Tennis, anyone.....?

[BWFC_Insane]

Murray will win the next one - the one he's most suited to winning. Hard court US Open in front of real fans. Today will have given him the belief he can win one.

It won't get any easier than this Wimbledon for Murray thanks to other players beating Nadal and Djokovic.
All he had to do was beat the 5th and 3rd seeds after a succession of no hopers but he still couldn't do it, he surely won't have such an easy route in New York.

Oh deary deary deary me.

Everybody in Team Murray would be absolutely delighted if he only has to play Tsonga in the semi and Federer in the Final in New York.It would be astounding for it to be so easy again.

I'm sure they'd be thrilled with another run including, Karlovic, Baghdatis, Ferrer, Tsonga and the best player to ever walk onto a tennis court who has won the most mens singles grand slams ever in the final.

Piece of piss....

[Worthy4England]

Well maybe they could get round it by playing no-one you've ever heard of.

There's only one of your list that's ranked higher than Murray, which generally means, he's largely better than all the others.

They generally don't have that good a record against Murray - think he edges it against all of them - Karlovic and Tsonga fairly comfortably.

That just leaves Federer, who out of the people ranked higher than Murray has the worst record against him - although he's never lost on grass against Murray - then again neither have Nadal or Djokovic.

So yes, as draws go, this one was about as good as it's likely to get.

[Puskas]

What about his blubbering, though?

Like a little girl. Or, worse, a West Ham fan.

Man up, Murray, and grow a pair.

What's wrong with a firm, manly handshake at the end? The loser saying to the winner, "Congratulations, sir." The winner responding, "Thank you, sir - well played yourself". Both men pick up their medals, maybe briefly acknowledge the crowd (small wave, none of these histrionics so popular nowadays), then depart.

That's all that's necessary. None of this breaking down in tears. Stiff upper lip.

We're turning into a world of girly-men.

[BWFC_Insane]

Well maybe they could get round it by playing no-one you've ever heard of.

There's only one of your list that's ranked higher than Murray, which generally means, he's largely better than all the others.

They generally don't have that good a record against Murray - think he edges it against all of them - Karlovic and Tsonga fairly comfortably.

That just leaves Federer, who out of the people ranked higher than Murray has the worst record against him - although he's never lost on grass against Murray - then again neither have Nadal or Djokovic.

So yes, as draws go, this one was about as good as it's likely to get.

Murray is 4 in the world. Because he is bloody good. Thats not to say that his run to the final wasn't tough. It was. Up to the semi (and owing to Nadal getting knocked out) it was about as tough a grand slam run as you can get.

Nadal, Djokovic and Federer have won 29 of the last 30 grand slams between them. Its a crazy era where there are 3 absolute behemoths of the game all competing. Usually you might have to get past 1 like that in extreme circumstances 2. To have 3 is a bit unfortunate.

Murray has non the less reached 4 grand slam finals and in each come up short against one of the 3 behemoths.

I don't think there is any disgrace in that and all he can do is keep trying to improve and hoping he gets a break along the way.

Wimbledon was a chance, to suggest he might not get another like it is well, looking into a crystal ball. And to suggest it was easy? Not a chance. If it were a case of purely going by ranking then Murray might as well just pitch up to lose a semi final every time, and we'll not bother with the rest.........

[Worthy4England]

Well maybe they could get round it by playing no-one you've ever heard of.

There's only one of your list that's ranked higher than Murray, which generally means, he's largely better than all the others.

They generally don't have that good a record against Murray - think he edges it against all of them - Karlovic and Tsonga fairly comfortably.

That just leaves Federer, who out of the people ranked higher than Murray has the worst record against him - although he's never lost on grass against Murray - then again neither have Nadal or Djokovic.

So yes, as draws go, this one was about as good as it's likely to get.

Murray is 4 in the world. Because he is bloody good. Thats not to say that his run to the final wasn't tough. It was. Up to the semi (and owing to Nadal getting knocked out) it was about as tough a grand slam run as you can get.

Nadal, Djokovic and Federer have won 29 of the last 30 grand slams between them. Its a crazy era where there are 3 absolute behemoths of the game all competing. Usually you might have to get past 1 like that in extreme circumstances 2. To have 3 is a bit unfortunate.

Murray has non the less reached 4 grand slam finals and in each come up short against one of the 3 behemoths.

I don't think there is any disgrace in that and all he can do is keep trying to improve and hoping he gets a break along the way.

Wimbledon was a chance, to suggest he might not get another like it is well, looking into a crystal ball. And to suggest it was easy? Not a chance. If it were a case of purely going by ranking then Murray might as well just pitch up to lose a semi final every time, and we'll not bother with the rest.........

It wasn't as tough as it can get - Karlovic has never beaten him in an ATP match - his semi final opponent has beaten him once in 6.

What would have been tough, would have been facing Nadal along the way who has a much better record against him than Federer. The only person he faced ranked higher was in the Final - which in the event he lost fairly comfortably.

I'm not suggesting it was easy, you've always got to beat those you're playing against, but it certainly wasn't too tough either, as runs to a Final go.

His 4 grand slam final appearances, the first time he meets someone ranked higher than him, generally, out he goes. The only exception was 2008 US when he beat Nadal. (Nadal retired in 2010? against him in the Oz)

Pat Cash winning in 1987 from ranked 11 was a tough draw. Murray's this year at Wimbledon wasn't.

[BWFC_Insane]

Well maybe they could get round it by playing no-one you've ever heard of.

There's only one of your list that's ranked higher than Murray, which generally means, he's largely better than all the others.

They generally don't have that good a record against Murray - think he edges it against all of them - Karlovic and Tsonga fairly comfortably.

That just leaves Federer, who out of the people ranked higher than Murray has the worst record against him - although he's never lost on grass against Murray - then again neither have Nadal or Djokovic.

So yes, as draws go, this one was about as good as it's likely to get.

Murray is 4 in the world. Because he is bloody good. Thats not to say that his run to the final wasn't tough. It was. Up to the semi (and owing to Nadal getting knocked out) it was about as tough a grand slam run as you can get.

Nadal, Djokovic and Federer have won 29 of the last 30 grand slams between them. Its a crazy era where there are 3 absolute behemoths of the game all competing. Usually you might have to get past 1 like that in extreme circumstances 2. To have 3 is a bit unfortunate.

Murray has non the less reached 4 grand slam finals and in each come up short against one of the 3 behemoths.

I don't think there is any disgrace in that and all he can do is keep trying to improve and hoping he gets a break along the way.

Wimbledon was a chance, to suggest he might not get another like it is well, looking into a crystal ball. And to suggest it was easy? Not a chance. If it were a case of purely going by ranking then Murray might as well just pitch up to lose a semi final every time, and we'll not bother with the rest.........

It wasn't as tough as it can get - Karlovic has never beaten him in an ATP match - his semi final opponent has beaten him once in 6.

What would have been tough, would have been facing Nadal along the way who has a much better record against him than Federer. The only person he faced ranked higher was in the Final - which in the event he lost fairly comfortably.

I'm not suggesting it was easy, you've always got to beat those you're playing against, but it certainly wasn't too tough either, as runs to a Final go.

His 4 grand slam final appearances, the first time he meets someone ranked higher than him, generally, out he goes. The only exception was 2008 US when he beat Nadal. (Nadal retired in 2010? against him in the Oz)

Pat Cash winning in 1987 from ranked 11 was a tough draw. Murray's this year at Wimbledon wasn't.

When you're ranked 4 in the world you are always (likely) to only play lower ranked players up to the semi finals.

That does not necessarily mean that every single tournament is "easy" up till that point. Murray has had easier runs at Wimbledon up to the semi final point than this years, which was tough, facing players with experience and ability. You might say you'd expect him to beat them because he's ranked number 4, but that doesn't take away from the fact that there were far easier runs on offer. Equally Nadal went out, to a lower ranked player (one you'd likely never heard of) and it raised eyebrows.

Murray going out to Ferrer or Tsonga would have in comparison been far less shocking.

Its also somewhat churlish to suggest he lost the final "fairly comfortably". He was lets not forget a yard either way on a passing shot from serving for a 2 sets to love lead. And the match went well over the 3 hour mark. That is not a routine win. I don't think anyone would argue that Nadal, Federer, Djokovic are better, but thats why they've shared 29 grand slams out of the last 30 between them. Quite remarkable really, to have three players at that almost god-like level.

I know you're desperate to criticise Murray cos he doesn't smile or cos he's from Scotland or whatever, but I think the fact he's not won a grand slam will sit heavily with him. And thats a good thing.

But equally he's achieved more than any other British male player post WW2 and for that he should and will be celebrated. And he's still a far better example of a sportsperson than any of the ENGLAND football team..............

[Puskas]

Jeremy Bates was better, anway.

[Prufrock]

Feck me the nationalistic, Scottish/British bollocks really does my head in. The only people who care are small minded English people desperate to find sommat to be angry about cos the fecking empire was lost.
Jesus fecking Christ. He's Scottish, British, what the fook does it matter? I'd rather a bloke like Murray represented our nation than Henman, who the feck cares which side of a border they happened to have been born?

Errr isn't the Scottish National Party in power North of the Border?

I'm sure you'd like to make something more of this than there is, but I'm fairly sure last time you posted about our national team, you cared little about it. Why should we support someone from another nation then? Surely you'd care even less.

Coz he isn't from another nation. We may have different teams (given our very different histories, and associations) for football and rubgy but we live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Yes he is. It's just that the nasty Empire doesn't recognise it as such. I'm just ahead of you dark ages youngsters in my recognition of this.

Hmmm

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Yesterday was odd as I didn't cheer a single point as I don't feel an affinity for either player.

I don't actively wish Murray ill, but as far as I'm concerned he's just from another small country and might as well be Croatian for all I care.

[Prufrock]

His interview at the end with the tears was inadvertently funny. His voice went all Gary Neville.

Difficult to feel much warmth for Federer, I don't actively dislike him, but his cool assured arrogance is very difficult to like, but feck me when he turns it on he is a bit good at tennis!

[TANGODANCER]

Is this thread about tennis, or pride and prejudice?

[Jakerbeef]

What always bothered me about Federer is I get the feeling he doesn't quite think the others are fellow sportsmen. A bit like Barcelona, say. Looking downward I guess. Understandable in his case.

What's wrong with a firm, manly handshake at the end? The loser saying to the winner, "Congratulations, sir." The winner responding, "Thank you, sir - well played yourself". Both men pick up their medals, maybe briefly acknowledge the crowd (small wave, none of these histrionics so popular nowadays), then depart.

That's all that's necessary. None of this breaking down in tears. Stiff upper lip.

Cos the dour, stony-faced stuff has already worked so well for him in the PR stakes?

Novotna was a very popular champion after she won with the memories of her tearful collapse still fresh after losing from a set up and a few breaks up. Short-term he'll get a lot of 'ya big jessie!' but in the long-term the show of commitment will endear him rather than detract. Maybe he's a blubber? It's certainly more warranted than Rog' having a big wail after losing when he already had a bundle of grand slam titles.

Strangely, crying when winning seems to be considered almost acceptable. But surely crying after so many missed opportunities makes more sense. Heck, I wouldn't have begrudged Jimmy White a total breakdown after that 6th final...

Asking them not to jump up and down and celebrate seems harsh. Milk the moment, it don't last long.

[Hoboh]

Is this thread about tennis, or pride and prejudice?

Roll on the womans beach volley ball

[Puskas]

Strangely, crying when winning seems to be considered almost acceptable. But surely crying after so many missed opportunities makes more sense. Heck, I wouldn't have begrudged Jimmy White a total breakdown after that 6th final...

Asking them not to jump up and down and celebrate seems harsh. Milk the moment, it don't last long.

Crying should never be acceptable at sports, winning or losing. It shows weakness.

Robert Smith had the truth of it.

"Milking the moment" is almost as bad. A firm handshake, as I said, should be sufficient celebration. Let's not go overboard.

[Worthy4England]

I'm quite looking forwards to Blubbfest '13.

Will Wimbledon be held in London next year?

[Hoboh]

I'm quite looking forwards to Blubbfest '13.

Will Wimbledon be held in London next year?

Depends if the Glazers buy it I suppose!

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

Murray will win the next one - the one he's most suited to winning. Hard court US Open in front of real fans. Today will have given him the belief he can win one.

It won't get any easier than this Wimbledon for Murray thanks to other players beating Nadal and Djokovic.
All he had to do was beat the 5th and 3rd seeds after a succession of no hopers but he still couldn't do it, he surely won't have such an easy route in New York.

Oh deary deary deary me.

Everybody in Team Murray would be absolutely delighted if he only has to play Tsonga in the semi and Federer in the Final in New York.It would be astounding for it to be so easy again.

If Federer is back to number one in the world does that mean Murray would play him in the semi.?
On Hard Court that gives him a big chance of making a Final for me - and he's beaten both the others on hard as well.
i think i'll lump on

[lovethesmellofnapalm]

Feck me the nationalistic, Scottish/British bollocks really does my head in. The only people who care are small minded English people desperate to find sommat to be angry about cos the fecking empire was lost.
Jesus fecking Christ. He's Scottish, British, what the fook does it matter? I'd rather a bloke like Murray represented our nation than Henman, who the feck cares which side of a border they happened to have been born?

Errr isn't the Scottish National Party in power North of the Border?

I'm sure you'd like to make something more of this than there is, but I'm fairly sure last time you posted about our national team, you cared little about it. Why should we support someone from another nation then? Surely you'd care even less.

Coz he isn't from another nation. We may have different teams (given our very different histories, and associations) for football and rubgy but we live in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Thanks for the support. It's your prerogative to support who you want. But "Britain" ot the UK are not "nations"
England Scotland Wales and Ireland are.

[Puskas]

Thanks for the support. It's your prerogative to support who you want. But "Britain" ot the UK are not "nations"
England Scotland Wales and Ireland are.

Really? Do you have anything to back up that assertion? It seems to me that the word "nation" means different things depending on what people are arguing for.

I don't have a good dictionary to hand, so let's use the internets:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/nation" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

noun
a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory:

the world’s leading industrialized nations

Seems like you could use that to argue that Britain and the UK are just as much nations as England, Scotland, etc...

[TANGODANCER]

a large body of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular state or territory:

So that's The Reebok out as a nation then?