i dont know. why don't we wait to find out.
what about you? how do you think you'd do?
thankfully you and i are not placed in such an unenviable position where we are constantly being judged by the whole world in every single gesture, word, action or deed. as you say what conclusions would the world arrive at with regards to us?
unfortunately, every public persona has to endure this situation. it's the price of fame or notoriety; the trade -off that each of them knows comes with the territory.
some of them say and do the right things and fare well with everyone. some...not so much.
But that's kind of the point, though. They can be better or worse at saying the 'right' (i.e the most diplomatic) things; at presenting the 'right' image, but it doesn't necessarily have any bearing on who they are in real life. You don't get to know someone by watching them make press conference statements, and I think it's pretty ludicrous people believe they can divine intimate details about someone's personal life and personality from the handful of words they used to answer a particular question, in a presser.
So frankly, I don't see why there's so much fuss made over a players' constructed
media image. You don't know Nadal and you don't know Federer, and the image of them that is projected in the PR
performances they do, is a fraction of who they really are.
federer is not a bad guy or a terrible person but he DOES say some things that are objectionable and despicable. where i have a problem with him is that he is very clever in disguising it and therefore manages to suck some people in into thinking he is being charming and gracious and nice. their problem not mine!!
Except that Federer has said nothing objectionable in this case, and you haven't demonstrated otherwise.
i don't think you read or understood my post.
please read it again and try to see exacly what part of federer's statement i was referring to and what i said about it.
i was not saying that players don't sometimes lose because they played badly. usually that is the case for whatever reason.
i was addressing the "sometimes" part of his sentence. where he grudgingly admitted that "some" of his losses were because his opponent played better than him. as if to suggest that this is not always the case and there are other reasons or excuses for his "other" losses. that is what i addressed because it is condescending. with one word he has taken credit away from "some" of the players who have managed to beat him because as the "sometimes" suggest, it wasn't because they played better than him on that day.
If it's an objective fact that players lose because they play badly, and if Federer is included as one of those players, then sometimes
Federer will lose because he played badly! That's just the truth. It's not discrediting anyone to admit that.
You're saying Federer should pretend
that all of his loses came because his opponent played much better than his 'normal' level?