the crowd for vocal support (and getting it) once or twice during the Wawrinka match, so if there is a degree of orchestration from the players I can’t be entirely surprised if the crowd occasionally carry on a little longer than they ought to sometimes (whatever the rights or wrongs of it).
gc
Jeremy Grayson. Son of immigrant. Adoptive father of two. Metadata librarian. Freelance point-to-point / horse racing writer, analyst and commentator wonk. Loves music, buses, cats, the BBC Micro, ale. Advocate of CBT, PACE and therapeutic parenting. Aspergers.
The atmosphere is part of what makes Wimbledon what it is i’d imagine. I’m just not for people shouting when a player is gonnae throw the ball up in the air to serve.
All that stuff aside as it’s irrelevant, does anyone think Roddick is a fair old price at 3/1 ?
No because on all known form, on crowd backing and on pure tennis ability then Murray will win. Looks like the ideal final of Federer v Murray is on!
No because on all known form, on crowd backing and on pure tennis ability then Murray will win. Looks like the ideal final of Federer v Murray is on!
There’s no advantage in the atmosphere Dougie…Rodick said everytime the crowd shout ‘come on Andy’, he will just pretend they’re shouting for him
Joking aside, Rodick has a good serve and can keep up a good tempo like The Swiss guy did, so it’s not a foregone conclusion yet. Murrays price is always gonnae be skinny because of the home player factor, 1/4 is a no no for me.
Credit to Roddick but again on the big occasion Murray has come up woefully short. I doubt he will get a better chance. Against Wawrinka his game often looked feeble in comparison but his opponent made enough mistakes for him to scrape through. It didn’t happen a second time. For the most part he didn’t appear to have the confidence/power to do anything more than just get the ball back. Perfectly summed up by the last point when he unbelievably allowed the ball to bounce rather than smashing or volleying and was immediately on the backfoot. In the end I am not disappointed he lost because such defensive tennis should win nothing. All of a sudden Tim Henman’s Wimbledon record doesn’t look quite so bad.
The English media and all the rest of them like to build people up and knock them down. I did say that was a fair old price for Roddick.
As for Stivvi saying that Henmans Wimbledon record dosen’t look so bad now, i never realised Henman stopped playing at 22.
Murray has won 1 more title than Henman did already, and has reached one more major final.
He will be back next year.
I’m no tennis aficionado but I’d guess Murray at his best is somewhat superior to Henman at his best. Good luck to Murray next year; he’s good enough to win Wimbledon eventually (which is more than could ever be said about Henman).
At least Henman played interesting tennis at a time when it seemed to be all about scoring aces [yawn]. What concerns me about Murray is that people go on about how young he is and how he will get better, but Nadal is the same age as him, and I think that the most recent champions have all achieved quite a bit by the age of 22. Glad to see Henman being quite good fun in the commentary box after a rather stilted start last year, but how amazing is McEnroe, being both informative and incredibly funny. Semi finals are always [with the exception of last year] better to watch than finals, and I’m pretty sure that Federer will win on Sunday without breaking sweat .
The English media and all the rest of them like to build people up and knock them down. I did say that was a fair old price for Roddick.
As for Stivvi saying that Henmans Wimbledon record dosen’t look so bad now, i never realised Henman stopped playing at 22.
Murray has won 1 more title than Henman did already, and has reached one more major final.
He will be back next year.
Considering he is ranked third in the World and Nadal wasn’t playing I don’t think the media were being unduly optimistic. I think given Murray’s 6/2 win record over Roddick the match was probably priced up as you would expect.
I mentioned Henman only because he was often labelled as an under achiever. I wasn’t comparing their overall records. Obviously, Murray has achieved a good deal more, but the most telling statistic for any player will always be the number of Grand Slam titles.
If he doesn’t pick up an injury I am sure he will be back next year but unless he can find an offensive game he will not be winning. It is no certainty that he will be a better player next year than this – we may already have seen the best of him.
We never asked the English media and flag wavers to build him up so highly. He will probably have a better chance of reaching another final outside Wimbledon because he won’t have to put up with all the crap that comes with it.
Representing ‘Britain’ at sport is a load of rubbish anyway. People should always represent their individual countries at any sport, with some exceptions as far as the Ryder Cup is concerned.
I, for one, thought Murray played a creditable match today. But there are two problems with that:
1) "Creditable" does not win Grand Slam titles, unless you are Roger Federer.
2) I have been a massive Andy Roddick fan pretty much since the 2003 Aussie Open QF epic against El Aynaoui (OK, I had to look up the spelling!), and, with the possible exception of his Queens SF against Agassi that same year, today is the best match I’ve ever seen the American play. If he serves like that again, he may make Federer settle for 7-6, 7-6, 7-6 on Sunday!
I hope Serena can get the better of her big sister today.
As for the men’s final, Federer looks nailed on. He has met Andy Roddick on fifteen previous occasions and leads the American 14 – 1.
Gambling Only Pays When You're Winning
As for the men’s final, Federer looks nailed on. He has met Andy Roddick on fifteen previous occasions and leads the American 14 – 1.
Brings to mind one of my favourite all-time sporting quotes, from Vitas Gerulaitis after finally beating Jimmy Connors at the 1979 Masters following sixteen straight losses:
"Nobody beats Vitas Gerulaitis 17 times in a row"
Brilliant.
Henman would have won Wimbledon at least once had Pete Sampras not been around – Henman knockers seem to forget this fact. Henman never had a gift wrapped draw like Murray has blown this week either.
I’d agree with the comments i’ve read above regarding Murray being far too defensive – i was sick and tired of watching him celebrating his opponents unforced errors with such enthusiasm. Constantly waiting for the mistake won’t cut it against the top-ish boys, as Roddick proved.
The bottom paragraph isn’t without valid points (Murray’s game is about forcing errors rather than waiting for them IMO), but overall I, frankly, think you’re talking keech, PC.
I need only mention 2001 to offer worry as to "Tiger Tim’s" temperament. With just him and two old-timers- one of which was at his mercy before the rain came- standing between him and a tournament he seemed desitned to win at one stage given his playing style, he made a most convincing job of throwing it away. He’d already knocked out Sampras’ conquerer, to boot.
Please tell me where the draw in the top half this year was "gift-wrapped" to Murray, Nadal’s withdrawl aside (and yes that was significant, but would the expectation on Murray have been nearly as great had the Spaniard turned up?). En route to the final, Federer defeated a recent Frech Open finalist (the only man to beat Nadal at Roland Garros, no less) and one of tennis’ best servers prior to the SF, rarely wetting his famous sweatband all the while. Murray played an on-song #19, a Queens’ SF opponent and the Tours’ current numero uno grass-court specialist in what many view as Roddick’s finest match. Not a world of difference IMO.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.