• Thank you all very much for sharing your time with us in 2025. We hope you all have a safe and happy 2026!

Rafa Nadal

I simply think Nadal was too good. Body language, petulance or not it got to a point where Murray had played arguably the best tennis he could and was losing. How hard must it be in that environment against that opponent to try and lift yourself when you've hit him with all you've got and still can't find a way through.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Unfortunately there are 3 players at the moment that are just better than Murray. If Murray plays his best and Djokovic/Federer/Nadal play their best Murray loses.

Whatever sport you're playing sometimes you just have to hold your hands up when you're beaten by the better man/team/player.
 
Murray played superbly in the first set, when his first serve was firing, and he was aggressive on his ground stokes. He was keeping the points short.

As his first serve percentage dropped, holding serve became harder, and Nadal hardly missed a ball in the last three sets. As soon as the rallies got longer Murray was always going to lose to probably the player with the greatest ground stokes ever. Noticeable that Nadal also put in a lot of short sliced balls, which Murray was forced to try and hit a winner off, or get caught out of position.

To be ranked below Nadal, Federer and Djokovic is no disgrace, with the first two guaranteed to be among the greatest players ever.

Murray is the greatest British player since the 1930's, and without him from my point of view, tennis would not be so interesting to watch.
 
But think about it this way. You are playing a person at golf in matchplay. They have beaten you on a few occasions in the past but all things being equal you are a better player. In the match they get off to a flyer and are 2up before you can blink. Then they inexplicably three putt from six foot and give you a foothold back in the match. After that there shoulders slump, they sigh after every bad shot, they toss their clubs disconsolately into the bag. What does that do to you? It breeds your confidence because you feel they are crumbling.

My point is when you are playing someone who is better than you, no matter how the game is going, don't give them a greater advantage by looking beaten. Whether you think you are or not is a moot point the damage is already done.
 
But think about it this way. You are playing a person at golf in matchplay. They have beaten you on a few occasions in the past but all things being equal you are a better player. In the match they get off to a flyer and are 2up before you can blink. Then they inexplicably three putt from six foot and give you a foothold back in the match. After that there shoulders slump, they sigh after every bad shot, they toss their clubs disconsolately into the bag. What does that do to you? It breeds your confidence because you feel they are crumbling.

My point is when you are playing someone who is better than you, no matter how the game is going, don't give them a greater advantage by looking beaten. Whether you think you are or not is a moot point the damage is already done.
Click to expand...

Hold on Murray does that when he is winning, which is 75% of all his matches. He is just naturally grumpy. At the very highest level, i don't think it makes any difference. Nadal isn't going to look over the net, see Murray with slumped shoulders and think he has an advantage. He knows full well that someone of that ability, is never beaten until the last point.
 
Murray played superbly in the first set, when his first serve was firing, and he was aggressive on his ground stokes. He was keeping the points short.

As his first serve percentage dropped, holding serve became harder, and Nadal hardly missed a ball in the last three sets. As soon as the rallies got longer Murray was always going to lose to probably the player with the greatest ground stokes ever. Noticeable that Nadal also put in a lot of short sliced balls, which Murray was forced to try and hit a winner off, or get caught out of position.

To be ranked below Nadal, Federer and Djokovic is no disgrace, with the first two guaranteed to be among the greatest players ever.

Murray is the greatest British player since the 1930's, and without him from my point of view, tennis would not be so interesting to watch.
Click to expand...

Very well put Rich.
 
Too much press hype.
Nadal has 10 slams, Murray has 0, they're roughly the same age. That tells you simply Nadal has too much class for Murray. If Murray played great and Nadal poorly he may have had a chance but the way Nadal was playing yesterday no-one could live with him.
Don't think Murray's a quitter but I agree the despondency kicks in too early and the opponent sees that, needs to wear more of a poker face.
Madal's returns were really deep to the baseline, Murray just seemed to set Nadal up by hitting too short much of the time.
Quite tough for Murray that at any one time there are 3 players, not just one, that are a class above him.
FWIW I think in the era when Hewitt and Ivanesivic won Wimbledon ten years ago or so, Murray coudld've beaten them.
I can't see Murray winning any slams with Djokovic and Nadal as good and young as they are. Federer has seen better days and is fading away now.
 
However i do think Murray has the potential to win a Major,unlike Monty :)
Click to expand...


Not a chance unless he a) reduces the number of unforced errors in his game and b) learns how to serve properly.

His 1st serve % is well below that of the other top 10 and this has been the case for years and yet for some reason he doesn't seem to think that he needs to change it because he gets his fair share of aces.

Murray v Nadal is one of those occasions when I hope that both players can lose.
 
Murray choked its as simple as that.

He's a great player but when it comes to the crunch games he cant handle the pressure. Thats the difference between great players like him and grandslam winners like Fed, Nadal, etc.
 
Murray isn't good enough to win a slam. Yes he's up against Nadal at his peak, but before that you had Feferer, Sampras, etc etc. It's not bad luck, it's insufficient ability. Top 4 in the world ? Great, but the press and tennis community are guilty of heaping praise on someone who is, in the grand scheme of things, an also ran. It's the equivalent of us wetting our pants about Paul Caseys achievements.
 
Why is it when someone loses to a better player, they have 'choked'. Henman lost to Sampras in most of his semi's at Wimbledon, and he knew how to play a bit on grass. ;)

Without Henman and Murray over the last 10/15 years we would have had no British interest in Wimbledon beyond the first couple of days of the first week. In the last 6 years only one player Del Potro has won a major apart from Federer, Nadal and Djokovic. In the same period in golf there have probably been 10-15 different winners ?
 
I don't think Henman was a choker, maybe he did when he lost to Goran in the semi, but in general I think he got the best out of his ability. Murray does seem to come way short when the chips are down, but I think that's more to do with the top players being able to raise their game another notch in the finals, semis etc
 
I agree with Sampras being a level above Henman but Goran Ivanosivic(sp) come on. Henman was way ahead until that rain break and just seemed to throw it away. Its not just Tennis though is it. It seems to be every sport at all levels including football etc. The only sport we seem to have that physcological edge is cricket. I hate putting England down as I'm as patriotic as they come but it would be nice to see British/English athlete/team go into a competition with a genuine belief they can win it.
 
It comes down to media hype. Look at the young British player in the semi final - Murray out so the eyes of the world turn on him. He's plastered over every paper as the next big hope. He doesn't need all that build up on the day of his biggest game to date.

I know it is part and parcel of any sport these days (didn't take the press long to slam Haye) but surely all this build them up to knock them down hysteria has to affect performance to some degree. Personally I do think Murray can win a title but probably not on grass and Australia or the US offer his best hope. Didn't see the final today but Djokovic (?) must have played well. As others have said if the top 3 are all on their game they are simply better than Murray. That isn't just sport but life. No matter what you do there will always be someone that does it better.
 
Murray has the game to win the US open but it's his mentality that lets him down. It must be hard having 60 million people on your shoulders
 
Henman on Murray today from BBC Sport website

"Mentally, I think his attitude had been fantastic on the court and he has been more in control," Henman told BBC Sport. "The trouble is dealing with adversity."

Henman highlighted an incident during the match with Nadal, when Murray, having won the first set, lost his way after blowing a big chance to break early in the second.

"Having missed that forehand during the fourth game of the second set, there was definitely some sort of a reaction as he lost seven games in a row," said Henman.

"He got distracted from his game plan and game style."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Don Barzini
Atheism and Theism
8 9 10
Replies
187
Views
15K
SwingsitlikeHogan
SwingsitlikeHogan
Mandofred
Garage/yardworks
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
Tashyboy
Tashyboy
B
My Woburn Final
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Burnsey
B
Orikoru
Worst Ryder Cup Captains?
2 3 4
Replies
66
Views
3K
craigstardis1976
C
S
Index keeps going down!
Replies
9
Views
1K
mrpar
M
Top