Andy Vs Roger

I've got to agree with Colint on this one and although Murray done very well, he failed to win the match.

There's no doubt the lad has talent and will probably challenge for more grand slams but to class this competition as a success is typical of the British way of applauding failure.
 
Colint seems to be getting a very rough ride on here for expressing his opinion. Seems alot of people in this thread are 'Wimbledon' fans rather than 'tennis' fans and no doubt think the tennis season has now finished for another year.
 
Durango said:
Colint seems to be getting a very rough ride on here for expressing his opinion. Seems alot of people in this thread are 'Wimbledon' fans rather than 'tennis' fans and no doubt think the tennis season has now finished for another year.
Click to expand...

Nonsense. I'm a tennis fan. The issue I have with Colin's standpoint is that is delivered as absolute fact which it isn't. He claimed Federer is past it and that Murray will never win a Major because he's lost four finals and is now 25. When you examine the facts and apply some historical knowledge of tennis both of those statements are fundamentally flawed. I'm all up for people having opinions and arguing their point but what gets my goat is when people are obnoxious and obtuse.

When you analyse the match the majority of EXPERTS agree that Murray pushed Federer hard in that match and that it was vintage Federer that crossed the line. If Murray had turned in an abject display I'd say there was some merit in Colin's argument. But as someone who has watched every single final he has played he was a very different and improved player at Wimbledon.

He has always had the talent and regularly beats the top three in best of three tournaments. What he has lacked is the temperament to handle the big occasion and five set matches. I am seeing signs that he is progressing on that front.
 
Tiger said:
Nonsense. I'm a tennis fan. The issue I have with Colin's standpoint is that is delivered as absolute fact which it isn't. He claimed Federer is past it and that Murray will never win a Major because he's lost four finals and is now 25. When you examine the facts and apply some historical knowledge of tennis both of those statements are fundamentally flawed. I'm all up for people having opinions and arguing their point but what gets my goat is when people are obnoxious and obtuse.

When you analyse the match the majority of EXPERTS agree that Murray pushed Federer hard in that match and that it was vintage Federer that crossed the line. If Murray had turned in an abject display I'd say there was some merit in Colin's argument. But as someone who has watched every single final he has played he was a very different and improved player at Wimbledon.

He has always had the talent and regularly beats the top three in best of three tournaments. What he has lacked is the temperament to handle the big occasion and five set matches. I am seeing signs that he is progressing on that front.
Click to expand...

Tiger, with respect, I never said Fed was past it. If you're going to take issue with I've said fine, but stick to what I said. I said he's past his best and I stand by that 1) because despite his brilliant tennis he doesn't look as dominating and 2) his results back up that he's not as good now as he was 3 years ago. How many slams do you think he'll win over the next 2 years ? 2 maybe ? If I asked you that question 3 years ago I dount you'd have said only 2.

Murray handled things for a set and a half, then was easily beaten and burst into tears. Not exactly the signs I'd look for in someone improving, and improvinmg quickly enough
 
richart said:
Perhaps Federer is as good as he was three years ago, but Nadal and definitely Djokovic have improved ?
Click to expand...

+1 I think they are better at handling him. colint your description of amurray's performance is not only disrespectful but it's also off the mark. That second set was heading to a tiebreak until Federer produced two moments of brilliance. I do agree that in the final two sets Federer went up a gear but I'd attribute that more to the change of conditions, which he excels in, than a dip in Murray's performance.

If you look at Feds record he dominated three of the Majors. If there wasn't a clay court slam we'd probably not hold Nadal in such high esteem. The elephant in the room is that Fed's a daddy to two year old twins, which does coincide with a drop in slam dominance, so perhaps mentally he's not as sharp as he was. Technically, he is sheer class but the quality of play, especially from Djokovic suggests the others are closing the gap.

For my money there has been an erosion of his aura, similarly to what has happened to Woods. The other guys have worked out strategies to beat him and that has boosted their confidence they can.

You criticise Murray for crying yet it is Federer who is the most prone if the two to emotional outbursts in victory and defeat. The real question is how much time Federer wants to spend away from his young family. I have a feeling he wants an 8th Wimbledon title and a 20th slam before he hangs up his racket. I reckon he'll have achieved both those things in two years time.

However, I would never suggest he is past his best. Tennis is a game of skill, fitness and mental fortitude. He has bucket loads of all three. When his legs go, which doesn't look likely, you may have a case.
 
The problem with the drop shot to Federer is not only does he play on or inside the base line, so has less distance to run than someone like Nadal, he also has the best hands in tennis. Where as most players would just get the ball back in play, Federer can hit winners from tight into the net.

By playing from right on the baseline he cuts the angles down, so even when Murray was serving fast into the corners, he was able to block his returns back. He must have the best hand eye co-ordination of any player to play this way, and his half volleying from the baseline, hitting winners at times is stunning. Anyone that has played the game will know how difficult the shot is to to time on a consistant basis, let alone hit the shot with such power.

A truely great player, and I very much doubt we will ever see another one like him. Unfortunately due to the surfaces they play on, tennis players are going to get bigger and stronger, and thump it harder and harder from the baseline. Touch, finesse, even slice will become a thing off the past
 
Tiger said:
My one criticism of Murray would be that he tried the drop shot to often, especially in the second set when Federer was on the ropes. It l
Click to expand...

Thats a Sign of mental tiredness & not thinking straight tho Tiger, I dont think Murray could sustain hitting the ball that hard for more than 2 full sets , if he had won the 2nd set , then maybe adrenalin would have kicked in & RF head may have gone down a bit

.. As i said before he needs to hide negative emotion a bit more , some of the challanges he called werent even close , showing he was looking for help from others , or geting a breather .. & good players will eat you alive at the smallest sign of weakness..

Its quiet possible he will win a grand slam , prob is , RN a genius on clay , NJ a genius on hard court & RF a genius on grass .. & they all good on the other surfaces aswell .. unfortunate that 3 of the greates players of all time were around as he was/is peaking aswell ,
 
Tiger you've said my description is wide of the mark (and also disrespecful although why I should be showing him respect alludes me), but then basically agreed with me. I said he was in the match for a set and a half and then was easily beaten, you said Fed went up a gear in the final 2 sets so effectively saying the same. Whether Murray wilted or Fed went up a notch or both, he was still only in the match for a set and a half. I'm not really clear as to why the Murray fanboys can't accept that ? When the top guys raise their game Murray gets blown away, he kept his compusure right through the tournament until the last few sets when the old petulance crept in because he knew as much as anyone that the writing was on the wall. I rasied the tears because you can't claim that a player is on the right road mentally when they burst into tears, surely ?

It's a fair point raised by Rich that the others may have raised their game and so making Fed look like less of a player, but personally he just doesn't look the same. Whether that's mental because of his young family etc we'll never know.
 
Mungoscorner said:
Tiger,save your typing finger mate,your posts have been excellent,but sadly its just encouraging the Troll to type more bile.
Click to expand...

Mungo, typing an opinion different from others on the forum isn't trolling. Irrelevant personal posts such as yours are closer to the mark. Contribute to the debate or stay out of it
 
Doon frae Troon said:
Do you guys actually play tennis?Or are you just armchair experts.
Click to expand...
I turned my hand to it unsuccessfully in my youth and concentrated on football and cricket instead. Have always had an enormous interest in the sport though, followed it closely and massive respect for those who play it to the top players standard. I don't think you have to be a top player to have the necessary knowledge for informed debate though, unless you are drilling down into very technical areas. Where I have got some knowledge is in performance sport environment. Colin I haven't agreed with you because the premise of your arguments have been that Federer is past his best ( I don't think he is) and that Murray will never improve enough to win a Major (I think he's getting better). I'm not a fanboy of anyone as that implies a blind following and support of an individual without any basis in fact. From what I have seen from friendships and training with high level athletes is that it's not all about talent. Some it is about mental strength. I think that's the missing ingredient for Murray and he seems to be improving in that area.
 
I think Murray has the strength but his 'body language' is poor. I get upset when the armchair experts on here say he gives up.
One bright spark complained about him giving up in the 3rd round when he was 18 years old and his body was no where near developed.
I can relate this to a group of young golfers who were approaching England boys selection. The Pro and I installed a drill of never looking dissapointed if they hit a poor shot. Our example was that the selectors were 100 yards away and would have no idea whether the shot was chunked or thinned.
In latter years one of our boys won shot of the year with a fantastic tee shot that turned a Ryder Cup match [for the whole team] I saw him a few months later and he reminded me of their training. 'It wasn't a great shot I hit it a bit fat and got lucky' he said.
 
I would say that mental strength and body language go hand in hand but that's semantics really ;).

I like the idea about never displaying emotion on a golf shot I'll have to try that one. My mental golf game is massively weak!!
 
colint said:
Mungo, typing an opinion different from others on the forum isn't trolling. Irrelevant personal posts such as yours are closer to the mark. Contribute to the debate or stay out of it
Click to expand...

Oh your a Mod now as well as a Troll ?
You clearly don't like Murray,and your trying to justify your criticism of him and his tennis based on your opinion of what makes a good/great tennis player.
As for "irrelevant personal posts" i'm doing nothing more than voicing my opinion,Have a look back through the thread and you'll find that i'm not the only person doing this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Golf Course Ownership Structure
Replies
8
Views
665
doublebogey7
D
MarkT
FootJoy AMA
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
13K
Biggleswade Blue
B
MarkT
  • Locked
Win a pair of the all-new FootJoy Premiere Series!
7 8 9
Replies
167
Views
42K
abjectplop
A
Crazyface
Why Is Golf On The Decline?
8 9 10
Replies
194
Views
26K
sunshine
S
F
Rickg Memorial Trophy 2020
8 9 10
Replies
195
Views
36K
Old Skier
Old Skier
Top