Help

loading...

Cheryl Murray

  • Tanks, Federer

    2009-11-28 21:01:30

    I’m constantly amazed at the creativity shown by fans of our great sport. I went to the Federer-Davydenko match and amused myself for a while listening to Steve Ullrich. Have you ever done this? Steve is great, because all of the other chair umpires just say the score nonchalantly into their microphones. Pascal Maria would be totally monotone, if not for the completely awesome way he says “game NA-dal”. No monotone for Ullrich, though. He has a variety of voices, depending on the gravity of the situation.

    Sometimes, for example, he uses his “this game is going just the way I expected it to” voice. He uses this voice when the score is 40-0 at 3-3 in the first set. If things start to get interesting though, Steve has a veritable buffet of tones. Sometimes Steve asks the score. Like “30-40?”. And sometimes, we get the ‘shock and awe’ inflection. “Game Davydenko!!??!!” or “0-40!!” It’s sort of like commentating and umpiring at the same time.

    I don’t know if the players like it, but I sure do. Livens things up nicely. Anyway, back to fan creativity. I saw a Scottish flag right near the court. It said “Thanks, Fed”, except the “h” was crossed out. As I can be rather slow on the uptake, it didn’t occur to me until well into the first set, that they meant “tanks Fed.” For those of you who are slower on the uptake even than I am, I’ll explain to you.

    They were not-so-subtlety accusing Federer of tanking his match against Del Potro in order to knock Murray out of the semis. I suppose I can understand a bit where they’re coming from. Murray and Federer have made no secret of the fact that…well…they really don’t like each other very much. That being said, I think it might be a bit of a stretch to suggest that Federer would orchestrate things so that the guy who yanked the US Open title out of his hands would advance.

    Regardless of its basis in actual…you know…truth, the effort was appreciated.

Tell a friend »

Comments

Thank you for this post, Cheryl.

Another fine one full of your individual voice, interesting and not run of the mill insights, observations or descriptions. And you give us plenty to help us imagine we're there in the bleechers.

chlorostoma , 11/29/09 1:01 AM


Ha ha I can hear him now "30-40?", such reasonance ... Steve Ullrich could quite easily have a career as a game show announcer or in documentary film narration.
I don't think we've had a food report from you this week though. Keep safe.

smr , 11/29/09 2:32 AM


whoops ... on those crosswalks.

smr , 11/29/09 2:33 AM


hilarious! altho would have liked even more blogging on the TANKS subject

RickyDimon , 11/29/09 2:49 AM


cheryl, Thank for sharing didn't notice that flag..hahahahaha
do you not have any scoop about Rafa?! or you're saving the best for last

mero , 11/29/09 5:50 AM


thanks Cheryl:) very funny.I have often though it was funny how Pasal calls NA-dal:)
Yes,some others were talking about that Tanks flag..very interesting.

alik , 11/29/09 11:37 AM


naughty, naughty. You wouldn't by any chance be having a bit of a stir would you?

ed251137 , 11/29/09 12:02 PM


I saw this poster ...i first reaction to it , rather than completing dismissing the statement was to be at awe at how creative it was . Its one of the signs i would surely remember ...hehe ....

and for the record ...roger letting the guy that beat him in the USO final to win so that Muzz wont come through ...i think not !

C'MON !!

fedexfan , 11/29/09 2:06 PM


typo typo ..."my first reaction to it , rather than completely... "

fedexfan , 11/29/09 2:07 PM


ed25: i think she might be! :)

but i agree, a truely great effort!!

homos , 11/29/09 2:48 PM


chlorostoma, thank you for your kind words. :)

homos and ed, I'm just telling it like I saw it.

cherylmurray , 11/29/09 10:37 PM


Cheryl, I LOVE the way Pascal Maria says "game NA-dal"! I still get chills whenever I think of that Epic Wimbledon final. One of my favorite memories was how Pascal said "Game, Set, Match, Rafael NA-dal...." just as Rafa threw himself to the ground. *shivers with glee* That was such a Magical moment.

While Steve Ulrich isn't my ultimate favorite, I do enjoy listening to him call the score. I remember watching a tennis match (that Rafa happened to be involved in *blinks innocently*) and Steve was like "Game *slight pause* Naadaal." The WAY he said it was all suave and smooth like. If I didn't know any better, I'd say that he even gently swayed from right to left and raised his eyebrows up and down as if trying to seduce a female spectator in the distance.

Another favorite moment was during a match that featured the GOAT of umpires: Mohammed Layani. As he was calling the score one of the players smashed his racket. Mohammed's tone changed to express surprise/disapproval at that display of Racket Abuse. He was like: "15-.... THIRTY!" (I can't remember for the life of me who was playing at the time...) Great stuff. :D

As for the "Tanks Fed" flag. You have to hand it to them. It's complete genius! I just knew that they were going to come up with something, after all, they didn't exactly give Federer a warm send-off after he lost to Del Po. I even heard boos.

I think it was a tough scenario for Federer. This is how I see it, the Fed *dramatic pause*.....was conflicted.

*lowers voice to an urgent whisper*
Caught between winning the match and allowing his redheaded-sworn-enemy Murray to go through. Or losing to Chewbacca, STILL qualifying himself, but knocking his redheaded-nemesis Murray out. When it came down to actually holding serve for JUST ONE MORE TIME, I think his subconscious and ever present passive aggression took over.

The saddest thing was (and I use "sad" VERY lightly, in fact, so lightly it means "great" in this case) was how Jason Goodall and Robbie took it for granted that Federer was going to hold serve. Now, I'm not going to go into detail about it now, but I really dislike those commentators. Most especially Jason Goodall. He is so biased, openly takes pleasure in other player's defeats and is a shameful gossip. But he smells funny. I just KNOW he does! Anyway, as Jason and Robbie cackled into the mic about the prospects of the Mighty Fed, King-of-awesome-serves-and-all things-monogrammed, NOT holding serve for just this ONE time, how for sure Del Po was finished and their precious Murray was through...I had an internal battle of my own. On one hand, I have nothing against Murray, except that those darn commentators ALWAYS rub me the wrong way and I find myself rooting against Murray as a way of getting back at them (pathetic, I know *hangs head*) So I wanted for Del Po to break serve and win. But then on the other hand, I have nothing against Murray and I thought that Del Po already won a Slam and winning WTF in London would make Murray all "WTF! I WON!" I'd be happy for him. Just as I was facing that internal struggle, London's Monogrammed Hero and tennis's Chewbacca took the court.

Now, I can only remember what happened on three of those crucial points (not in any particular order.) One, Federer double faulted. Two, Federer missed an overhead smash long. Three, Federer hit an extremely lousy approach shot and allowed Del Po to hit an easy backhand pass. Four (I'm trying to recall here), Del Po returned a weak second serve for a winner (?)

In any case, it was a VERY sketchy game. VERY sketchy. At one point the camera zoomed in of Federer's face after he hit that approach shot and was passed...I remember him biting his bottom lip, like a child who knows they are up to know good. He even had this child-like look of guilt in his eyes. I think he knew what he was up to. He was being mischievous (and a meanie.) He doesn't like Murray and so he didn't want Murray to come on the field trip with the rest of the class. So he hid Murray's signed permission slip and Murray had to stay behind.

Now one could argue that he wanted to win and beat the guy who beat him at the US Open final. Plus, he would've possibly had another crack at Murray to catch-up in the H2H. *shrugs* Who knows? All I know is that it was an extremely weak service game coming from Federer. At a very inopportune time. Whether he did it consciously or subconsciously is for us to speculate.

*clutches tin foil cap while narrowing eyes* They don't call him Darth Federer for nothing.

MiniArbre , 12/1/09 2:17 AM


so jason doesn't smell of soap like rafa? being so unpopular, you are in good company frowning at his existence mini.

i would hate to be likened to chewy - big, brown and furry with feet size of ronald m. but he was a goodie so i should be kinder.

cheryl, you can't blame us for picking on you while you were busy enjoying matches we couldn't be at!!

homos , 12/1/09 3:26 AM


lol, MiniAbre...

Muzza did himself no favor by not winning in str8s against verdasco.

torres9 , 12/1/09 10:09 AM


lol,mini.I enjoyed your post:)
In all seriousness,it's just hard to believe that federer would "on Purpose" lose just because he didn't want Murray to get in.
I don't put nothing pass him:) but, you never know.
Never-the-less,it's still funny the way you analysed the situation Mini:)

alik , 12/1/09 12:31 PM


the overhead smash was the second point

the last point was a forehand error by Federer five feet wide

RickyDimon , 12/1/09 4:05 PM


Enough. Just look at the titles of your articles here - ?Vamos Rafa? versus ?Tanks Federer?. You wax indignant Cheryl, at journalists suggesting that Rafa takes ?supplements? and yet here you are trashing another great player?s reputation by insinuating that he deliberately lost to del Potro. It?s a gutless enabling of posts like MiniArbre?s, who is concerned about lies destroying Rafa?s integrity but who happily speculates that Roger knows he is up to no good in throwing the game and match. It would be more honest if you just called this a Rafa blog or, more to the point, an anti-Fed blog.

I?m fine with the gushing over Rafa, the?Squee, he?s so cute/adorable/friendly/charismatic?. And I?d be fine if this were a private fan?s blog ? hey, it?s your blog, you get to choose who?s your favourite son and who gets dumped on, no prob. But frankly, I find it hard to believe that you ?re accredited journalists, as it strains the bounds of credibility that real journalists could be so openly biased in their reports. I mean, the Fed isn?t exactly going to go out of his way to grant you some of his time is he, given what you?ve said about him. And maybe that?s the reason you?re as full of bile as a rejected suitor ? maybe Roger isn?t friendly enough towards two-bit hacks like you.

If there?s one thing I?m sure of about Roger Federer, it?s that he appreciates competence and professionalism. Guess he?s going to have to wait a long time before he finds it here.

Jules , 12/1/09 6:22 PM


ROFL

cheryl next time you're at a tourney, don't report to us what's going on there. instead, tell us how clean the toilets are, how fresh the cream is on the strawberries, how hot it gets in the underground, and how bad the coffee is in england :)

homos , 12/1/09 7:04 PM


Welcome Jules. It's good to have another fearless voice here.

chr18 , 12/1/09 7:21 PM


Homos, Chewbacca's all kinds of awesome! As for Jason Goodall, since he's so unpopular you'd think they'd fire him already...*grumbles*

"lol, MiniAbre...
Muzza did himself no favor by not winning in str8s against verdasco."

Touché Torres9, touché. I wonder who HE'S working for? *rubs chin*

Alik, "you don't know the powah of the dark side!" :P

RickyDimon, five feet wide huh? That changes things. I must review my theory and make the necessary changes.
*adds the word "DUDE!" after "VERY sketchy"*
There, perfect!
***********

Jules, chillax. Cheryl NEVER insinuated that Federer purposely lost. You need to re-read her post, go back and then re-read again. I was the one who light-heartedly insinuated that I think he might have subconsciously thought about accidentally tanking the match on purpose. Cheryl was simply blogging about what she observed. That's it. A group of Murray fans were holding a flag that said "Tanks Fed." Rafa fans are so optimistic/loving to the point of delirium that they continued to shout "Vamos Rafa!" even though he was no longer even in the tournament. Cheryl observed these things and reported back to us. It's not her fault that I was inspired to write out MY observations and thoughts on the matter after watching that match and that you happened to get offended by them. She's not "enabling" me, I'm an individual with my own mind gosh darn it! That drama writes itself. It would've come out sometime or another. In fact, with the way those two go at each other, they should have their own TV show. We can call it....*drum roll*..... "Murderer!" (that's what you get when you merge the names "Murray" and "Federer". See what I did there?)

There's a big difference between professional journalists inventing dangerous lies about a person and then spreading them on their television show, and Joe-shmoe (that's me!) commenting on a blog on the internet and giving their thoughts. Those Argentinain journalists should stick to what they KNOW (if I'm going by first impressions, I'd have to say that isn't much) and report the facts rather than deciding to put the "skills" they've acquired in 'creative writing' to good use at the expense of a world class athlete. But that's just it Jules, in your blind frenzy you've hit a target. Those journalists probably weren't allowed anywhere near the players themselves because they are two-bit hacks and so they're just full of bile as rejected suitors. With all of the action that was going on during that big week at the World Tour Finals, that's the one thing they could think of to discuss....looozers!

I'm just expressing myself and telling how I see it. Torres9 is a Fedfan and he found his sense of humor and laughed at what I had to say. My post reeks of tongue-in-cheek and if you take me very seriously then I raise my glass of chocolate milk in toast to you because you have just accomplished the impossible. Though I must admit, I AM pretty convincing.

As for the rest of your comment, you just thew what little credibility you had once you made it personal. WHY must people make things personal when they are trying to make a point? Don't they realize that it just makes them look yucky?! Calling Cheryl bitter is like calling Federer a singer, it's just not right.

As for the gushing over Rafa, well, how can you resist? He's utterly Rafadorable! We're the victims here! What are we going to do? We're prisoners ! :3

Bottom line is, not only have you wrongfully accused Cheryl but you made it personal. You accuse her of incompetence yet you just demonstrated your lack of competence when it comes to grasping and understanding the English language. It is okay to vent frustration, but at least make sure you have your head on straight. The internet is full of blogs that worship the Gilded Fed. So as a Rafan and a tennis fan, I really can't find it within my heart of hearts to sympathize with you. It's about time Rafa gets doted on and gets plenty of attention. Why must there be tantrums and hissy fits whenever Rafa gets the spotlight?

If you really want the short end of the stick try being a Horacio Zeballos fan or hard-core Sergiy Stakhovsky fan in this world. Hard stuff.

*************
How's that for another fearless voice Chr18? *winks*

MiniArbre , 12/2/09 12:37 AM


Jules - that was an outstanding post! Seriously. I mean, it's pretty obvious that you didn't read my entry, but let's not let that keep us from scintillating discussion. Since I was simply reporting what I saw, I can only surmise that you disagree with my conclusions about what Tanks, Fed means.

Maybe the person that brought that flag was suggesting that Roger might enjoy driving tanks. In Scotland. Or maybe they were not referring to Federer at all, but simply celebrating the size of the gas tanks on FedEx trucks. In Scotland.

I'm open to any and all suggestions. Post them here!

MiniArbre, that was a brilliant defense. My thanks. :)

cherylmurray , 12/2/09 3:35 AM


Chillax yourself MiniArbre. You can gush away to your heart?s content about Rafa; he?s a nice boy and you?ll get no argument from me on that score. And dude, I?m in no danger of taking you seriously. You?re right; a fan?s comments on a blog don?t amount to a hill of beans.

Where I take issue is with the writers of this blog behaving like fans of one particular player and, more to the point, taking subtle and not-so-subtle pot shots at his main rival. It strikes me as being surprisingly unprofessional, given that a tennis journalist?s bread and butter would appear to be predicated on maintaining at least cordial relations with the players. If I were a tennis player, I wouldn?t want to give the time of day to a journalist who wrote such things about me.

It appears I?m not the only one who picked up on your tanking inference Cheryl. Witness ed251137?s comment. And you did say ?They were not-so-subtlety accusing Federer of tanking his match against Del Potro ? I suppose I can understand a bit where they?re coming from.? Perhaps you should read a bit about George Lakoff and framing an argument.

Like I said, I have no issue really with the fangirling about Rafa, but I detest the sly digs at Fed?s reputation. And I don?t get it. I mean, if Roger is such an arrogant, unfriendly guy, then how come he has been awarded the ATP Fans? Favorite six times, the Stefan Edberg Sportsmanship Award (voted for by his peers) five times and the Prix Orange for a record fifth consecutive time (voted for by the press and public).

I don?t think Rafael Nadal would get it either.

Jules , 12/2/09 7:27 PM


"And you did say ?They were not-so-subtlety accusing Federer of tanking his match against Del Potro"

They WERE not-so-subtlety accusing Federer of tanking his match against Del Potro...I still don't get what you're protesting about. That's like me accusing Cheryl of spreading rumors about Rafa using banned substances because she blogged about what those Argentinian reporters were saying and trying to get her to say.

And when did Cheryl ever say that Federer is an arrogant and unfriendly guy? You are all over the place. It seems to me like you have pent up frustration about a lot of different things and you are choosing to vent them all at once without considering whether or not they actually apply.



MiniArbre , 12/2/09 8:58 PM


OK, Cheryl, time to fess up:

It was you, wasn't it?, who got a couple of fans to draw Tank, Fed in large letters on that Scottish flag...

chlorostoma , 12/2/09 9:59 PM


You found me out, chlorostoma. My secret is out.

What I can't figure out is whether Jules is accusing me of taking shots at Federer or Murray. My confusion lies in the fact that I very clearly stated that the suggestion that Fed threw the match was rubbish. So maybe he's a Murray fan irritated that I called out his fellow Muzza lovers...

it's so hard to know for sure....

cherylmurray , 12/2/09 10:07 PM


Don't worry about it too much Cheryl. BTW, you're welcome. :)

Speaking of Murray, where did his nickname 'Muzza' or 'Muzzah' or 'Muxx' come from? And is 'Muxx' still pronounced as 'Muzz'? Also, did you notice that Del Potro has his name written on the back of his shoe? I first noticed it when the camera zoomed in on his feet at the O2 Arena. It had 'Del Po' stitched on the back.

That is a sign that you've made it big. Rafa has 'Rafa' written on the back of one shoe and his 'El Toro' logo on the back of the other. Federer has his 'RF' monogram on the back and now Del Potro. I wonder what logo, if any, Nike will come up with for him. I call Chewie! :D




MiniArbre , 12/3/09 2:21 AM


jules, go back and read cheryl's blog a few more times. and bear in mind it's a blog, not an article. and than stop barking up the wrong tree.

if you went to the match and saw that banner and told a friend about it, are YOU to blame for the banner? you are being ridiculous and confirming with each post that you have completely lost the plot.

it is a BLOG about what she SAW, not an article on a story she MADE UP! get with it woman!

homos , 12/3/09 2:54 AM


MiniArbre , 12/1/09 2:17 AM

I swear I came here to post a nice link for Rafans and then I saw this.
thanks for making a whole bunch of things up MiniArbe: so you even saw GUILT in Roger's eyes?cool!
let me explain to you!
you talk about that break Roger gave to Delpotro. do you actually watch Roger's matches?
how many times this year did he lose focus after having lost break points and let his own service game fly away?
Delpotro's service game: Roger hit the net at the 1st break point and gave Delboy a chance to hit the ball hard and win the point.I think there were 2 errors from Roger in that service game as well. at one point Roger hit a drop shot and a lob to win the point and have another BP. the next point Delpotro won was on a lucky 2nd serve that as the comms called it "surprised FEd" . the last point won by Delpotro was
won by the thinniest of margins.
the little luck Delpotro had and 3 BPs lost was enough to distract Roger as it's been the theme this year.
also,IF Roger knew he was through ,he probably didn't have the adequate rush of adrenaline to compete and you know what would happen when the guy on the other side is someone who has given him trouble the last couple of times they've played.
Roger's service game:
he did not DF in that service game ,but he played the points poorly. DP hit the net and won the 1st point. did this all had to do with Roger's tanking?

I thought those ppl who thought Roger tanked would lighten up after watching the 1st set against Davydenko! 2 DF and one EASY Volley missed to give Davy the 1st break. TANKING???
weak returns on Davy's 2nd serve in the last set and then losing serve after 2 sets of winning service games 40-0.40-15 most of the time. TANKING?
did you actually watch Roger lose to Tsonga in Montreal with choking a 5-1 lead??
TANKING?
all of these things happen,and just because Roger lost to Delpotro it means he tanked? where is your evidence?
why would Roger lose to a new rival who is the only guy besides Rafa who has beaten him in a GS final?. just to eliminate a guy he has beaten the last 2 times pretty easily? what matters to Roger is not that "well I really don't like Andy very much"
what he thinks about is to earn his 200 points,to beat a rival who has troubled him the last couple of times they've played,and to boost his own confidence.I'm sure right now Roger prefers Andy as an opponent to Delpotro.
Roger has pride,or to say his haters words:" he's arroagant and a sore loser who thinks he's entitled to win all the time"...
he was clearly disappointed and frustrated to play that way.(is that what you "diagnosed"as guilt? )
for all the reasons above he would never "tank",he might cool down but not tank.
with all respect to andy,only some of his fans who think he is the god and Roger trembles when his name is said,would think Roger tanked.

and Cheryl...thanks for your unbelievable bias against ROger. I know it's what you saw,but please don't tell me you didn't enjoy it and didn't want to let Roger's haters have their "fun".
btw,how has Roger "made it clear that he doesn't really like Murray very much"?
I've never had that impression from his pressers,just that he doesn't like the british media's behaviour.

niloofar , 12/3/09 8:30 AM


and Cheryl,excuse me, but where did you "make it clear" that the tanking thing was "rubbish"?
all I see in your post is that you "know where they are coming from" and it's "a little stretch" to suggest he tanked!!!

MiniArbre:
sth I forgot in my previous post. I don't know where you heard the "booing"!!! but I thought the crowd support for Roger was incredible during the whole tournamnet,enev against Andy.

niloofar , 12/3/09 8:45 AM


and Cheryl,where did you make it clear that the tanking thing was "rubbish"?
what I see in your post is that you "know where they are coming from",and it's a "little" stretching to suggest he tanked!!!!

niloofar , 12/3/09 8:50 AM


sorry if I was harsh in my post,just got frustrated ...and sorry for the extra post,it was a mistake.

niloofar , 12/3/09 9:43 AM


Niloofar, first of all, you don't have to apologize. I gave my point of view and wrote how I saw things and you did the same. Plus, you're indignant right now, so do it right. :P

While you are free to disagree with how I interpreted the situation, you can't really argue that I did not see what I said I saw because it all comes down to my perspective and point of view. You countered my interpretation of things with your own. Perfect recipe for a discussion. I clearly stated at the beginning of my theory that, "this is how I see it." I not once stated that my observations were for a fact, or that it was most definitely, without a shadow of a doubt, exactly how I said it was, because when you think about it, none of us can ever really know anything for sure. Our views are subjective. That's what an opinion is. We'd have to get into Federer's head during the match and read his thoughts to know EXACTLY what was going through his mind. What we are doing here is all speculation and interpretation.

Just because my point of view counters your own, does not mean that I am in the wrong for expressing mine. The same goes for you, just because you disagree doesn't mean you are not free to do just that. You gave a few examples of other matches he lost, but just because tanking always equals losing doesn't mean losing always equals tanking.

I'm pretty sure Federer double faulted in the 8th game of that deciding set and I distinctly remember hearing some boos coming from the crowd after that particular match. Is it really that surprising? Mix a few drinks with the propability of some fans thinking that Federer didn't exactly do all in his power to hold serve for just that one more time, and you have a recipe for boos (and possible moonings.) That doesn't mean that they don't have love for Rogah.

As for Roger's behavior towards Murray, some say big brotherly tough love, others say critical meanie. If we go by Murray's response to Federer's comments, I'd say he thinks it's the latter (that doesn't mean that he won't take Roger's criticism and use it against him by following some of his advice.) But, again, it comes down to interpretation. Federer fans are more tolerant/understanding of Roger and his Federerness. Others, maybe not so much. I for one agree with your view that the British Media are apart of it. Heck, I myself (as I illustrated in my previous post) feel the same way at times.

I am not a hater. Hate is a ridiculously strong emotion to feel towards an athlete (or anybody for that matter.)

Now, once you've excused me from the naughty corner that you just banished me to, I don't mind viewing that link you wanted to share. Of course you're free to say "I'm not going to give you anything!" As I'm free to say, "Why not? Pleeeaase!"

In all seriousness, there's no war here. Just differing minds with differing opinions.



MiniArbre , 12/4/09 12:08 AM


niloofar, I know you're frustrated. Maybe so much so that you missed the last sentence of my entry which stated that there was no truth to the claim.

cherylmurray , 12/4/09 3:33 AM


MiniArbe...
yes ,we are not in Fed 's head,but there should be enough evidence to put sth out for many people to read. anything might be true right? so I can point my finger to anyone and everyone to tell them they might have done sth wrong! the MIGHT!!! but I can't state that without evidence. I can imagine where people are coming from:they think "oh Fed lost and this loss elimintaed Murray so he could have interntionally lost to do so!" that's all the evidence they have.
as I said only extreme Murray fans who think Murray is the scariest guy on tour would think Roger would give up his pride,200 points,etc to eliminate Murray and let Delpotro go through.
anyone who has watched the last 3 matches between Roger and DP and the last 2 matches between Roger and Murray knows Roger has more trouble with DP now.
the reason I mentioned the previous matches was not that I was equaling losing with tanking,the reason was to show that a poor service game (and much worse than what you saw against DP) has happened in many of Roger's matches,so again that 's no evidence!!
btw,I checked about that DF and you were right,but I remember the rest of the points quite clearly. DF,so what? Roger had 11 DF in USO final and one crucial one in the tiebreaker,he had 2 DF in his service game with Davydenko,he double faulted on BP in the basel final.
I know you expressed your point of view and how you see it,but to suggest a player like Fed tanked a match is to attack his integrity IMO,I know you wrote your post in good humor and didn't mean to attack but it could be taken in a bad way.I for one would not love Roger for a second if I thought he tanked. all I can say is that Roger probably relaxed a bit,knowing he was through(and that 's not even concious) but I don't think he even knew which one of the other guys were through! there was a one game difference,even DP didn't know!!
but anyway thanks for taking your time and replying to me,about the link,it was nothing special,I just said it to emphasize I was here to do sth friendly. :)
I've already posted it on VamosRafa thread,I just like the blogger,she usually writes about Roger but this time she wrote about Rafa that's why I posted.
have a nice day!

Cheryl... I didn't miss it,but I just said you did not make it so clear as you said in one your posts :). well,maybe it's too much expectation to ask you to defend Roger like a diehard Fed fan.I can imagine myself writing pages against people with that flag! :)
ok,thank you both for replies.

niloofar , 12/4/09 6:51 AM


Knowing how skilled Roger is in the art of dissimulation it is hardly surprising that his disingenuous replies to pointed questions at the post match presser helped fan the speculation.

But in all of this hoo-hah, have you noticed the deafening silence from Andy?
I'm reminded of the Bobby Clarke quote: ?I've discovered that the less I say, the more rumors I start.?

ed251137 , 12/4/09 10:06 AM


what ed?
"disingenous"?
I don't know,I do suspect that Fed might have known he was through(opposite of what he said) and relaxed a bit,but he is not a fool either .when those journos who seemed to be asking all questions in relation to AM,ask him wether he knew or not ,it's not surprising for him to say I didn't to prevent the journos from putting the burden on his shoulder and at least asking:"did you relax?" I'm sure wether he knew or not, he wanted to win,but MIGHT have unconciously relaxed.
and as I said earlier I don't think he knew DP was through or AM (the both guys didn't know themselves!!)
and for the 100th times I'm sure Roger is now more uncomfortable with DP than with AM.
and defeaning silence from Andy?what does he have to do,call for an interview?
btw,I'm sure he is not as childish as some of his fans,and understands the pro players mind and the importance of each and every match.
the last thing:when you want to believe sth your mind will do anything to gather data to support it.I think if you want to believe there was anything special in Roger's loss( which was similar to many matches this year!!) you will find data for it.

niloofar , 12/4/09 2:00 PM


Thanks for adding some color about the umps. Tanks...OH, no one can really be that mean spirited.. about a game? Really? Can't beleive any of the players would tank.... on purpose..... besides.... people just lose focus, I have felt that lapse myself... and lost a game or two or a set or a match because of it. By the way, don't drink too much wine the night before either....

Vitality , 12/4/09 8:28 PM


User "federerbestclass" banned for spamming the site (same two comments posted 44 times).

Administrator , 12/7/09 11:42 AM


Administrator - thanks.

RickyDimon , 12/7/09 3:48 PM


ditto

cherylmurray , 12/7/09 9:39 PM


Jules and Niloofar,

i have read the article and i agree with you both, undercurrents of anti-fed blogging,not good and a great pity that this can happen?why is this allowed,with everything roger federer brings to the sport,that anyone can have the nerve to write in this way.there is positive discussion and then there is an underhand comment.not good.

maxi , 12/7/09 9:52 PM


Sure. Roger had every possibility calculated and KNEW if he lost at that very moment, Andy would be out. Come on, give me a break. I do believe he knew he was clinched to go to semi's, tho. With what we know now, could it be possible that Andy was distracted with his breakup? Hmmm?

Rafterfan , 12/8/09 6:41 PM


what's funny about the whole thing is that I don't think the ATP even knew. It took a looonngggg time before the announcement was made.

cherylmurray , 12/8/09 7:46 PM


the ATP knew good and well

anyone who got out a calculator (including me I will admit) knew exactly what the situation was at the beginning of the third set.

They just delayed the announcement for 1) suspense, and 2) to make double, triple, quadruple, etc. sure of the math.

RickyDimon , 12/8/09 8:02 PM


to even think in this way is so terribly damning of roger i cannot believe that you would even be thinking like this - i found a very interesting comment from another site which i think is worthy of discussion and this writer is well respected who has a massive point - it picks up on what miniarbre said earlier.

Federer tanked his match against Del Potro to spite Murray? cmon!

Miniarbre:
?In any case, it was a VERY sketchy game. VERY sketchy. At one point the camera zoomed in of Federer?s face after he hit that approach shot and was passed?I remember him biting his bottom lip, like a child who knows they are up to know good. He even had this child-like look of guilt in his eyes. I think he knew what he was up to. He was being mischievous (and a meanie.) He doesn?t like Murray and so he didn?t want Murray to come on the field trip with the rest of the class. So he hid Murray?s signed permission slip and Murray had to stay behind.

Now one could argue that he wanted to win and beat the guy who beat him at the US Open final. Plus, he would?ve possibly had another crack at Murray to catch-up in the H2H. *shrugs* Who knows? All I know is that it was an extremely weak service game coming from Federer. At a very inopportune time. Whether he did it consciously or subconsciously is for us to speculate. ?


I really doubt this guy saw ?guilt? in Fed?s eyes or the whole bottom lip thing was because he knew he was up to no good. But honestly, I agree that this sounds sketchy. HOWEVER, Fed?s been screwing up in the final sets of his matches for the last 2 years, his was nothing new, hell, nothing out of the ordinary. Again, I must repeat, this is Roger Federer.
He has full full belief in his game. I don?t think he hates Murray as much as people say, I think he is more like me and other fans who are sick of the media hyping up Murray so much. Also, even if he does dislike Murray, Fed?s ego would never let him tank a match like that. Especially considering he whooped Murray the last 2 times they played, you?d think he?d be licking his chops to play him again. And I don?t think that?s what Federer was even thinking about. I think he was a lot more focused on beating only the second guy to ever beat him in a slam final. A guy who actually has a slam and is a legit contendor to Fed?s throne, unlike Murray. Why would Federer dig so deep in the second set? Just to make the semis? Or to actually beat Del Po?
I just think it?s unlikely Federer would tank this particular match with his ego. And he finished on top of his group anyway, so he would?ve played Davydenko no matter what. And Soderling probably would?ve blasted right through Murray.

This is me now:
everyone is going to speculate, but i actually agree with this writer above, fed's ego would NOT have allowed him to behave in this way. I think that if anyone had accused rafa of the same thing, we would be having a very different conversation.

maxi , 12/8/09 9:02 PM


Now that there is no condom arround, let's have hmmm real sex! Nobody has ever beaten Rog comprehensively except Joko and Nadal in AO and FO respectively. Davy was all along a very good player and always fell short in GS. The two AndYs are very good but fell too short. Delpo is the only one who can stand in the way now that he has seen the better of the boss. But I feel the American Andy is the only one who has the experience and the quality to take it. No other condom, smooth, rough or corrogateted can take it from RF.

newfangkc , 1/23/10 6:57 PM


Cheryl, you come up with the most interesting blogs. Now that you say it, I recognise what you mean, that is when TV viewers can hear the umpire. I find the umpire's sound system at all tournaments except Wimbledon very inaudible, most of the time I just about hear what they are saying.

It's strange that Federer and Murray are the ones who don't like each other, but it's Federer and Nadal fans who fight all the time. I wonder what they both make of the way their fans carry on; Nadal says he reads most of what is on the internet, and I think Fed does too, if only to lap up the sycophancy. They must have a good laugh.


There is only one Rafael Nadal
Vamos!

carrie , 1/23/10 11:08 PM


unfair carrie.fed fans are no more sycophantic than nadal fans. This is a very old thread,going back 6 months or so.Am sure rafa enjoys the adoration and "lapping up" the fandom, just as much.Plus Jules and niloofar drew some very interesting inferences into what cheryl "may" have been hinting at. It could easily have been taken as being offensive. (as jules said).

maxi , 1/24/10 9:12 AM



Archive

Sat 06/07 06:31
Tennistalk says farewell

Thu 06/06 04:05
Novak Djokovic's unsung hero

Tue 21/05 15:52
Another Federer and Nadal match disappoints

Fri 17/05 18:03
Bill Tilden and the effects of moral bankruptcy on a legacy

Tue 19/03 21:01
Professor Federer teaches us a thing or two

Mon 18/03 15:43
Nadal makes the cleverest comeback in tennis history

Fri 01/02 22:00
Nadal's return at Vina del Mar

Thu 15/11 16:54
Federer and company make no room at the top for youth

Tue 11/09 20:24
Murray joins the ranks of Grand Slam elite

Fri 17/08 19:45
There is something about Roger Federer

Mon 13/08 23:05
Tennistalk is in Cincinnati again

Tue 12/06 16:21
The French Open, Nadal's personal playground

Wed 09/05 14:58
Novak Djokovic takes up skating at the Madrid ice rink

Thu 29/03 14:30
Nadal and Spain give French TV a punch in the mouth

Mon 19/03 13:56
And Roger Federer is BACK View all posts

Current ATP-rankings

1. Djokovic 12 500 pts
2. Murray 8 750 pts
3. Federer 8 670 pts
4. Ferrer 6 970 pts
5. Nadal 6 385 pts

Unibet Mobile prematch,live betting

Unibet Mobile betting Unibet Mobile betting

Scan QR code to access Unibet mobile.
Bet on Sports wherever you are and whenever you like, with Unibet's quick and simple mobile client you can place bets, check results and see live odds.
 For more info about QR codes & scanners click here.

ATP Calendar

Date
Tournament

Recommend Tennistalk



Follow us

Follow Tennistalk on Facebook Follow Tennistalk on Twitter

Tell a friend

Your name:

Friend's name:

Friend's email:

Other tennis links