• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

*Official* Tennis Thread

funnygirl

State Regular
Yeah, but Nadal had no choice but to be gracioius and have another muted celebration. He even apologised for winning. Thirteen times a runner-up has watched Federer raise the trophy etc., and as hard as it might be for Federer to lose a GS final, he ought to be more composed than that. Why should Rafa feel guilty? Or if he doesn't feel guilty, why should he be subdued? If Federer had won, I'm sure Rafa wouldn't have done that.
I feel sorry for Nadal .poor guy couldn't celebrate because of Fed's overflowing emotions .He lost it even before the start of the last set.
 

Simon

Request Your Custom Title Now!
surely no one is going to beat rafa on clay if he is even 80% good

but one question how good is verdasco on clay ????
Pretty good, but he's closer to Nadal on the other surfaces. As I said a couple of pages back I think we will see the best of Verdasco on grass, he has done alright on that surface in the past. I think pretty much everything before the start of 2008 can be stripped from his career as he is a completely different player. It's pretty rare in tennis terms for a player to really start hitting the peaks he is in his mid twenties.
 

biased indian

International Coach
Pretty good, but he's closer to Nadal on the other surfaces. As I said a couple of pages back I think we will see the best of Verdasco on grass, he has done alright on that surface in the past. I think pretty much everything before the start of 2008 can be stripped from his career as he is a completely different player. It's pretty rare in tennis terms for a player to really start hitting the peaks he is in his mid twenties.
oh thought he might challenge rafa if he had an off day ...so think Rafa is almost virtually assured of french title if he is fit
 

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
Yeah, nice article on Nadal.

Must admit I was taken aback to read the vitriolic comments from posters professing to hate or despise Rafa.

I wonder whether this reflects what seems to be a fairly widespread bias against him based largely – I think – on the, perhaps accurate, perception that he’s a somewhat manufactured player. This is, of course, magnified when he shares the court with such an obvious natural talent as Roger Federer.

I always incline towards the artist rather than the artisan when it comes to sport: Seve not Faldo; O’Sullivan ahead of Hendry; the flawed genius of Gazza and the fallible flash of a Hamed or Lara rather than the metronomic magnificence of Wilkinson or the consistently applied skills of a Lennox Lewis or Tendulkar. And above them all – as much for his candour and charisma off the court as the tempestuous grace he displayed on it – John Patrick McEnroe.

But rather than following this inclination to the Federer camp, I can’t help but side with Nadal. The almost feral intensity and startling physicality he brings to his tennis is irresistible and I’ve quickly warmed to the slightly incongruous and – as far as I can tell – ingenuous humility and empathy he displays in all the interviews and presentation ceremonies I’ve seen.

In contrast, the bland (though not objectionable) confidence bordering on arrogance of Federer leaves me cold. I don’t dislike him and – naturally – I enjoy watching him play, but there’s just nothing to be drawn to. And the bottom line is that, on Sunday, he was crying for himself; crying because he lost. Didn’t Thatcher do that once?
 

Uppercut

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Also a thought provoking article about women's tennis by Greg Baum. Think he's right on the money (no pun intended)

Men, women hitting balls - that's entertainment
I don't get this discussion. Let them get paid according to their profitability, same as EVERYONE ELSE in the private sector.

If the women's TV rights sell for more than the men's, if they bring in more spectators to the games, if they make the LTA more money, then let the women get paid more. If it's the other way around, then let the men get paid more money. It can't possibly be any fairer.
 

NUFAN

Y no Afghanistan flag
It's hard to judge though.

I mean surely the TV ratings were higher for the men's final, especially in the second hour of the contest. :dry:
 

biased indian

International Coach
It's hard to judge though.

I mean surely the TV ratings were higher for the men's final, especially in the second hour of the contest. :dry:
can compare the top tournaments where they don't play both like masters and WTA equivalent..think masters bring in more money than the similar WTA held events ...
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
Greg Baum is lucky that he is writing it in newspapers and about Tennis players, If he said the same thing about a female colleague, there is a good chance that he will be fired.
 

Sanz

Hall of Fame Member
What do you mean?
I am sorry, I should have read the article before making the post. I stopped reading after "THE women get paid too much at the Australian Open" and hence misunderstood what he was trying to say.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Greg Baum is lucky that he is writing it in newspapers and about Tennis players, If he said the same thing about a female colleague, there is a good chance that he will be fired.
He was defending them though.

EDIT: I see you realised that. :)
 
Last edited:

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
Have always thought that the money should have some basis on the length of the match, seems fair to be paid for performance IMO.
 

SirBloody Idiot

Cricketer Of The Year
I don't like Jankovic, but have to admit that Federer has become distinctly less likeable over the past couple of years. I suppose it is a lot easier to come off better when winning than it is when losing.
 

Perm

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
I don't like Jankovic, but have to admit that Federer has become distinctly less likeable over the past couple of years. I suppose it is a lot easier to come off better when winning than it is when losing.
Always easier to kick somebody when they're down too. If Federer offered these sort of comments when he was #1 then it's possible the journalists would have spun the angle of the story.
 

Jono

Virat Kohli (c)
Always easier to kick somebody when they're down too. If Federer offered these sort of comments when he was #1 then it's possible the journalists would have spun the angle of the story.
Nah. He's been arrogant for a lot of his career (I referred to his arrogance in 2007/08 in this thread). I never got the "he's a humble champion" comments. He's often a funny guy, and is a ****ing amazing player. But humble he is not.
 

Top