Federer asks: Why do they want to shoot me so soon? [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer asks: Why do they want to shoot me so soon?

habibko
06-23-2008, 05:31 AM
From The Times, June 23, 2008

Why do they want to shoot me so soon?

Neil Harman, Tennis Correspondent
The most recent interviews with Roger Federer have been conducted as if one was participating in a fireside chat, with the Wimbledon champion dressed in smoking jacket, sipping on a brandy. So what should the approach be this time — to hell with it, let’s cut straight to the French Open final? Or lull him into Wimbledon first and then surreptitiously slip Paris in the conversation? The wound was so recent and so deep.

As I mulled these things over, the five-times champion glided in, slipped into one of the All England Club’s superior leather sofas and if the expectation was of finding someone whose brain was mush after the worst performance in terms of games won by a world No 1 in the history of grand-slam finals, who had been finally cowed by slavering critics, or was concerned that he is about to become the victim of a lawn mowing, then I was in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong man.

The greeting is warm and eye contact immediate. He is dressed head to toe in white, the RF hat dispensed with, nothing to hide (the new cardigan is being saved for Centre Court today). He is enjoying being a tour guide to Gary Hamilton, his Australian fitness trainer, the newest member of Team Fed. “For me, this is a very, very special place and it’s nice to pass those feelings on to somebody else,” he says. “I came here first in the juniors, in 1998, when I was one of so many, but now I am the one.”

He knows his place, does the man. “Winning the singles title once was incredible because this is Wimbledon, the most important, and then two becomes three and then four and then five and five is definitely a different league again. Six would be extraordinary and I have a great opportunity.”

OK, that’s enough luxuriating. Aren’t you hurt, devastated, aren’t you less of a player because of what happened in Paris? “Well, I’ve come from Halle, where I didn’t drop serve and that was only the second time in my career, with Doha, that that has happened,” he said, disarming once more.

“I decided straight after the French final I wanted to go there. Normally, I sleep on a decision like that, but it wasn’t as if the final had been particularly tough; it was over so quickly. I’d felt physically fine throughout the tournament. I was over it fast.”

Really? Truly? “Rafa was outplaying me in the first set. In the second, I had a good start, but he fought back. I had a small chance, but when he is up two sets to love, he does not waste time. I didn’t think at the start it would happen the way it did, but it did happen and it’s, ‘Oh well, what the hell.’ Rafa will be the favourite in Paris for years to come, but why should I not believe I can beat him? A player who has won 12 grand slams can never go into a final thinking, ‘What’s the point?’ I never will. On any given day, on any surface, against any player, I am the favourite. I felt I had him figured out, the conditions were in my favour, but it wasn’t meant to be. What am I supposed to do?”
Rafael Nadal’s reaction to his fourth consecutive victory at Roland Garros was respectful and brief. “He could have rolled around for ten minutes if he’d wanted to, I would not have had a problem with that, seriously,” Federer said. “It was his moment. The problem of a win like that is that he had seen it coming for half an hour, 45 minutes before, and he probably felt he could not beat Roger Federer by this score, so it was an awkward situation for him. He almost didn’t dare to celebrate too much.”

The response to the scale of Federer’s defeat was eerie. Former champions who had sung his praises before the final fell silent. The wordsmiths were damning. Federer preferred a healthy dose of perspective. “The thing I have never felt comfortable with this year has been the glandular fever and how I reacted to it,” he said. “What was the best time to say I had not been well in Australia [in January, when he lost in the semi-finals to Novak Djovovic]? I wasn’t sure if I should say anything at all. Should I say something in Dubai [the tournament after Australia], perhaps after I had won a title; what was the best time? For me, it wasn’t fun to be hiding something, people asking me in Dubai, ‘How are you feeling?’ and me answering, ‘Fine.’ ”

Eventually, after he had lost to Andy Murray in the first round in Dubai, Federer decided to go public. “Perhaps people did not believe me, but why should I lie?” he said. “Some might say I lost to Novak in Melbourne because of that, but it was not the reason at all. He outplayed me in the semi-final and I have no problems accepting that. There were those who said it was a little excuse and others said, ‘Oh, now it all makes sense.’ When I lost in the semi-finals of Indian Wells and the quarters of Miami, everyone said I was going downhill, but no account was taken of what I had gone through. I suppose I had not given anyone a chance to criticise me for four years and they would want to take that chance.

“That is past, this is the most important time. The period after the French, with Wimbledon, the Olympic Games and the US Open, that is when this season will be decided for me. If I haven’t won any of those titles, then I will agree that this year has not been up to my standards. But let’s wait and see what happens. Sometimes you would like to think people would not want to shoot me quite so quickly, but what can I do?

“I will never be blasé about being No 1. For me, every tournament victory is important. When is it going to end? That is when you have to appreciate them all [55 career titles as we speak] because sometimes, in this career, you can get lost. I am amazed that I have done what I have done, but I want to continue doing it for much, much longer.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/article4192541.ece

:rolleyes:

Mimi
06-23-2008, 05:43 AM
why a :rolleyes: at the end of the message? you don't agree with roger :confused::p

DhammaTiger
06-23-2008, 05:44 AM
Interesting. Thanks for posting.

leng jai
06-23-2008, 05:49 AM
Federer is a mug and really neesd to shut up and accept he is done.

habibko
06-23-2008, 05:51 AM
why a :rolleyes: at the end of the message? you don't agree with roger :confused::p

of course I agree! but I'm glad he is finally giving everyone a piece of his own mind, though he usually lets his racquet do all the talking :worship:

Fedex
06-23-2008, 06:40 AM
Good article.

Allez
06-23-2008, 06:55 AM
No surprises here. Roger loves heaping lots of pressure on himself. In paris he said he believed very strongly that 2008 was his year to win RG. Now he is thinking about a 6th title while Nadal is only thinking about the first match. He is thinking about the Olympics and the USO while Nadal is still thinking about his 1st round at Wimbledon. He allows himself to get sucked into the whole debate about who the favourites are, while Nadal focuses only on himself and his next opponent. Some things never change.:sad:

Best of luck @ Wimby Rogi :angel:

prima donna
06-23-2008, 07:13 AM
No surprises here. Roger loves heaping lots of pressure on himself. In paris he said he believed very strongly that 2008 was his year to win RG. Now he is thinking about a 6th title while Nadal is only thinking about the first match. He is thinking about the Olympics and the USO while Nadal is still thinking about his 1st round at Wimbledon. He allows himself to get sucked into the whole debate about who the favourites are, while Nadal focuses only on himself and his next opponent. Some things never change.:sad:

Best of luck @ Wimby Rogi :angel:
What are you ranting about ?

nobama
06-23-2008, 07:39 AM
No surprises here. Roger loves heaping lots of pressure on himself. In paris he said he believed very strongly that 2008 was his year to win RG. Now he is thinking about a 6th title while Nadal is only thinking about the first match. He is thinking about the Olympics and the USO while Nadal is still thinking about his 1st round at Wimbledon. He allows himself to get sucked into the whole debate about who the favourites are, while Nadal focuses only on himself and his next opponent. Some things never change.:sad:

Best of luck @ Wimby Rogi :angel:How do you know what Nadal is thinking about? :confused:

Caerula Sanguis
06-23-2008, 07:52 AM
Nice update from Roger's state of mind.

DavidW
06-23-2008, 08:31 AM
Nice read. This will likely be Federer's hardest wimbledon for a while with some not even picking him to get him past the Semis. I don't believe he is past it, I just believe that Rafa and Nole have upped their game quite a bit and provide much more of a threat. Should be fun.

Daniel
06-23-2008, 08:41 AM
Wonderful words by Roger
always to the point and smart
no one like you my Roger
:worship: :worship:

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 08:53 AM
Did Federer just say he's the favourite against Rafa at the French? :lol: Anyway, interesting read, but I must admit I've never liked the way Federer carries himself in interviews, it's the only thing I truly dislike about him.

MaryX
06-23-2008, 08:55 AM
Wonderful words by Roger
always to the point and smart
no one like you my Roger

Are you in love with him?Looks like that.

Caerula Sanguis
06-23-2008, 08:57 AM
Did Federer just say he's the favourite against Rafa at the French? :lol: Anyway, interesting read, but I must admit I've never liked the way Federer carries himself in interviews, it's the only thing I truly dislike about him.

I'm curious to what you don't like about his interview. I find it very enjoyable because he speak straight out of his mind without bashing anyone.

ZakMcCrack
06-23-2008, 09:02 AM
Did Federer just say he's the favourite against Rafa at the French? :lol: Anyway, interesting read, but I must admit I've never liked the way Federer carries himself in interviews, it's the only thing I truly dislike about him.

Hmm...let me think about it for an instant - I guess it's mainly because you're just too bloody darn stupid to read and interpretate context-sensitive. You obviously get satisfied by seeing what you want to see and nothing else. As a 12 times Slam holder, reckoned by many as the best ever to have played the game - yes, then you are nolens volens favorite to win it all, in terms of pressure, in any case.

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 09:04 AM
Hmm...let me think about it for an instant - I guess it's mainly because you're just too bloody darn stupid to read and interpretate context-sensitive. You obviously get satisfied by seeing what you want to see and nothing else. As a 12 times Slam holder, reckoned by many as the best ever to have played the game - yes, then you are nolens volens favorite to win it all, in terms of pressure, in any case.

I'm too darn stupid to agree that a player who has lost every time at the French Open to possibly the greatest CLAY COURT player of all time is the favourite to win their encounters there? :retard:

finishingmove
06-23-2008, 09:07 AM
delusional.

but what he thinks of himself is of no relevance.

T2KN
06-23-2008, 09:08 AM
He's got class. :worship:

Technically speaking, because of his #1 position, Fed should indeed always be the favorite, which is of course completely unrealistic, especially here with Rafa's claycourt game. But yeah... The 'casual' tennis viewers do expect the #1 to always win imo.

Mimi
06-23-2008, 09:10 AM
yeah, roger is great, no doubt about it, but it sounds stupid to insist that he will beat nadal in FO after he got a thrashing ....., isn't it wiser tio say this after he beat rafa comprehensively on clay a few times first?:rolleyes:


I'm too darn stupid to agree that a player who has lost every time at the French Open to possibly the greatest CLAY COURT player of all time is the favourite to win their encounters there? :retard:

Knightmace
06-23-2008, 09:14 AM
Good on you Roger

ZakMcCrack
06-23-2008, 09:30 AM
I'm too darn stupid to agree that a player who has lost every time at the French Open to possibly the greatest CLAY COURT player of all time is the favourite to win their encounters there? :retard:

You're missing the point, dude...Try again and read the last sentence of my previous posting to get a grasp of it. Therefore thank you, Cocolate&Rafa ;-)

Gnomey
06-23-2008, 09:43 AM
yeah, roger is great, no doubt about it, but it sounds stupid to insist that he will beat nadal in FO after he got a thrashing ....., isn't it wiser tio say this after he beat rafa comprehensively on clay a few times first?:rolleyes:

As long as he's active and is still playing great tennis, I don't see why it sounds "stupid" for Roger to say he can beat Nadal in FO and that he has the game to. You can't be a successful tennis player (let alone get to where Roger is) if you just give up hope and go "I couldn't do it last time...I won't be able to do it in the future". And besides, you have to at least sound confident in front of the press. How else could he have answered them?
I don't see any arrogance in what Fed's saying so what's the problem?

Anyway, good on him.
With regards to Borg placing him 3rd, Roger said he wasn't disappointed - just surprised. Oh well, I doubt he dwells on it anyway...

A_Skywalker
06-23-2008, 09:47 AM
"I am the favourite. I felt I had him figured out"

Great, I hope you figure him next year again :yeah:

Mimi
06-23-2008, 09:49 AM
i don't think roger will never beat nadal in FO, but i think it would be wiser if he remains a bit less high profile about his chance, its just like Novak's dad told the press "my son will never lose to roger again" but then he got beaten in Monte Carlo, isn't it a bit not too smart to say this?

As long as he's active and is still playing great tennis, I don't see why it sounds "stupid" for Roger to say he can beat Nadal in FO and that he has the game to. You can't be a successful tennis player (let alone get to where Roger is) if you just give up hope and go "I couldn't do it last time...I won't be able to do it in the future".
I don't see any arrogance in what Fed's saying so what's the problem?

Anyway, good on him.
With regards to Borg placing him 3rd, Roger said he wasn't disappointed - just surprised. Oh well, I doubt he dwells on it anyway...

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 09:50 AM
You're missing the point, dude...Try again and read the last sentence of my previous posting to get a grasp of it. Therefore thank you, Cocolate&Rafa ;-)

Nope, sorry, still nothing doing. Yes, he's a 12 times Slam holder... none of those are on clay. He is one of the greatest players of all time...not on clay. He is #1 on every surface... except clay. I suppose it depends if you instantly equate the # to favouratism. Does that mean Davydenko is 'technically' speaking more of a favourite to win Wimbledon than Roodick?

Mimi
06-23-2008, 09:50 AM
:hug::yippee:"I am the favourite. I felt I had him figured out"

Great, I hope you figure him next year again :yeah:

bokehlicious
06-23-2008, 09:51 AM
i don't think roger will never beat nadal in FO, but i think it would be wiser if he remains a bit less high profile about his chance, its just like Novak's dad told the press "my son will never lose to roger again" but then he got beaten in Monte Carlo, isn't it a bit not too smart to say this?

You can't be serious if you compare a 12 slams owner with a one slam wonder brat... :yawn:

Gnomey
06-23-2008, 09:55 AM
i don't think roger will never beat nadal in FO, but i think it would be wiser if he remains a bit less high profile about his chance, its just like Novak's dad told the press "my son will never lose to roger again" but then he got beaten in Monte Carlo, isn't it a bit not too smart to say this?

One should never use the word 'never' like that. Now THAT's arrogance from Djokovic's dad- and to the point of being jinx-worthy.:rolleyes:

Well, I don't think Roger's being high-profile about his chances. The press keep bringing it up and if they ask you if you still think you've got a chance - what else can you say? If it was left to Roger himself, I doubt he even wants to talk about that FO final again and again but what can you do if interviewers throw the same questions in your face everytime?

Mimi
06-23-2008, 10:10 AM
their achievements are not comparable, but what they think of themselves are much the same ;)

You can't be serious if you compare a 12 slams owner with a one slam wonder brat... :yawn:

bokehlicious
06-23-2008, 10:13 AM
their achievements are not comparable, but what they think of themselves are much the same ;)

Brazil is entitled to think they're favourite anytime they enter a football event, Liechstenstein on the other hand would sound arrogant if they were thinking the same... Federer = Brazil, Djokovic = Liechtenstein ;)

ZakMcCrack
06-23-2008, 10:16 AM
Nope, sorry, still nothing doing. Yes, he's a 12 times Slam holder... none of those are on clay. He is one of the greatest players of all time...not on clay. He is #1 on every surface... except clay. I suppose it depends if you instantly equate the # to favouratism. Does that mean Davydenko is 'technically' speaking more of a favourite to win Wimbledon than Roodick?

There we go, because he's widely regarded as one the best - if not the best - ever, the vulgar, who only have a vague notion or smattering of tennis, expect him to win everything - after all, what else could you expect from the best? Sticking to facts and keeping it technical, Nadal was the hot favorite and I never even denied that. I think you insist a little bit too much on the sheer definition of the term "favorite", for the simple reason that we seem to talk at cross purposes ;-)

GuiroNl
06-23-2008, 10:16 AM
I'm curious to what you don't like about his interview. I find it very enjoyable because he speak straight out of his mind without bashing anyone.

I think it's strange that he feels that he's the favourite against Nadal on clay (the 9-1 H2H on clay is clear enough).

Also, I don't like the fact that he transforms Nadal showing respect by not going overboard with his celebrations into Nadal feeling akward because of Federer's greatness.

Other than that it's a fine interview.

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 10:19 AM
....

Federer is not Serb. Thank God.

delusional.

but what he thinks of himself is of no relevance.

This is the most pathetic article I've ever read from Roger. Crybaby at his best. I felt like I read some WTA 'she said she's nicer than me, aaaaaa'.

Good is - nobody cares. Players certainly don't.

I'll start to support and appreciate Nadal much more.

bokehlicious
06-23-2008, 10:19 AM
Also, I don't like the fact that he transforms Nadal showing respect by not going overboard with his celebrations into Nadal feeling akward because of Federer's greatness.

:spit: sure :yeah: :haha: you gotta love haters reading comprehesion :retard:

groundstroke
06-23-2008, 10:20 AM
Great article. The Times has a reputation for providing quality articles.

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 10:24 AM
There we go, because he's widely regarded as one the best - if not the best - ever, the vulgar, who only have a vague notion or smattering of tennis, expect him to win everything - after all, what else could you expect from the best? Sticking to facts and keeping it technical, Nadal was the hot favorite and I never even denied that. I think you insist a little bit too much on the sheer definition of the term "favorite", for the simple reason that we seem to talk at cross purposes ;-)

But I didn't think we were discussing who the 'masses' expect to win each tournament, but about the expectations Federer places on himself? Because it seems we both agree then that Federer is wrong to believe himself that he is the "favourite" to win said matches, which is what he seems to be implying.

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 10:35 AM
I'm curious to what you don't like about his interview. I find it very enjoyable because he speak straight out of his mind without bashing anyone.

I don't buy into all the 'ego king' crap, but I always find Federer cold, distant and somewhat aloof in his interviews, almost to the point of passive aggression. The phrase "he probably felt he could not beat Roger Federer by this score, so it was an awkward situation for him. He almost didn’t dare to celebrate too much." certainly raised an eyebrow from me. The way he talked about his illness aswell, as in, "yes, there was something wrong with me, BUT don't let that make you think it's an excuse or anything...". I don't know, his tone I suppose. I am actually more accepting of Novak's outright cocky attitude, at least he speaks his mind, even if it's often ugly to hear.

groundstroke
06-23-2008, 10:38 AM
You are not delusional at all rafa_maniac, not, you're not crazy about Nadal, you're not a big fan, so of course, naturally that means that you're not biased against Federer, amirite?

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 10:46 AM
I don't know, his tone I suppose. I am actually more accepting of Novak's outright cocky attitude, at least he speaks his mind, even if it's often ugly to hear.

Even we always disagree you're right here. Maybe Roger is 'ego king' but Nadal is THE king (for now at least:))

It so brb 'Nobody loves me, they attack me, they would like to take away my 1st(it's mine!) from me':bigcry::sad:

Chiseller
06-23-2008, 10:49 AM
Trolls are back in time.

rafa_maniac
06-23-2008, 10:51 AM
You are not delusional at all rafa_maniac, not, you're not crazy about Nadal, you're not a big fan, so of course, naturally that means that you're not biased against Federer, amirite?

I'm indifferent to Fed, respectful but not adoring. I certainly much prefer him to Djoko in general, but I hate his interviews.

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 10:52 AM
Trolls are back in time.

Oh, in that case next time OP have to write NOTA BENE - 'only good reactions are welcomed'.

bokehlicious
06-23-2008, 10:53 AM
You are not delusional at all rafa_maniac, not, you're not crazy about Nadal, you're not a big fan, so of course, naturally that means that you're not biased against Federer, amirite?

Rafa fanbase is the only objective one, I thought every mtfer knew that :scratch: :shrug: :angel:

Mimi
06-23-2008, 11:00 AM
nobody is flawless, and thats include roger, i have been here longer than most of you, pete received tons of unreasonable critics even he won a little bit more slams than roger, so what? can't you just relax, being no.1 does not mean all the people have to worship you, i don't think they are critcising roger, just that we don't agree with some of his views :shrug:

Mimi
06-23-2008, 11:06 AM
lol, if rogertards are objective, why you are allowed to said Ivanonic is fat, while for those who said Mirka is fat, it was regarded as a bad joke ;)?

Rafa fanbase is the only objective one, I thought every mtfer knew that :scratch: :shrug: :angel:

bokehlicious
06-23-2008, 11:07 AM
Shut up mimi, please... :rolleyes: :yawn: ;)

Mimi
06-23-2008, 11:08 AM
yeah, i will shut up if you shut up too :wavey:
Shut up mimi, please... :rolleyes: :yawn: ;)

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 11:12 AM
yeah, i will shut up if you shut up too :wavey:

Take care mimi:wavey:

Chiseller
06-23-2008, 11:17 AM
Oh, in that case next time OP have to write NOTA BENE - 'only good reactions are welcomed'.

Since I used the plural of the word "troll" it wasn't only addressed to you.

As a journalist you should actually know the difference between sane criticism and trolling. Therefore I don't understand your objection.

Maybe, who knows. At least this father's son is not 'I'm proud girl' like Swiss. Shame, Helvetia had got many great people from Tell to nowadays. But one day Roger was born.

Mimi
06-23-2008, 11:18 AM
:hug::smooch: you too Take care mimi:wavey:

Beforehand
06-23-2008, 11:36 AM
Rafael Nadal’s reaction to his fourth consecutive victory at Roland Garros was respectful and brief. “He could have rolled around for ten minutes if he’d wanted to, I would not have had a problem with that, seriously,” Federer said. “It was his moment. The problem of a win like that is that he had seen it coming for half an hour, 45 minutes before, and he probably felt he could not beat Roger Federer by this score, so it was an awkward situation for him. He almost didn’t dare to celebrate too much.”

:inlove:

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 02:19 PM
Serbia never had Seles. Stop lying.

:confused: Interesting. Yes, Yugoslavia had Seles, Seles is from Serbia. In case you don't know here are 28 nationalities. So, be:angel: don't 'lying' to me.

Just a bunch of fangirl/gays/boysdrooling over Djokovic and Ivanovic who started watching tennis last month.

I have to thank you coz you talked to 46 years old man who started watching tennis before you born. You didn't hear, here in Serbia (Europe FYI) TV sets existed about 40 years.

Chiseler - I'm representing myself here, job aside. This forum is for fun?

Bascule
06-23-2008, 02:40 PM
:confused: Interesting. Yes, Yugoslavia had Seles, Seles is from Serbia. In case you don't know here are 28 nationalities. So, be:angel: don't 'lying' to me.

I have to thank you coz you talked to 46 years old man who started watching tennis before you born. You didn't hear, here in Serbia (Europe FYI) TV sets existed about 40 years.

Chiseler - I'm representing myself here, job aside. This forum is for fun?

No, my mom had TV at least 45 years ago.

We did follow tennis and had match covers in 80s when I was kid.

Okonsky
06-23-2008, 02:44 PM
No, my mom had TV at least 45 years ago.

We did follow tennis and had match covers in 80s when I was kid.

Bascule, dear, you wrong;) I've wathched Connors, Mr Loyd, Sweeds in midd 70es.

Shabazza
06-23-2008, 02:56 PM
Rafa fanbase is the only objective one, I thought every mtfer knew that :scratch: :shrug: :angel:

There's no such thing as an objective fanbase.

Bascule
06-23-2008, 02:56 PM
Bascule, dear, you wrong;) I've watched Connors, Mr Loyd, Sweeds in midd 70es.

I was talking about myself, Manon.:)
And you know how much I'm younger than you.;)
It was too early for me to watch the matches in 70s.:)

MaryX
06-23-2008, 03:15 PM
Bascule, dear, you wrong I've wathched Connors, Mr Loyd, Sweeds in midd 70es.

I was talking about myself, Manon.
And you know how much I'm younger than you.
It was too early for me to watch the matches in 70s.

... :)
Why do you lie all those tennis educated and informed people?You had TV in '70s and '80s?!And watched tennis?!NO way!
And my mother tells me she's been watching tennis in '60s :eek: she is lying, too :o
It is well known Serbs have been living in caves, drawing on the walls...still do.

About this:
There's no such thing as an objective fanbase.
I agree

jacobhiggins
06-23-2008, 03:50 PM
I think it's strange that he feels that he's the favourite against Nadal on clay (the 9-1 H2H on clay is clear enough).

Also, I don't like the fact that he transforms Nadal showing respect by not going overboard with his celebrations into Nadal feeling akward because of Federer's greatness.

Other than that it's a fine interview.

Nadal did feel akward with the win because he beat the number 1 and arguablly the greatest player ever so easily. Who cares if you don't like it but it's the truth, cry me a river!

Bascule
06-23-2008, 04:06 PM
... :)
Why do you lie all those tennis educated and informed people?You had TV in '70s and '80s?!And watched tennis?!NO way!
And my mother tells me she's been watching tennis in '60s :eek: she is lying, too :o
It is well known Serbs have been living in caves, drawing on the walls...still do.

About this:

I agree

:lol: :yeah:

Fanbase by the definition is biased.:retard:

Johnny Groove
06-23-2008, 04:10 PM
Every fanbase is biased, but others are more classy than others.

RagingLamb
06-23-2008, 04:35 PM
Rafa "almost didn’t dare to celebrate too much" at the FO. Good one Roger.

DDrago2
06-23-2008, 04:44 PM
Roger is basicaly complaining on medias not being transparent. They do not present things to people as they happened.

Bascule
06-23-2008, 06:27 PM
Every fanbase is biased, but others are more classy than others.

Is this from Orwell's "Animal farm"?

:haha:

Allez
06-23-2008, 06:37 PM
How do you know what Nadal is thinking about? :confused:

Because it's what he himself has said time and time again. Everytime he's asked about Roger or the title he says he's not thinking about Roger or the title only about his 1st round opponent. Obviously Roger is not as skilled in deflecting tricky questions.

GuiroNl
06-23-2008, 06:40 PM
Nadal did feel akward with the win because he beat the number 1 and arguablly the greatest player ever so easily. Who cares if you don't like it but it's the truth, cry me a river!

What has me not liking what he said to do with all of a sudden crying :confused:. Lighten up man.

Anyway, how do you know that it's the truth. Did Nadal say it in an interview? Or do you think it's true because of this interview?

Corey Feldman
06-23-2008, 07:24 PM
Rafael Nadal’s reaction to his fourth consecutive victory at Roland Garros was respectful and brief. “He could have rolled around for ten minutes if he’d wanted to, I would not have had a problem with that, seriously,” Federer said. :haha: Loved that part