Fan in Chicago Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 EDIT2: Looks to be Ofiba's opinion, too Add me to that list. The guy is very very good but his arrogance stopped me for ever rooting for him. I also believe (probably have said this before) that he took advantage of a lull in men's tennis post-Sampras to pile on major titles before the likes of Nadal and Djokovich stood up to him and started beating up on him. That said, winning a major at age 30 is no mean achievement and he did beat the (then) #1 on the road to the championship. Murray showed some promising signs but still looks vulnerable in the big points. I have always complained that his major failing is his passive playing style and lack of killer instinct that stops him from hammering the opponent in the big points. Lendl seems to be helping him with those aspects but he has to really take a huge step to get past the big 3. And by the way, Lendl still doesn't have a Wimbledon even as a coach Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eball Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 (edited) He's a complete baby when he loses and an arrogant jackass when he wins. If you watch his speech on-court after the win today, instead of being a gracious winner (which he feigns, to his credit), he starts talking about his accomplishments. If you're ASKED about them, that's fine. But for him to start going on about how he's now tied with Pete Sampras as having won the most Wimbledon titles and how he has regained the #1 spot in the rankings. It would be like Tom Brady getting up there on the podium with Goodell after winning the SB and, without being prompted, talking about how awesome he is for having won the MVP award and how he's likely going to be viewed as one of the greatest QBs in history after winning 3 championships. The guy puts on a facade well, but he's nothing but a gloating, arrogant prick...in my opinion EDIT: Looks like it's this guy's opinion, too....and he states the case with plenty of examples of Federer's douchery: http://www.murraysworld.com/columns/article/20600/ EDIT2: Looks to be Ofiba's opinion, too I thought Federer was gracious to Murray in his post-game comments. It was an excellent match; I don't really pay attention to all of the other nonsense in tennis, but there's no denying Federer is in the discussion for greatest of all time. Pete Sampras was the most boring, dull champion I've ever witnessed; I couldn't wait for his career to end. The fact Federer's now 30 and still able to do this speaks volumes. There are lots of cocky athletes; big deal. I also like Nadal and Djokovic, and look forward to more battles among the three. Edited July 9, 2012 by eball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
section122 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 He's a complete baby when he loses and an arrogant jackass when he wins. If you watch his speech on-court after the win today, instead of being a gracious winner (which he feigns, to his credit), he starts talking about his accomplishments. If you're ASKED about them, that's fine. But for him to start going on about how he's now tied with Pete Sampras as having won the most Wimbledon titles and how he has regained the #1 spot in the rankings. It would be like Tom Brady getting up there on the podium with Goodell after winning the SB and, without being prompted, talking about how awesome he is for having won the MVP award and how he's likely going to be viewed as one of the greatest QBs in history after winning 3 championships. The guy puts on a facade well, but he's nothing but a gloating, arrogant prick...in my opinion EDIT: Looks like it's this guy's opinion, too....and he states the case with plenty of examples of Federer's douchery: http://www.murraysworld.com/columns/article/20600/ EDIT2: Looks to be Ofiba's opinion, too That first link is some terrible "journalism." My favorite Roger cry baby routine is when he complained when Djokovic came back to beat him after hitting a risky return shot at match point. Here's the quote. "Some players grow up and play like that. I remember losing junior matches and being down 5-2 in the third and they start slapping shots and they all go in for some reason. That's the way they grew up playing when they were down. I never play that way. I believe hard work's going to pay off. [...] So for me this is very hard for me to understand how you can play a shot like that on match point. But maybe he's been doing it for 20 years. Maybe for him it's very normal. You'll have to ask him." It might just be me but this doesn't seem like that bad of a statement. Add me to that list. The guy is very very good but his arrogance stopped me for ever rooting for him. I also believe (probably have said this before) that he took advantage of a lull in men's tennis post-Sampras to pile on major titles before the likes of Nadal and Djokovich stood up to him and started beating up on him. That said, winning a major at age 30 is no mean achievement and he did beat the (then) #1 on the road to the championship. Murray showed some promising signs but still looks vulnerable in the big points. I have always complained that his major failing is his passive playing style and lack of killer instinct that stops him from hammering the opponent in the big points. Lendl seems to be helping him with those aspects but he has to really take a huge step to get past the big 3. And by the way, Lendl still doesn't have a Wimbledon even as a coach First Murray sucks... bad. There is a level with Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer and then everyone else. I was rooting for Murray because of the historical aspect but the way he struggled through his 2 previous matches I didn't think he had a shot. Secondly, I'm assuming none of you liked Andre Agassi much. He was the ultimate cocky tennis player to sampras' boring guy routine. When someone is the best in the world at something why is humility expected at all points in time. Federer is enjoying his accomplishments and there are many of them. Good for him for being able to enjoy them in the moment. Especially as his career winds down I am happy he is able to get the record for most weeks at #1 and am proud of him for working so hard for it. I think he should be able to be proud of it himself as well. I thought Federer was gracious to Murray in his post-game comments. It was an excellent match; I don't really pay attention to all of the other nonsense in tennis, but there's no denying Federer is in the discussion for greatest of all time. Pete Sampras was the most boring, dull champion I've ever witnessed; I couldn't wait for his career to end. The fact Federer's now 30 and still able to do this speaks volumes. There are lots of cocky athletes; big deal. I also like Nadal and Djokovic, and look forward to more battles among the three. They are all excellent but I like Nadal the least out of the 3... something about manpri's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UConn James Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 AJ, I don't get where you're hating on Federer for the post-match comments. The interviewer asked him WRT the Slam titles and regaining #1. It did not come from out of the blue. She asked him. And even if she hadn't, I think he's well within rights to say that he was proud of these accomplishments. I'm not a fan of his, but you've got to respect that Roger worked his ing ass off playing tourneys everywhere to get back #1 when a guy his age would normally be taking it slower and resting b/w majors. If there was anything, I think Murray put a little dig about Federer's age, and Federer said that Murray would "probably win at least one" major. That was a little backhanded, I thought. It would've been a nice bone to throw to the Brit crowd and a Murray who was very emotional to say something like 'I really hope Andy can finally deliver a home win for you. I think he has an excellent chance to. Just... not as long as it's me he's playing against for it.' (The last part would have to be delivered right, with obvious good spirits). I think that would have gone over with a crowd amd a player that was very disappointed having waited so long for this chance. Anyway, I'm not going to hate on him. RF became the first father to win a major in a very long time (or is it, ever? I forget). Thirty years old in a sport that's very unforgiving when the next gen of younger, faster and stronger comes up all too quickly. And I'm not sure how you could look at those twin girls and hate on him. That kinda melted my heart a little bit. What will be his legacy? Will he be considered the best ever? I don't know. If he can play a few more years and deliver some more against the likes of Djokovich and Nadal, yes. That'll be very difficult, tho. How do you determine eras in a sport with turnover like this? I think it's more of an overlapping Venn-diagram-like thing more than lineal determination. RF and Nadal will be two of the best ever who've kind of had a draw in the time that they've competed against each other. Nadal will have a lot to do post-Roger to draw even. Just my $0.02. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 AJ, I don't get where you're hating on Federer for the post-match comments. The interviewer asked him WRT the Slam titles and regaining #1. It did not come from out of the blue. She asked him. And even if she hadn't, I think he's well within rights to say that he was proud of these accomplishments. I'm not a fan of his, but you've got to respect that Roger worked his ing ass off playing tourneys everywhere to get back #1 when a guy his age would normally be taking it slower and resting b/w majors. If there was anything, I think Murray put a little dig about Federer's age, and Federer said that Murray would "probably win at least one" major. That was a little backhanded, I thought. It would've been a nice bone to throw to the Brit crowd and a Murray who was very emotional to say something like 'I really hope Andy can finally deliver a home win for you. I think he has an excellent chance to. Just... not as long as it's me he's playing against for it.' (The last part would have to be delivered right, with obvious good spirits). I think that would have gone over with a crowd amd a player that was very disappointed having waited so long for this chance. Anyway, I'm not going to hate on him. RF became the first father to win a major in a very long time (or is it, ever? I forget). Thirty years old in a sport that's very unforgiving when the next gen of younger, faster and stronger comes up all too quickly. And I'm not sure how you could look at those twin girls and hate on him. That kinda melted my heart a little bit. What will be his legacy? Will he be considered the best ever? I don't know. If he can play a few more years and deliver some more against the likes of Djokovich and Nadal, yes. That'll be very difficult, tho. How do you determine eras in a sport with turnover like this? I think it's more of an overlapping Venn-diagram-like thing more than lineal determination. RF and Nadal will be two of the best ever who've kind of had a draw in the time that they've competed against each other. Nadal will have a lot to do post-Roger to draw even. Just my $0.02. Nice post, U CONN When the announcers said that Murray and his girl friend live about 20 minutes away in his 7 MILLION DOLLAR house, I really didnt feel that bad for him losing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 AJ, I don't get where you're hating on Federer for the post-match comments. The interviewer asked him WRT the Slam titles and regaining #1. It did not come from out of the blue. She asked him. And even if she hadn't, I think he's well within rights to say that he was proud of these accomplishments. I'm not a fan of his, but you've got to respect that Roger worked his ing ass off playing tourneys everywhere to get back #1 when a guy his age would normally be taking it slower and resting b/w majors. If there was anything, I think Murray put a little dig about Federer's age, and Federer said that Murray would "probably win at least one" major. That was a little backhanded, I thought. It would've been a nice bone to throw to the Brit crowd and a Murray who was very emotional to say something like 'I really hope Andy can finally deliver a home win for you. I think he has an excellent chance to. Just... not as long as it's me he's playing against for it.' (The last part would have to be delivered right, with obvious good spirits). I think that would have gone over with a crowd amd a player that was very disappointed having waited so long for this chance. Anyway, I'm not going to hate on him. RF became the first father to win a major in a very long time (or is it, ever? I forget). Thirty years old in a sport that's very unforgiving when the next gen of younger, faster and stronger comes up all too quickly. And I'm not sure how you could look at those twin girls and hate on him. That kinda melted my heart a little bit. What will be his legacy? Will he be considered the best ever? I don't know. If he can play a few more years and deliver some more against the likes of Djokovich and Nadal, yes. That'll be very difficult, tho. How do you determine eras in a sport with turnover like this? I think it's more of an overlapping Venn-diagram-like thing more than lineal determination. RF and Nadal will be two of the best ever who've kind of had a draw in the time that they've competed against each other. Nadal will have a lot to do post-Roger to draw even. Just my $0.02. I don't hate Federer the person, I hate Federer the sports figure...just as I do the Pats. As for his greatness, I think he's certainly deserving of being in the conversation for one of the greatest grass court players of all time, but he's not on my list of the top overall players in history. Michael Chang > Federer Nice post, U CONN When the announcers said that Murray and his girl friend live about 20 minutes away in his 7 MILLION DOLLAR house, I really didnt feel that bad for him losing. He definitely deserved to lose...he was only really there to begin with because Nadal sharted himself in the 2nd round. That first link is some terrible "journalism." It is, I agree...but it's just a fan site, so can't really expect much. For me, though, there are more than enough direct quotes from Federer to support my position of douchery. And this is coming from someone who likes Rex Ryan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I hate tennis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajzepp Posted July 9, 2012 Share Posted July 9, 2012 I thought Federer was gracious to Murray in his post-game comments. It was an excellent match; I don't really pay attention to all of the other nonsense in tennis, but there's no denying Federer is in the discussion for greatest of all time. Pete Sampras was the most boring, dull champion I've ever witnessed; I couldn't wait for his career to end. The fact Federer's now 30 and still able to do this speaks volumes. There are lots of cocky athletes; big deal. I also like Nadal and Djokovic, and look forward to more battles among the three. I never cared for Sampras either. I was an Agassi guy. I don't mind cockiness...I don't mind arrogance...that's an aspect of sports that I consistently support. I just don't like spoiled little babies who whine when they don't get their way. I hate tennis. Add me to that list. The guy is very very good but his arrogance stopped me for ever rooting for him. I also believe (probably have said this before) that he took advantage of a lull in men's tennis post-Sampras to pile on major titles before the likes of Nadal and Djokovich stood up to him and started beating up on him. That said, winning a major at age 30 is no mean achievement and he did beat the (then) #1 on the road to the championship. Murray showed some promising signs but still looks vulnerable in the big points. I have always complained that his major failing is his passive playing style and lack of killer instinct that stops him from hammering the opponent in the big points. Lendl seems to be helping him with those aspects but he has to really take a huge step to get past the big 3. And by the way, Lendl still doesn't have a Wimbledon even as a coach Amen brother! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts