Wimbledon Day 13, Sunday 14th July

noleisthebest wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

barrystar wrote:I think Federer’s shoulders should be broad enough to take ‘digs’ like that. Why should Djoko acknowledge Federer as the best ever when, as far as he is concerned, he’s not done yet. If he doesn’t like Fed that’s fine by me.

Exactly!
It's a big boys game tennis....

Actually, it’s called the Gentlemen's Singles.

That’s a thing over here. It requires a certain type of grace, even saying things to be nice about it. You do t have to offer effusive praise but you have to behave in a certain way.

He’s a Serb, sure, but you’d have thought someone might have tried to explain it.

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "gentleman"...never mind.

I’m English. We do.

Daniel2 wrote:

DEC1M8 wrote:

Daniel2 wrote:Nadal has a chance of equaling or beating Fed's slam haul (with the aid of so many FO) but I get most pleasure in knowing Novak won't.

Nadal seems to be ageing tho, his movement is bad now as you’d expect. However Djokovic seems as fast as ever??
Honestly I think Djokovic is a huge threat to Feds slam count, I don’t think Rafa is.

As fast as ever?  Did you just watch that match?  A 38 year old kept pace and played better than him.  He was as worn out as Fed at the end.  No way will he last another 3 years at the top.  Prob not even 2.  He's coming to the end - you'll see.

Yeah I watched it. Djokovics shots were shit, but his movement and retrieval seemed fine. I hope you’re right, but I doubt it. Nadal declining, next gen are shit, Djokovic as he said will look to play on till 37, who can stop him?

Slippy wrote:Amazing match. Novak some way short of his best but took his chances when he needed to. Starting to get into the discussion as the greatest Wimbledon champion now. 

Overall, unless someone else can step up, one of Novak or Rafa look nailed on to win the US Open. Entirely plausible that by next year’s US Open both Rafa and Novak could be up to 19.

yep, he managed to win with a dodgy shoulder. Pure will, determination and heart. I cannot adore him enough!

noleisthebest wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Is it okay for a 27yo man to cry on a train?

no, suck it up and grow up, this is a good opportunity to practise.

The old man blew it, had no balls, for the third time....it's embarrassing....switch to Nole camp.

I have a feeling if this is an attempt to convert more people to Nole fandom, it won’t be successful.

noleisthebest wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Is it okay for a 27yo man to cry on a train?

no, suck it up and grow up, this is a good opportunity to practise.

The old man blew it, had now balls, for the third time....it's embarrassing....switch to Nole camp.

Yes, see, this is needless. Ciao.

DEC1M8 wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Is it okay for a 27yo man to cry on a train?

It’s the sad moments that make the victories more special. Embrace it.

You're a better man than I!

summerblues wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Is it okay for a 27yo man to cry on a train?

Yes.  But this did not feel like a crying match to me.  You have chances, you do not take them.  There should be consequences.

Novak didn't take his chances to go 40-15 down though, did he?  He got lucky. Again.

Slippy wrote:Entirely plausible that by next year’s US Open both Rafa and Novak could be up to 19.

Well well well, slow down here.  Congrats to Nole and all.  16 slams is impressive.  But let's not have Rafa and Nole much closer to Fed.

I doubt Nole will make it.  Still feel Rafa by far the bigger threat.  But stopping him from getting 19 here I hope will go a long way to keeping him at bay for good.

That was exhausting to watch, think I'm done with watching tennis for the foreseeable future haha. Congrats to Nole, felt Federer was clearly better for most of that match, should have won the first 4 sets with the tennis he was playing.

Feds greatest performance was probably in giving that speech after the match. Strange that on paper, this is a much worse loss than the one to Nadal but it doesn't feel as bad though it's pretty bitter.

I thought the crowd was actually pretty fair and muted throughout most of the match, be interesting to hear if anyone thought differently? I'm not sure what to make of that speech from Djokovic or his demeanour, had shades of AO12 final about it, guess I know how Nadal fans felt. I don't mind that he doesn't say Federer is the greatest of all time, by comparison last year I thought he was way more empathetic to Anderson. To be fair Federer was a bit of a letdown in 2009 in that department towards Roddick though he was much younger then than Djokovic is now.

I thought it was impressive how so many of his groundstrokes were pushing Djokovic back. Are the courts so much slower or is Djokovic's defense that good? Federer had this on his racquet but I don't think it should ever have been close enough for those kind of nerves to play a part; his tennis for the kind of surface you'd expect from Wimbledon is that far ahead of Djokovic's I think.

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

bogbrush wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

barrystar wrote:I think Federer’s shoulders should be broad enough to take ‘digs’ like that. Why should Djoko acknowledge Federer as the best ever when, as far as he is concerned, he’s not done yet. If he doesn’t like Fed that’s fine by me.

Exactly!
It's a big boys game tennis....

Actually, it’s called the Gentlemen's Singles.

That’s a thing over here. It requires a certain type of grace, even saying things to be nice about it. You do t have to offer effusive praise but you have to behave in a certain way.

He’s a Serb, sure, but you’d have thought someone might have tried to explain it.

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word "gentleman"...never mind.

I’m English. We do.

gentleman is a concept, not an english invention.

DEC1M8 wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

luvsports! wrote:Is it okay for a 27yo man to cry on a train?

no, suck it up and grow up, this is a good opportunity to practise.

The old man blew it, had no balls, for the third time....it's embarrassing....switch to Nole camp.

I have a feeling if this is an attempt to convert more people to Nole fandom, it won’t be successful.

It's not for the weakhearted, that's for sure...enjoy Fedal fakery...

noleisthebest wrote:
It's not for the weakhearted, that's for sure...enjoy Fedal fakery...

It's not fake, they genuinely like and respect each other. Djokovic's attitude I think grates both of them.

DEC1M8 wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
It's not for the weakhearted, that's for sure...enjoy Fedal fakery...

It's not fake, they genuinely like and respect each other. Djokovic's attitude I think grates both of them.

I hope it grates them real good!

On another note, I don't mind most of NITBs gloating. It's all good and if that's how she wants to celebrate, fair enough. I am a little confused at this accusation that Fed has no balls though. His whole game is balls to be able to play like that and not only make it close but look the superior player for most of that. He was the one attacking and pushing the issue in most of the rallies and most of the points. To keep playing with an attacking mentality on these slow as molasses courts takes more balls than Nadal or Djokovic imo.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:That was exhausting to watch, think I'm done with watching tennis for the foreseeable future haha. Congrats to Nole, felt Federer was clearly better for most of that match, should have won the first 4 sets with the tennis he was playing.

Feds greatest performance was probably in giving that speech after the match. Strange that on paper, this is a much worse loss than the one to Nadal but it doesn't feel as bad though it's pretty bitter.

I thought the crowd was actually pretty fair and muted throughout most of the match, be interesting to hear if anyone thought differently? I'm not sure what to make of that speech from Djokovic or his demeanour, had shades of AO12 final about it, guess I know how Nadal fans felt. I don't mind that he doesn't say Federer is the greatest of all time, by comparison last year I thought he was way more empathetic to Anderson. To be fair Federer was a bit of a letdown in 2009 in that department towards Roddick though he was much younger then than Djokovic is now.

I thought it was impressive how so many of his groundstrokes were pushing Djokovic back. Are the courts so much slower or is Djokovic's defense that good? Federer had this on his racquet but I don't think it should ever have been close enough for those kind of nerves to play a part; his tennis for the kind of surface you'd expect from Wimbledon is that far ahead of Djokovic's I think.

Yeah, tough to watch but imagine to play, and then come out and behave that well. That’s class.

The dig isn”t failing to call him the GOAT (that’s unnecessary), it’s giving him the “one of the best” dig. And no real recognition of the balance of play over the 5 hours. But hey, if it doesn’t appeal to him to be classy then that’s ok, he just shouldn’t be confused why crowds around the World think he’s a wanker and support whoever he’s playing.

I thought Federer fell short with Roddick that day too, but it was more error and clumsy than calculated. Andy certainly never seems to have held any grudge over it.

He's a fecking genius

bogbrush wrote:

break_in_the_fifth wrote:That was exhausting to watch, think I'm done with watching tennis for the foreseeable future haha. Congrats to Nole, felt Federer was clearly better for most of that match, should have won the first 4 sets with the tennis he was playing.

Feds greatest performance was probably in giving that speech after the match. Strange that on paper, this is a much worse loss than the one to Nadal but it doesn't feel as bad though it's pretty bitter.

I thought the crowd was actually pretty fair and muted throughout most of the match, be interesting to hear if anyone thought differently? I'm not sure what to make of that speech from Djokovic or his demeanour, had shades of AO12 final about it, guess I know how Nadal fans felt. I don't mind that he doesn't say Federer is the greatest of all time, by comparison last year I thought he was way more empathetic to Anderson. To be fair Federer was a bit of a letdown in 2009 in that department towards Roddick though he was much younger then than Djokovic is now.

I thought it was impressive how so many of his groundstrokes were pushing Djokovic back. Are the courts so much slower or is Djokovic's defense that good? Federer had this on his racquet but I don't think it should ever have been close enough for those kind of nerves to play a part; his tennis for the kind of surface you'd expect from Wimbledon is that far ahead of Djokovic's I think.

Yeah, tough to watch but imagine to play, and then come out and behave that well. That’s class.

The dig isn”t failing to call him the GOAT (that’s unnecessary), it’s giving him the “one of the best” dig. And no real recognition of the balance of play over the 5 hours. But hey, if it doesn’t appeal to him to be classy then that’s ok, he just shouldn’t be confused why crowds around the World think he’s a wanker and support whoever he’s playing.

I thought Federer fell short with Roddick that day too, but it was more error and clumsy than calculated. Andy certainly never seems to have held any grudge over it.

Yeah Federer often gets blamed for that jacket that he was actually clueless about. I wish he'd recognised the closeness of the match, I guess he did as time went by and he talked with rodddick again when Roddick was interviewing him.

Is "one of the best" a dig? I guess it is, but is there an alternative he could have used that wouldn't have sounded off? I do think that if Djokovic desired the crowds love as many suspect he does, he missed an opportunity. It left me slightly colder towards him as a result, even had me questioning whether I was right in supporting him over Nadal last year haha.

I do feel for him as there's no reason he shouldn't be loved as much as Nadal as neither of their games are anything special in the sense of the magic and wonder that Federer's has. Surely deep down there must be some awareness of this?

From my perspective anyway, I don't think Rafa and Djokovic are close in terms of watchability.
Nadal's rallies generally result in either him ripping forehands on the attack, or he's being punished and on the defence- even then he can come up with screamers, i.e. banana shots. Nadal's opponent also get more opportunity to hit out and produce hot shots.
Djokovic's rallies tend to be him being able to keep it neutral for most of it, but but the end he's too consistent with his deep balls, and the opponent goes long.

It had a similar effect on me. I’ll be behind Nadal in future, Slam record regardless, because I just like people who win well even more than lose well. Trouble is that it’d be ok if he had a character like Kyrgios who doesn’t mind getting crap off the crowd but he wants the love too but doesn’t realise why people give it to Federer and Nadal and not to him.

What would I have said in his place? Probably stuff about being run to a standstill, how he had nothing left to give, still can’t believe he somehow finds himself with the trophy. Don’t want to say GOAT? Cool, just leave rating out then. It’s easy, if you want to do it.

It’s always in the upbringing, always. Nadal comes from an ultra-professional sporting family. They know the game. Federer is obviously quite cultured so he gets it too. Murray was always excellent too.

Murray was a whining bitch on the court and a SJW on Twitter.  Good riddance.

Good to see Fed fans approve of my pro-Nadal stance in case of Djoko.

Djoko and his 7 fans are just psycho bullshit

And who said it a day ago, the match is on Fed racket, well damn right it was

Castle was absolutely insufferable to listen to watching on BBC. Henman and Becker were insightful and balanced but it seems Castle has an anyone but Fed attitude and I thought he just liked Nadal  It didn't help that he talked more than them two put together as well.

Everyone was saying Djok was gonna hammer Fed... but look at his matches and shite draw this year.  Fed had this match won so many times.

Hours have passed and on reflection it still hard to digest. Djokovic to his credit grew stronger at the business end of the sets he won. Looked after his serve when it mattered. 

Federer had this match in his hands and that's what will hurt the most. He wasn't chasing the match to keep in it, but more chasing to win it. And maybe that's where some of the over-eagerness to finish the points off quickly in the match proved his undoing. More so at 40-15 with championship points. 

There's 2 schools of thought here. One would suggest his time is done in terms of winning slams if he is lose them in this manner, however the other school suggests if he can get himself in such positions (even with his big rivals) that there could be still more left in the tank for one last hurrah. 

I recall a couple of posters here saying this won't be like the 2014 or 2015 finals and it wasn't. When I reflect on how far off he was of Djokovic's level those days and his level today, it's frightening the difference. More so when you factor in the respective ages. 

It's so bitter this defeat, but I think he can come back from this.

Of course he can come back....at Basel Open.

GS are done I think for good, unless Nadal is in the final with Fed 

Jahu wrote:And who said it a day ago, the match is on Fed racket, well damn right it was

Modesty forbade me from mentioning that, but I did say it and it certainly was.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Castle was absolutely insufferable to listen to watching on BBC. Henman and Becker were insightful and balanced but it seems Castle has an anyone but Fed attitude and I thought he just liked Nadal  It didn't help that he talked more than them two put together as well.

He’s been that way for over a decade.

I guess some former pros of such limited talent resent the genius; the better ones like Becker and Henman appreciate it.

I only picked up the "anti"? fed sentiment when he was playing Nadal, guess I never really noticed it otherwise. Pretty infuriating to see the extent of his analysis reaching as far as counting the length of the rally and overlooking that Fed hit 2-3 down the line forehands close to the line as well as other attacking shots and to just chalk that up as great from both of them. Then when Federer made errors he'd be banging on about how great that was from Djokovic.

Another reason I overlooked it might be that he's always been pro Nadal, similarly in the Kyrgios match earlier, Kyrgios would wack Nadal's return of his serve wide or into the net in the tiebreak and he'd be gushing over how great that was from Nadal. Maybe he just favours defensive players?

40-15 serving for the 9th title and gets broken. That’s got to hurt. I suspect he’ll get on with it. It has been pretty amazing to me these last two matches how he has stuck with Nadal and Djoko even during long rallies. He has gotten closer to them since 2011-2016. I’d expect their respective declines to be quicker. We’ll see. I think Fed appreciates and respects how important they are to his legacy more easily than they do. Whatever happens they cannot take his period at the top away from him. And losing a Wimbledon final to a guy 5 years younger than you so that you stay on 8 wins and 20 slams overall is the very definition of a first world problem. If he was classy in defeat (I did not see) I think he gets that too.

Jahu wrote:Good to see Fed fans approve of my pro-Nadal stance in case of Djoko.

LOL.

Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

bogbrush wrote:

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Castle was absolutely insufferable to listen to watching on BBC. Henman and Becker were insightful and balanced but it seems Castle has an anyone but Fed attitude and I thought he just liked Nadal  It didn't help that he talked more than them two put together as well.

He’s been that way for over a decade.

I guess some former pros of such limited talent resent the genius; the better ones like Becker and Henman appreciate it.

Hard to treat a commentator or even pundit seriously if they are more renowned for GMTV! 

My only criticism of Henman was his admiration for rallying on grass. Was hoping he'd be the more purist of the bunch. His line on the that first BP Federer was masterful "He got the shot he wanted and missed it" 

Just a shame he isn't on commentary more. 

Castle loves a soundbite.

The BBC for the most part have been awful (especially on the womens side) the Women's Final being the pinnacle when all they bleated about was how good friends Serena was with Meghan and also how Serena was a mother and how impressive she is doing what she is doing. No respect what so ever for Halep and beating she was dishing out. 

Sam Smith needs booting out. The worst kind of feminist there is. So bloody pro Williams.

Tenez wrote:Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

I expected to lose to Nadal (closely) but to be similarly close to Djokovic. This weekend was a revelation from the point of view of his current level. When fit (like he has been this fortnight) the game of tennis is still on his racquet.

Tenez wrote:Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

Yes, Federer did play well, but obviously not well enough to convert one of the two championship points.
And it had nothing to do with exhaustion and you know it.

You are a sore loser.

Tenez wrote:Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

That's quite reserved. I expected a bit more frustration from yourself

In fairness I don't think even age was a factor. The fact Djokovic was drawing breath after that 4th set and was looking flustered said a lot to me in terms of where Djokovic is himself. I think the rallies were more exacting on him than on Federer given how much Federer was making him work. RBA made Djokovic work, but Federer made him work harder given the reluctance to shift from the baseline. Federer looked quite composed.

I look back to that BP in the first set, where Federer had that FH lined up and missed it and I think that became a theme for the match. Those points that carried more significance and often the FH let him down. His court position in the latter stages of the fifth worried me as he seemed miles away from shots going down his FH side. 

The first TB was a kicker. Djokovic's first serve went missing for most of the match and Federer couldn't make the inroads in those early return games that he should've. I thought for the most part Federer's serve held up well and the fact he started serving at the speeds he usually does was hugely encouraging. 25 aces on that court is immense! 

Federer's game for me looks so much more solid. The fact over the course of this tournament he has made less UE's than Djokovic suggests he is no longer leaking higher amounts of UE's. Large in part to how he has shored up the BH with the racquet. From a groundstroke perspective his game hasn't looked any stronger than it does now. 

The stinger in all of this aside from the ridiculous 94 winners he hit is the fact Djokovic wasn't in this match in the slightest. He hung on and hung on and took his chances when it mattered after the bulk of the work had been done. You could say it's clever but for me more Federer just wobbled.

You dont think age was a factor?!!!?

Tenez wrote:You dont think age was a factor?!!!?

Given there were no break points even allowed until serving 5-1 in the 4th, and then they began falling like confetti, we have only two explanations; after many hours on court Djokovic began to return far, far better than at any time in the match or after that time Federer, feeling his near-38 years and the Nadal semi, lost some pop and control on the serve.

It doesn't change anything but logical thinking is always appealing so..... let me think which it could be...….. hmmmm

Tenez wrote:Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

Fed losing big points is not new. He has been doing it since the beginning. I've seen him lose matches from total winning positions most of the times the opponent isn't ready to give it to Fed. Any time when the opponent refuses to go away, Fed's serving starts to wobble. 

Some earlier ones I can remember:

1. 2005 AO loss to Safin in SF, 
2. 2005 WTF loss to Nalbandian 
3. Rome loss to Nadal.
3. 2009 final loss to Delpo
4. 2010 USopen SF loss to Djoko
5. 2011 USopen SF loss to Djoko

This is where I think Fed is not mentally as tough as Djoko/Nadal. Nadal and Djoko since 2011, they will have the opponent earn everey single point. 

From 40-15, he got too eager to finish it off. 

On big points, Nadal/Djoko take some extra time, let the breathing get normal, let the opponent wait an extra few seconds of anxiety. Get your focus absolutely on target and make sure to hit the 1st serve. Nadal/Djoko just won't serve until they are absolutely ready to. Fed just misses some of these skills and flows out in the moment.

He isn't mentally as tough now.  Again, 2004-7 he was a demon and never would have let this match slip.  But Nadal and Djok won't be doing shit at 38.  Age was the main difference and Federer still outplayed him.

bogbrush wrote:

Tenez wrote:You dont think age was a factor?!!!?

Given there were no break points even allowed until serving 5-1 in the 4th, and then they began falling like confetti, we have only two explanations; after many hours on court Djokovic began to return far, far better than at any time in the match or after that time Federer, feeling his near-38 years and the Nadal semi, lost some pop and control on the serve.

It doesn't change anything but logical thinking is always appealing so..... let me think which it could be...….. hmmmm

Yes it doesn't change anything but most here think Federer is on the decline physically since 2007 so not thinking that 12 years on his decline had no factor in the match???? I am a bit puzzled.

Even Djokovic was exhausted....so imagine if he was 6 years older.

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:Losing 2 MPs again v Djoko is immensely frustrating but let's look at the positives:
- Federer fought like a lion in spite of his physical exhaustion. 
- his grace on the court made Djokovic'game look even uglier than it is.
- had Fed been 5 years younger it would have been a thrashing... Let alone had Djoko been 38 and Fed 32
- Djoko gets closer to Nadal in slams #. Ideally they will get both 18 slams and be remembered as the Emersons of the open era: that is champions no-one cares off with many dodgy slams.
- and finally don't forget that most of you thought he'd lose to Nadal and be thrashed by Djokovic. I know that makes the 2 wasted point even more frustrating but let's take some perspective.

Yes, Federer did play well, but obviously not well enough to convert one of the two championship points.
And it had nothing to do with exhaustion and you know it.

You are a sore loser.

No I am not. I am actually happy he has shown the world he was still the better player, in spite of his age. If anything I am very surprised that at his age he got to MPs....It would have been great to have teh W....but one or 2 points do they really matter?

I am extremely happy to be french and even quite patriotic but I do not have to show or prove anything about it, unlike hooligans who have a shitty life in ugly suburbs and only exit and get some pride through their football team, or nationality.

Tenez wrote:You dont think age was a factor?!!!?

He was 38 going on court and 38 going off it. 

Look on the flip side. Had he won 3 sets, what would the consensus be? Djokovic is 32 and not the player he was at 25?

Was 38 the reason he lost those key points in the match? Absolutely not. Federer should've won that match in 3. He tightened up in those breakers. That's before you even get to the marathon 5th set. 

He said himself in the pre-match build up he had good rest following the Nadal match and felt quite fresh going into the match. I had reservations of him going 3 sets with Djokovic let alone 5. Djokovic looked more dead on his feet than Fed did. 

There wasn't a time during the match where I thought "He's 38 and that's why he is losing"

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:
You are a sore loser.

No I am not.

I am actually happy he has shown the world he was still the better player, in spite of his age. If anything I am very surprised that at his age he got to MPs....It would have been great to have teh W....but one or 2 points do they really matter?
I am extremely happy to be french and even quite patriotic but I do not have to show or prove anything about it, unlike hooligans who have a shitty life in ugly suburbs and only exit and get some pride through their football team, or nationality.

Oh, I think you are.

And it doesn't take much to show...it seems to be a thin line between "grace" and ugliness with you, no?

The only one sore is you nitb. Someone please get this scum out of here.

raiders_of_the_lost_ark wrote:The only one sore is you nitb. Someone please get this scum out of here.

Ouch, I'm scum now that needs to be banned.

That's the thanks I get for building this forum...never mind.

It was a good ride while it lasted.

Now it's time to fly .

Ciao.

The One and Only (and you all know it)
nitb


LAAAAAAAAAAAAA LA LA LA LA LAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

OH YEAH!

Honestly nitb, this is like watching a car crash of your reputation.

Maybe the smart thig would have been to come on today and say you were pissed yesterday or something and forget it but what you're doing now is wum work.

You're also showing yourself to be a hypocrite having spent ages burrowing so far up Tenez's arse praising Federer and saying how much you thought the World of him that we could only recognise you by your shoes. Now you're just acting like a poster girl for a bad Serbian stereotype.

I think that was a bit rude from ROTLA, NITB never insulted anyone personally and was just mirroring Djokovics confidence, I think calling someone scum based on that is not acceptable.
Also NITB is the most frequent poster on this forum, and provides some diversity with her views, so would be dumb to chase her away.

This reminds me of the aftermath of 2008 which blew 606v2 open because of the pent-up emotions it released.  Nitb has always worn her heart on her sleeve and I cut her some slack for that.

The thing about Djoko which has always intrigued me is the contrast between the 'grit in your shoe' quality he and his family have always radiated and his apparent desire for love & respect.  Early on Fed and others were dismissive of his retirements and there was the 'shut up' moment, and Djoko has always refused to join in the Fedal respectathon (for which I say good for him, frankly, it's a free world).  When he plays he is a sporting presence.  He acknowledges good shots and was about as graceful on Murray's moments of great triumph when he was the fall guy as it is possible to be.  Along with a way of playing that is efficient, the result is to leave me somewhat cold, I am not really bothered by any of it, but the inconsistency is interesting.

Who knows where his career will take him - probably a slam count beyond Nadal, and whilst five slams is a hell of a lot you feel Fed has somehow to pick up one more to be truly safe - but given someone whose style does not float my boat, it may be more interesting to see how his reputation develops away from the Court afterwards.  McEnroe was substantially disliked, but he has acquired 'national treasure' status without looking like a sellout, Connors has very much not, Lendl's work with Murray has enhanced his reputation in the UK at least, Becker has flirted with being the tennis world's Boris Johnson and may be coming back from that particular brink (no doubt the he'll look hard for another).  I wonder about Djoko.

DEC1M8 wrote:I think that was a bit rude from ROTLA, NITB never insulted anyone personally and was just mirroring Djokovics confidence, I think calling someone scum based on that is not acceptable.
Also NITB is the most frequent poster on this forum, and provides some diversity with her views, so would be dumb to chase her away.

Hello there, calling someone a 'sore loser' is a personal attack. Tenez here was being objective looking for positives and some possible reasons( his opinion) for the way the match went. She can count the points with hers. 

 We are all tennis fans and no matter what we think of or who we support in a match,  calling a fan a sore loser is a personal attack. And she was doing it over and over. Hence falling into the definition of an online-scum-wum.

I've not banned her, I don't call for a ban nor do I support it.