Federer running scared of Murray?- Article says it all [Archive] - MensTennisForums.com

Federer running scared of Murray?- Article says it all

tennizen
01-17-2009, 08:55 PM
Best Article Ever!

Federer running scared of Murray - Supercharged Scot in prime shape for Grand Slams

by Malcolm Folley

With his muscular physique, relaxed mind and scintillating form, Andy Murray is a man without fear as greatness beckons at the Australian Open over the next fortnight.

Murray has breached the mind of serial champion Roger Federer, tamed the raging bull of tennis, Spaniard Rafael Nadal, and watched Novak Djokovic make an unconvincing start to the year with losses in Brisbane and Sydney to undermine his confidence ahead of his defence of the title.

Against this backdrop, there is an awakening within the corridors of tennis that Murray, who opens up against Romanian Andrei Pavel, will be a remorseless force from now on, not withstanding the regal brilliance of Federer, the marbled muscle of Nadal or the precociousness of Djokovic.

Tim Henman, the Pom who took more than his share of ridicule in Australia, understands the impact Murray is making worldwide. 'I have no doubt in my mind that Andy will win more than one Grand Slam,' said Henman, who appeared in six semi-finals at Grand Slam tournaments.

'At 21, he's only scratched the surface, yet he's already No 4 in the world and he's won nine titles. He will achieve far better and bigger things than me.'

The size of the shadow Murray has cast across the game ahead of the Australian Open, which begins in Melbourne tomorrow, can be measured by the discomfort being expressed by Federer.

The 27-year-old from Switzerland clearly dislikes being reminded of the damage Murray has inflicted on him in the past three months when the British No 1 beat him three times in succession. Each time Federer led by a set.

'Usually, if I win the first set, it figures I'd win the match,' said Federer nine days ago, on a cool, dark night in the Arabian desert after Murray reduced him to a pale imitation of a man who possesses an enviable 13 Grand Slam titles.

'It's a disappointing statistic,' said Federer, clearly irritated, just as he was when he learned that Murray shared the head of the betting market with him.

Only Nadal has condemned Federer to defeat on a similar scale. Federer can contend with a rivalry with the Spaniard, who beat him at the French Open and again in a titanic Wimbledon final; but to him, Murray is still a pretender without a crown. Yet Federer had to concede in Qatar: 'If Andy carries on like he is, he will have a shot at being No 1.'

Federer's one win over the Scot in the past three years was claimed, significantly, in the US Open final four months ago, when Murray was hit by fatigue and stagefright. Yet Davis Cup captain John Lloyd suspects the balance is now heavily weighted in Murray's favour.

'Roger can't get any better,' said Lloyd, the last British player to appear in the Australian Open final 33 years ago. 'He's played at a fantastic level, but he doesn't like to play Andy nowadays. He's moaned out here because the bookmakers have made Andy favourite to win it, something that would have been unthinkable even six months ago.

'To Federer, it's ridiculous and he doesn't like it. But I think the fact that he wants to make a dig at Andy in public is a sign of Federer's increasing vulnerability where Murray is concerned.'

Murray insisted: 'I don't have a problem being favourite or not. I guess Roger would prefer to be favourite himself, so that's absolutely fine. It doesn't change my mindset going into the tournament. It's obviously a good thing (to be seen as a threat). When you do become a contender for a Slam, the seedings and stuff help with your draws. It gives me that little bit of extra confidence.'

After dispensing first with Mark Petchey, then enduring a volatile 18-month period with American coach Brad Gilbert, Murray has placed around him a group of people he likes and trusts; coach Miles Maclagan, fitness trainers Jez Green and Matty Little, and physiotherapist Andy Ireland. Murray eats with them, plays football-tennis with them, and works himself to a standstill when the need arises. His change of attitude is unmissable.

Australian Rod Laver, still the only man to have won all four Grand Slams in the same year since tennis became professional 40 years ago, recalled watching Murray during his time with Gilbert.

'They were fighting each other,' he said last week. 'I sat there thinking: "What's going on? This is not a game of tennis." That was the rock bottom of his career. He is a different person now. He actually looks interested in the game. His knowledge is uncanny, he is tactically brilliant and he has amazing anticipation.'

True praise, indeed. Murray presents a humble account of how he developed his tennis education. 'I wasn't particularly good at school,' he said. 'But I've always been pretty smart on court. I find players' weaknesses because I watched so much tennis when I was younger.'

Nadal is aware that, in the months since the US Open where Murray beat him, the man from Dunblane has become an even greater threat: 'When you win in Cincinnati, Madrid and in Doha last week, playing against Federer and Andy Roddick, you are ready to win a Grand Slam tournament, no?'

Vida
01-17-2009, 09:15 PM
what papers is that from tennizen?

tennizen
01-17-2009, 09:17 PM
^ Daily Mail, UK

StanShapkar
01-17-2009, 09:22 PM
Bla , bla, bla.....

13>0

the cat
01-17-2009, 09:25 PM
The problem for Murray against Federer is that Murray and Federer will only play each other late in a grand slam and Roger gets to the semi's and finals of slams easier than Murray does. Advantage Federer. There is no doubt Murray was tired and Federer was not when they played in the 2008 U.S. Open final. And that showed in the final. Murray obviously has the game to compete with and beat Federer but if he's more tired than Federer when they play in slams then the match is in Federer's hands.

Vida
01-17-2009, 09:32 PM
^ Daily Mail, UK

thought so. fed is established champ and all, many like to kiss his feet and the return of investment is very good, but andy... well, apart from backhand, forehand and serve, he's got british press as a weapon as well. it could prove invaluable especially against those who like to read good stuff written about them - guys with big egos.

NinaNina19
01-17-2009, 09:35 PM
Bla , bla, bla.....

13>0

How many did Federer have at Murray's age :rolleyes:?

Jaz
01-17-2009, 09:36 PM
This thread is worth trolling.

No one cares, we know that when the cruch comes Federer can still play well, is capable of beating Murray. The British journos are making out that Murray is unbeatable (far far from it...)

ORGASMATRON
01-17-2009, 09:36 PM
I dont care what these people say lol, Roger will always be better then Andy Candy. This is really becoming pathetic and boring...

ORGASMATRON
01-17-2009, 09:42 PM
How many did Federer have at Murray's age :rolleyes:?

Ive heard this reply a few times as well and once again its getting boring and pathetic. Its dumb cos you might as well ask how many slams have Murray won in three years? Just to remind you that Federer has won 8 slams in three years. Murray i wont even bother to mention.

Vin Judah
01-17-2009, 09:43 PM
bullshit article

Henry Chinaski
01-17-2009, 09:48 PM
federer is wearing black at the moment to hide the shit stains that appear on his shorts every time the name "Andy Murray" flashes through his chicken shit brain. It's all starting to make sense. The Daily Mail has always been a veritable font of wisdom.

Radalek
01-17-2009, 09:54 PM
How many did Federer have at Murray's age :rolleyes:?

Hm, Nole is 7 days younger than Murray and got his slam 1 yr ago...By your logic Nole>Murray>Federer...as some poster above said 13>0...

dam0dred
01-17-2009, 09:55 PM
Ah yes, sports journalism at its finest. Full of facts and reasonable statements grounded in reality...

ORGASMATRON
01-17-2009, 10:09 PM
Ah yes, sports journalism at its finest. Full of facts and reasonable statements grounded in reality...

Love it :haha:

Dini
01-17-2009, 10:31 PM
Tabloid. That is all I am saying- no further comment.

Clydey
01-17-2009, 11:02 PM
This Murray is good.

Matt01
01-17-2009, 11:50 PM
Bla , bla, bla.....

13>0


5 > 2

foolish pleasure
01-18-2009, 12:00 AM
Best Article Ever!

heehee... murry went from being this whiny head case, cussing out his box during every match, to being everyone's favorite player like overnight...how did that happen :confused:

luie
01-18-2009, 12:02 AM
5 > 2
1 GS +1MM victory > 5 MM victory.:lol::lol::lol::lol:

holagirl56
01-18-2009, 12:04 AM
I especially love the source. Unbiased journalism at its finest.

Dini
01-18-2009, 12:06 AM
heehee... murry went from being this whiny head case, cussing out his box during every match, to being everyone's favorite player like overnight...how did that happen :confused:

To be fair its not overnight. The hard work he has put in over the last two years has paid off and people feel he has all the tools to win it, as he not only has showed that he can win against the very best but also has the head and the mind of a champion. Having said that I think people are going a bit over board with the favourite claims, he has made a QF and a final, and tail end of 2008 was mighty impressive but the British media especially are hyping it all up more than it deserves to be honest.

scoobs
01-18-2009, 12:22 AM
That article is nauseatingly over the top.

How to set someone up for a fall.

Matt01
01-18-2009, 12:24 AM
1 GS +1MM victory > 5 MM victory.:lol::lol::lol::lol:


I was talking about the h2h :p

Diprosalic
01-18-2009, 12:29 AM
How many did Federer have at Murray's age :rolleyes:?

rafa had a couple and nole 1

so rafa > nole > murray > fed?

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 12:36 AM
5 > 2

This dont mean jack. Its like saying Rafa is better then Roger.

rafa_maniac
01-18-2009, 12:37 AM
Ugh, yet another reason for me to feel disdain for Murray and hope he loses - to shut the British press the hell up. I've never been a raging Fed fan, but I'm well and truly in his corner on this one.

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 12:46 AM
Ugh, yet another reason for me to feel disdain for Murray and hope he loses - to shut the British press the hell up. I've never been a raging Fed fan, but I'm well and truly in his corner on this one.

:worship:

l_mac
01-18-2009, 12:51 AM
Bla , bla, bla.....

13>0
:lol: The greatest argument of all :worship:
Ive heard this reply a few times as well and once again its getting boring and pathetic. Its dumb cos you might as well ask how many slams have Murray won in three years? Just to remind you that Federer has won 8 slams in three years. Murray i wont even bother to mention.

Hm, Nole is 7 days younger than Murray and got his slam 1 yr ago...By your logic Nole>Murray>Federer...as some poster above said 13>0...

Nadal>Nole>Federer

Spes
01-18-2009, 01:08 AM
One of the worst, most clearly biased and not afraid to show it articles I have read in quite a while...and this coming from someone who likes Murray more than Federer.

Andi-M
01-18-2009, 01:11 AM
When will the English tabloids ever learn. If Murray dosen't win now the great British Murray will turn into arrogant Scottish Mugray.

lina_seta
01-18-2009, 01:19 AM
murray is gathering more enemies and faster too than djoko on his rise..

just cant wait to see this guy lose now

EternalxJourney
01-18-2009, 01:21 AM
Great article. I hope Roger reads this and puts it up by his bedpost so he'll see it every night before he goes to bed.

Arkulari
01-18-2009, 01:26 AM
wait a sec, wasn't Roger still 21 when he won Wimbledon? and he won his first AMS at the age of 20 :scratch:

as far as I know, he became 22 in august that same year, so he won it at the same age Muzza is now

to me it goes like this:

Roger = Rafa


Djoker
Muzza (very very close and will go over Djoker if he wins the AO)


Tsonga

maybe Nalby if he is on










The rest...

Corey Feldman
01-18-2009, 01:31 AM
f'ing moronic fedtards in this thread :rolleyes:

stop ripping Murray for things that arnt his doing

Arkulari
01-18-2009, 01:33 AM
same thing that happened with american media, they like to write a ton of bullshit on their own and that does them more harm than good :shrug:

Thanos
01-18-2009, 02:20 AM
I dont care what these people say lol, Roger will always be better then Andy Candy. This is really becoming pathetic and boring...

just like your threads and your persona on here :)

pogotheorist
01-18-2009, 03:34 AM
When will the English tabloids ever learn. If Murray dosen't win now the great British Murray will turn into arrogant Scottish Mugray.
The tabloids know what they're doing. Fairness and consistency have nothing to do with it. They don't care about truth - just the noise level. Making Murray into a villain by misrepresenting a joke (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/othersports/article-1033143/Des-Kelly-Federer-8217-s-winner-taking-defeat-like-man-son.html) was good business once:for the hard of thinking, let me state here that: I did the interview with Andy Murray and Tim Henman a couple of years back where Murray talked about 'supporting whoever England were playing against'.

It was a clearly a sarcastic remark. He was responding to teasing from your columnist about Scotland's absence from the 2006 World Cup and derisive laughter from the mischievous Henman.

It was reported in that context in this newspaper at the time and the exchange was run as a transcript.

A couple of days later a red-top got excited about the comments, lifted a couple of them into a 'story' that took on a life of its own and from there the truth was lost.

It is astonishing how this has run and run.

An extremely talented columnist pal of mine declared unequivocally the other day that: 'I don't think his remarks about England were a joke. There are some people who just don't like the English and I believe in my marrow that Murray is one of them.'

Based on what?

I did the interview - and it was a joke, as I have said before
So building him up for a fall and then howling if he takes it suits them perfectly.

Arkulari
01-18-2009, 03:42 AM
besides, the daily mail has SUCH credibility... :rolleyes:

http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/original/0221newspapers.jpg

all of those have less credibility than Bush :rolleyes:

HarryMan
01-18-2009, 03:53 AM
So if clown wins the AO this year (wont happen, but still), the British media will proclaim him as the greatest tennis player in the history of the game. :retard::retard::retard:

I hope Fed (or even Nadal or anyone else) rips apart this Scottish clown.

Arkulari
01-18-2009, 03:57 AM
I actually don't dislike muzza, but the brit press should lay off him for a while, that pressure is doing him more harm than good, he's a very good player, if he wins the AO it'll be great, otherwise he'll move on :shrug:

RagingLamb
01-18-2009, 04:23 AM
horrible article. how many of those victories would Murray trade for the USO final?

Arkulari
01-18-2009, 04:35 AM
ALL of them :shrug:
same way he'll trade his latest victories over Rafa for that one in Wimbledon, he could have reached the final that way

~Maya~
01-18-2009, 04:56 AM
andy murray is going to surprise everyone this year, he is getting better and stronger by every game. He will deffinately win a slam or two, or even three this year Go muzza!!!
Posted by margaret j
United Kingdom
10:15

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/yoursay/index.html

3 slams for Murray this year :rocker2:

:D

kyleskywalker007
01-18-2009, 06:06 AM
Nadal is aware that, in the months since the US Open where Murray beat him, the man from Dunblane has become an even greater threat: 'When you win in Cincinnati, Madrid and in Doha last week, playing against Federer and Andy Roddick, you are ready to win a Grand Slam tournament, no?'

:haha::haha::haha::haha:

Yeah, sure, because beating Roddick nowadays is like a sign of being a true champion. Guess it is full of champions out there then.....I mean, Roddick couldn't even win a final against Delpo in Washington....

Now, to another topic, the thing is that, Murray is not hated because of who he is or what he does, it is the media that makes you hate him if you happen not to be a fan of him. It is almost like if you couldn't find middle ground.
The guy himself plays some amazing tennis but you get so pissed off at these idiots who apparently have nothing better to do...Now, if Murray wins AO he will be a god; if not, I don't want to imagine what they are gonna post!

I guess it is everywhere the same. When Roddick was at his best, I guess that he was believed to be the next best thing by the american press. I can tell you that in Argentina, every year is the same about newspapers talking about Nalby and the slams. Now, that happens, but, another thing is to actually read and believe that bullshit.

Has anyone checked the tennis section of "The Times"? I challenge you to count how many times the word Murray is repeated in the headlines...Here's the link....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/

PS: Hope you are a little patient, because it is gonna take some time....:rolleyes:

Foxy
01-18-2009, 06:44 AM
This dont mean jack. Its like saying Rafa is better then Roger.

Is he not? Get a clue?

lina_seta
01-18-2009, 07:03 AM
[I]


Has anyone checked the tennis section of "The Times"? I challenge you to count how many times the word Murray is repeated in the headlines...Here's the link....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/tennis/



HOLY SH!T
thats what i call hype

bokehlicious
01-18-2009, 07:35 AM
The British Press :drool: :hearts:

:retard: :retard: :retard:

next...

Clydey
01-18-2009, 08:09 AM
Ugh, yet another reason for me to feel disdain for Murray and hope he loses - to shut the British press the hell up. I've never been a raging Fed fan, but I'm well and truly in his corner on this one.

You can't really blame Murray for the fact that the press are going way over the top.

Clydey
01-18-2009, 08:12 AM
f'ing moronic fedtards in this thread :rolleyes:

stop ripping Murray for things that arnt his doing

Exactly. You'd think Murray had actually written the article himself. Some lunatic journalist has gone way over the top and suddenly people on here are foaming at the mouth and blowing their load at the thought of Muzza losing. :lol:

wally1
01-18-2009, 08:22 AM
Exactly. You'd think Murray had actually written the article himself. Some lunatic journalist has gone way over the top and suddenly people on here are foaming at the mouth and blowing their load at the thought of Muzza losing. :lol:Yep, I'm astounded. Are there actually still people in the world who take the British media seriously? :eek:

MsTree
01-18-2009, 08:40 AM
English media. Not British. In Scotland we're not so arrogant as to think that our sportsmen and women have a divine right to win and therefore Scotland's media is generally a bit less hysterical
Try here http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/sport/Murray39s-moment.4887853.jp
"History is in the air and, regardless of what the bookmakers think, it would be a foolish man who bet against Federer as the Open begins."
And the history they're talking about is Fed's 14th slam rather than Andy's 1st.

nobama
01-18-2009, 10:13 AM
The British Press :drool: :hearts:

:retard: :retard: :retard:

next...Especially the Daily Mail. What's next, a "serious" article from News of the World? :haha:

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 10:18 AM
Is he not? Get a clue?

Whats wrong with you?

13>5

Clydey
01-18-2009, 10:20 AM
Wow another :retard:

13>5

Nadal is only 22 and Federer is 27. Why do people insist on comparing players who are at different stages in their careers?

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 11:09 AM
Nadal is only 22 and Federer is 27. Why do people insist on comparing players who are at different stages in their careers?

Nadal will never get where Roger is going, that should be pretty obvious. The way he plays just wont allow him to go on for long, and we all know that the players who peak so early burns out sooner or later. Nadal cant really be compared to Roger anyway, Roger have talent that Rafa can only dream of and he plays with ease. Rafa is just a difficult matchup for Roger thats all, and he stil leads Rafa in h2h on all surfaces but clay. Nuff said.

Clydey
01-18-2009, 11:30 AM
Nadal will never get where Roger is going, that should be pretty obvious. The way he plays just wont allow him to go on for long, and we all know that the players who peak so early burns out sooner or later. Nadal cant really be compared to Roger anyway, Roger have talent that Rafa can only dream of and he plays with ease. Rafa is just a difficult matchup for Roger thats all, and he stil leads Rafa in h2h on all surfaces but clay. Nuff said.

Should we disregard clay, then? I guess we should just disregard every match that doesn't lend credence to your views.

reggie1
01-18-2009, 11:33 AM
The Daily Mail has always been a veritable font of wisdom.
Are you 'avin a laugh?! The Daily Mail! It must be one of the most right wing, scare mongering, racist and homophobic (as much as it can get away with) toilet paper rags ever! :o This sort of press surrounding Murray over here drives me insane. I want him to do well but the way the press is now beginning to fawn over him in this country to such a level, when he hasn't even one a slam is stomach churning. Rant over. ;) Obviously none of this is actually Murray's fault.

Cashif
01-18-2009, 11:36 AM
I like Andy much more than Federer but this article is just ridiculous. To say, Roger being scared of Andy is total:bs:

l_mac
01-18-2009, 11:43 AM
Are you 'avin a laugh?!

Have a think about it.

Clydey
01-18-2009, 11:44 AM
Are you 'avin a laugh?! The Daily Mail! It must be one of the most right wing, scare mongering, racist and homophobic (as much as it can get away with) toilet paper rags ever! :o This sort of press surrounding Murray over here drives me insane. I want him to do well but the way the press is now beginning to fawn over him in this country to such a level, when he hasn't even one a slam is stomach churning. Rant over. ;) Obviously none of this is actually Murray's fault.

Henry was being sarcastic.

I only have one other thing to say.

http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/5440/db1d19169ec9cc8a26edff1qa7.jpg

I think that ends the discussion.

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 11:48 AM
Should we disregard clay, then? I guess we should just disregard every match that doesn't lend credence to your views.

Well yeah since Rafa is the GOAT on clay and Roger is just the GOAT and still the second best player on clay id say yes absolutely, we can diregard clay.

Primus
01-18-2009, 11:48 AM
Nadal will never get where Roger is going, that should be pretty obvious. The way he plays just wont allow him to go on for long, and we all know that the players who peak so early burns out sooner or later. Nadal cant really be compared to Roger anyway, Roger have talent that Rafa can only dream of and he plays with ease. Rafa is just a difficult matchup for Roger thats all, and he stil leads Rafa in h2h on all surfaces but clay. Nuff said.

"Nadal will never get where Roger is going"..how can this be obvious? Few years ago it was "obvious" that Nadal is nothing more than another spanish clay machine. And shyet again he made 2 wimbledon finals, and sould really won in 2007...remember he had 4 break points in 5th set. Only serving made that day Roger 5 times Wimbledon champion. It's so laughable when people are saying Nadal talent can't match Federer and yet he get his ass kicked of the base line every single time. It's laughable how every year fed fans predict that Nadal will just run out of gas and yet he wins more and more every year. It's laughable how the "GOAT" can't take 5 games in FO final when serve doesn't matter that much....it was clear demonstration of how pathetic Federer's baseline play realy is compared to Nadals. And even more pathetic is this how Federer never learns anything out of his Nadal losses. He keeps on playing same old style even thou he was humiliated x times before. Unlike Nadal who is nothing more than brilliant how he adapted to play on grass. And let me tell you someting...if it wasn't Wibledon final, Nadal would have won 3:0 last year..it was only he's desire of I sould say fear of losing that gave Federer 3. and 4. set. Federer has nothing, Nadal, Djoko and Murray now actually belive without a doubt that they can take him out anyday, anywhere. And this is the way it's gonna be.
Let me tell you someting, Federer is great player without a doubt, but most ppl forget he actually played in era when there was no great champions beside him. Sampras had 100x times harder opponents in every possible surface. It was like Agassi, Chang, Muster, Courier, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Becker, Edberg...man those names are legendary. And I bet Federer couldn't make even 10 GS with that competition..no fucking way. He even shows his true nature this year when loosing to Murray ...he's attitude was just redicolus. I was realy dissapointed by him. So, give Nadal time b4 you start craping like this, cos if only he make one more season like the one before he's GS will be very close to two digit number.

l_mac
01-18-2009, 11:49 AM
Well yeah since Rafa is the GOAT on clay and Roger is just the GOAT and still the second best player on clay id say yes absolutely, we can diregard clay.

Hmm. I think we should disregard matches on surfaces other than clay.

Clydey
01-18-2009, 11:51 AM
Well yeah since Rafa is the GOAT on clay and Roger is just the GOAT and still the second best player on clay id say yes absolutely, we can diregard clay.

Should we disregard hard since Rafa isn't a great hardcourt player? I mean, Federer is the second best on clay, but Rafa isn't the second best hard court player. I'd say that there's more of a case to disregard their hard court results. You can't have it both ways.

Betty
01-18-2009, 11:55 AM
omg another thread..another article..finaly tonight AO will start

hema:devil:;)

scoobs
01-18-2009, 11:57 AM
omg another thread..another article..finaly tonight AO will start

hema:devil:;)
And thank God.

It will be good to move from over-analysis of nothing phase to over-analysis of tennis phase.

Ceri
01-18-2009, 11:58 AM
:wavey: Aahhh, you gotta love the Daily Mail. Overblown, unconvincing and usually completely unfounded musings are the order of the day for that rag. But, y'know, Fed fans - and I count myself among them - fret not! Andy isn't going to be the greatest ever. He's probably not going to overtake Fed in the slam count. Most importantly, Fed's still playing and will do so for a while yet. He's in the twilight stage of his career and Andy's not even at his prime yet. You just have to graciously accept that Roger isn't going to be winning everything bar the French anymore, but that he'll probably sneak one or two more slams out of the bag before he retires.

prima donna
01-18-2009, 12:03 PM
67 responses to this piece of utter nonsense. Unbelievable.

q.j.
01-18-2009, 12:09 PM
http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/5440/db1d19169ec9cc8a26edff1qa7.jpg


a Scottish version of a Leprechaun :confused:

Clydey
01-18-2009, 12:11 PM
a Scottish version of Leprechaun :confused:

The Hulk :mad:

scarecrows
01-18-2009, 12:21 PM
Let me tell you someting, Federer is great player without a doubt, but most ppl forget he actually played in era when there was no great champions beside him. Sampras had 100x times harder opponents in every possible surface. It was like Agassi, Chang, Muster, Courier, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Becker, Edberg...man those names are legendary. And I bet Federer couldn't make even 10 GS with that competition..no fucking way. He even shows his true nature this year when loosing to Murray ...he's attitude was just redicolus. I was realy dissapointed by him. So, give Nadal time b4 you start craping like this, cos if only he make one more season like the one before he's GS will be very close to two digit number.

interesting

since Federer is playing in the same era than Nadal aka. the mug era, then this means that even Nadal wouldnt have won this many Grand Slams, right?

TJ20
01-18-2009, 12:22 PM
haha, this is a tabloid.. and not only that... a nationalistic tabloid, like The Sun.

The newspapers worth reading in the british press are The Guardian, The Times, Observer Sports, Telegraph, maybe the Express... or some foreign view who do not write it better in the written word than the british (apart from a very few american newspapers) but offer unbiased views.

The british nationalistic tabloids are written so they can be understood by people from the age of 8 +.

Primus
01-18-2009, 12:25 PM
interesting

since Federer is playing in the same era than Nadal aka. the mug era, then this means that even Nadal wouldnt have won this many Grand Slams, right?

In generaly, yes. I belive he would take RG, but never wimbledon.

FedFan
01-18-2009, 12:27 PM
Murray has nothing to do with all the hype and the exaggeration of the British press. He can't be blamed for it.

As he is the best player on hardcourt at the moment, he has a real chance to win in AO.

Let's not overreact and wait what happens the next two weeks.

Jaz
01-18-2009, 12:42 PM
Murray has nothing to do with all the hype and the exaggeration of the British press. He can't be blamed for it.

As he is the best player on hardcourt at the moment, he has a real chance to win in AO.

Let's not overreact and wait what happens the next two weeks.

It's everything to do with the British press, if the Joker had beaten both at Qatar/Doha the media attention would not be there. It's just British media bias, nothing new about it. We've seen it again and again. Hamilton mania. They make out it's the second coming of Sampras himself.

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 01:00 PM
"Nadal will never get where Roger is going"..how can this be obvious? Few years ago it was "obvious" that Nadal is nothing more than another spanish clay machine. And shyet again he made 2 wimbledon finals, and sould really won in 2007...remember he had 4 break points in 5th set. Only serving made that day Roger 5 times Wimbledon champion. It's so laughable when people are saying Nadal talent can't match Federer and yet he get his ass kicked of the base line every single time. It's laughable how every year fed fans predict that Nadal will just run out of gas and yet he wins more and more every year. It's laughable how the "GOAT" can't take 5 games in FO final when serve doesn't matter that much....it was clear demonstration of how pathetic Federer's baseline play realy is compared to Nadals. And even more pathetic is this how Federer never learns anything out of his Nadal losses. He keeps on playing same old style even thou he was humiliated x times before. Unlike Nadal who is nothing more than brilliant how he adapted to play on grass. And let me tell you someting...if it wasn't Wibledon final, Nadal would have won 3:0 last year..it was only he's desire of I sould say fear of losing that gave Federer 3. and 4. set. Federer has nothing, Nadal, Djoko and Murray now actually belive without a doubt that they can take him out anyday, anywhere. And this is the way it's gonna be.
Let me tell you someting, Federer is great player without a doubt, but most ppl forget he actually played in era when there was no great champions beside him. Sampras had 100x times harder opponents in every possible surface. It was like Agassi, Chang, Muster, Courier, Rafter, Ivanisevic, Becker, Edberg...man those names are legendary. And I bet Federer couldn't make even 10 GS with that competition..no fucking way. He even shows his true nature this year when loosing to Murray ...he's attitude was just redicolus. I was realy dissapointed by him. So, give Nadal time b4 you start craping like this, cos if only he make one more season like the one before he's GS will be very close to two digit number.

I think your taking what i said out of context. Lets look at it more closely. I repect Rafa and it annoys no one more that Roger is so stubborn against Nadal and doesnt seem to learn anything then it does me. This is something i noticed a long time ago and if i knew Roger this is the first thing i would tell him. GO MORE TO THE NET AGAINST RAFA! But this is really the only critique i have of the great man.

For the rest he is really flawless and what you said about the era of tennis i keep hearing that and i want everyone who says that to listen very carefully. Roger would have ***** all those players you mentioned at will. And none other then Agassi who was Pete's biggest rival said that Federer is better, and so did Rafter and probably all of the others you mentioned as well. CASE CLOSED.

Primus
01-18-2009, 01:37 PM
I think your taking what i said out of context. Lets look at it more closely. I repect Rafa and it annoys no one more that Roger is so stubborn against Nadal and doesnt seem to learn anything then it does me. This is something i noticed a long time ago and if i knew Roger this is the first thing i would tell him. GO MORE TO THE NET AGAINST RAFA! But this is really the only critique i have of the great man.

For the rest he is really flawless and what you said about the era of tennis i keep hearing that and i want everyone who says that to listen very carefully. Roger would have ***** all those players you mentioned at will. And none other then Agassi who was Pete's biggest rival said that Federer is better, and so did Rafter and probably all of the others you mentioned as well. CASE CLOSED.

You see...it's just a matter of perspective. You can qoute Aggasi, Rafter or even Wilander who is like in love in Federer . Those guys opinions mean absolutely nothing to me. Their opinion is not realisic. Wilander even after famos RG 2008 said that Roger got it all wrong, he should be more agressive, etc...
I mean what's wrong with you people? It's not about Federer, it's about Nadal. Don't look what Fed did wrong. Look how he was ***** by pure flawless display by Nadal. And the most funny thing like you are all saying Federer should be more agressive...I mean he's forhand is just terrible nowdays, he's UE are sky high and saying he should risk more equals suicide. And again when he stuck a winner, fed fans: "omg..did you see that strike..I thing Im gonna cum". I really doubt that you and Wilander got the magic formula and on the other hand Federer and all his squad didn't once thought about :):):)
I don't say Roger would be a failure 10 years in Sampras era. But Im it's quite different to play real champions or a bunch of mugs. Maybe he realy would own some of them, but i bet he also would get owned big time. So stop this GOAT crap. And oh yea...he's the best athlete, best server, best back line stroker, best volley in the game, mentaly strong as an lion, and he still get his ass owned by "regualar, not half as him talented, not half as him expirianced" guys like Nadal and Murray. What's wrong with this picture?

Forehander
01-18-2009, 01:43 PM
why is this the greatest article ever?

prima donna
01-18-2009, 01:47 PM
Maybe he realy would own some of them, but i bet he also would get owned big time
Where lies the logic in this little conundrum ?

Xenosys
01-18-2009, 01:54 PM
The article is sourced to the Daily Mail, that says it all really. This newspaper are known for creating gash stories out of nothing at all, just to rile up some sensationalism. Not to mention almost daily references to Princess Diana, even though the poor woman has been dead for over 10 years, which they have become notorious for here.

This tabloid is up there with 'The Sun', and 'The Daily Star'.

Metis
01-18-2009, 02:06 PM
I love how this has turned to a Nadal vs Federer argument. :lol:


Ah... the good old days :inlove: :sad:

l_mac
01-18-2009, 02:07 PM
It's everything to do with the British press, if the Joker had beaten both at Qatar/Doha the media attention would not be there. It's just British media bias, nothing new about it. We've seen it again and again. Hamilton mania. They make out it's the second coming of Sampras himself.

:retard:

FedFan said Murray had nothing to do with all the hype in the British press. Not that the hype had nothing to do with the British press. :retard: :retard:

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 02:10 PM
You see...it's just a matter of perspective. You can qoute Aggasi, Rafter or even Wilander who is like in love in Federer . Those guys opinions mean absolutely nothing to me. Their opinion is not realisic. Wilander even after famos RG 2008 said that Roger got it all wrong, he should be more agressive, etc...
I mean what's wrong with you people? It's not about Federer, it's about Nadal. Don't look what Fed did wrong. Look how he was ***** by pure flawless display by Nadal. And the most funny thing like you are all saying Federer should be more agressive...I mean he's forhand is just terrible nowdays, he's UE are sky high and saying he should risk more equals suicide. And again when he stuck a winner, fed fans: "omg..did you see that strike..I thing Im gonna cum". I really doubt that you and Wilander got the magic formula and on the other hand Federer and all his squad didn't once thought about :):):)
I don't say Roger would be a failure 10 years in Sampras era. But Im it's quite different to play real champions or a bunch of mugs. Maybe he realy would own some of them, but i bet he also would get owned big time. So stop this GOAT crap. And oh yea...he's the best athlete, best server, best back line stroker, best volley in the game, mentaly strong as an lion, and he still get his ass owned by "regualar, not half as him talented, not half as him expirianced" guys like Nadal and Murray. What's wrong with this picture?

Ok i dont think we're gona agree on this one so lets just agree to disagree. :cool:

Bobby
01-18-2009, 02:10 PM
I think your taking what i said out of context. Lets look at it more closely. I repect Rafa and it annoys no one more that Roger is so stubborn against Nadal and doesnt seem to learn anything then it does me. This is something i noticed a long time ago and if i knew Roger this is the first thing i would tell him. GO MORE TO THE NET AGAINST RAFA! But this is really the only critique i have of the great man.

For the rest he is really flawless and what you said about the era of tennis i keep hearing that and i want everyone who says that to listen very carefully. Roger would have ***** all those players you mentioned at will. And none other then Agassi who was Pete's biggest rival said that Federer is better, and so did Rafter and probably all of the others you mentioned as well. CASE CLOSED.

Beating Nadal, especially at Roland Garros, is really not that simple. If Federer would attack more, Nadal would pass him from left and right all day and then go home and eat some ice cream. The approach shots would have to be close to perfect every single time and not even Federer is able to do that.

scoobs
01-18-2009, 02:13 PM
Federer's approach shots often leave him with too much to do off the volley.

l_mac
01-18-2009, 02:31 PM
Federer's approach shots often leave him with too much to do off the volley.

Too much? He is the greatest volleyer of all time.

scoobs
01-18-2009, 02:33 PM
Too much? He is the greatest volleyer of all time.
Volleying must really have been shit back in the day then.

l_mac
01-18-2009, 02:33 PM
One of the Eurosport commentators said it, so it must be true.

FedFan
01-18-2009, 02:36 PM
I would prefer Roger to ignore what the press is saying about him. He has become too sensitive and as he feels attacked, he begins attacking. I don't like it! Stop reading the newspapers, better begin to read a book for a change. ;)

Let the racket do the talking and concentrate mainly on your tennis. Accept that there are other very good players now and that you are no longer number one. You are still the favourite in a GS, but not the overhelming favourite of the last years.

Where is your new coach, who may build up your confidence?

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 02:51 PM
Too much? He is the greatest volleyer of all time.

I think anyone that knows anything about tennis would agree that Roger is not using his skills at the net enough, specially against Rafa. He really does have great volleys but of course if you are not gona use something a lot it's not gona be as good as it can be. Look at what he did to Sampras at wimbledon. In those days the grass was still fast and he actually served and volleyed and was awesome at it. If the grass was still the same as in those days Rafa wouldnt have a prayer at Wimbledon and Roger would proably have won it 10 times in a row.

That doesnt take away from the fact that Roger should get his shit together and go more to the net. I mean really if you look at how Rafa got better and better on grass and how Roger just stood still on clay there is clearly a lot to do for Roger. If Roger had the same mentality as Rafa he would never has lost his crown last year at Wimby and never have been humiliated at RG the way he was. It hurts to say but its true.

l_mac
01-18-2009, 02:55 PM
I think anyone that knows anything about tennis would agree that Roger is not using his skills at the net enough, specially against Rafa. He really does have great volleys but of course if you are not gona use something a lot it's not gona be as good as it can be. Look at what he did to Sampras at wimbledon. In those days the grass was still fast and he actually served and volleyed and was awesome at it. If the grass was still the same as in those days Rafa wouldnt have a prayer at Wimbledon and Roger would proably have won it 10 times in a row.

That doesnt take away from the fact that Roger should get his shit together and go more to the net. I mean really if you look at how Rafa got better and better on grass and how Roger just stood still on clay there is clearly a lot to do for Roger. If Roger had the same mentality as Rafa he would never has lost his crown last year at Wimby and never have been humiliated at RG the way he was. It hurts to say but its true.

Great post.

FedFan
01-18-2009, 03:04 PM
I think anyone that knows anything about tennis would agree that Roger is not using his skills at the net enough, specially against Rafa. He really does have great volleys but of course if you are not gona use something a lot it's not gona be as good as it can be. Look at what he did to Sampras at wimbledon. In those days the grass was still fast and he actually served and volleyed and was awesome at it. If the grass was still the same as in those days Rafa wouldnt have a prayer at Wimbledon and Roger would proably have won it 10 times in a row.

That doesnt take away from the fact that Roger should get his shit together and go more to the net. I mean really if you look at how Rafa got better and better on grass and how Roger just stood still on clay there is clearly a lot to do for Roger. If Roger had the same mentality as Rafa he would never has lost his crown last year at Wimby and never have been humiliated at RG the way he was. It hurts to say but its true.

Roger should consider to go more to the net, but he will never be as good as Mc Enroe, who was clearly and by far the best volleyer ever. ;)

Nathaliia
01-18-2009, 03:11 PM
Typical article by UK press for the UK people to wank at.

The funniest out of all it was the last sentence by Nadal finished with immortal "no?"

Primus
01-18-2009, 03:58 PM
If the grass was still the same as in those days Rafa wouldnt have a prayer at Wimbledon and Roger would proably have won it 10 times in a row.


I can't belive ppl still bitching about that grass. I mean at 2007 when Fed won by an inch it was fast enough, but one year later, just about when Rafa lift wimbledon trophy, it was like 100 petitions online already "Speed up the grass at wibmly!!"....or let me translate you "Ban Rafa or anyone else who can beat Roger from wimbly!"....don't you see how pathetic this is? And do you honestly belive player who barely escapes a triple bagel in a clay, could be so dominant on the other surface? I realy don't...after all it's tennis. If you can't hit forhand at clay, you can't do it on grass eather. Exept maybe Karlovič here would be example if he would feed you with a 12314 aces per match, but apart from him, ninete.:cool:

ORGASMATRON
01-18-2009, 04:06 PM
I can't belive ppl still bitching about that grass. I mean at 2007 when Fed won by an inch it was fast enough, but one year later, just about when Rafa lift wimbledon trophy, it was like 100 petitions online already "Speed up the grass at wibmly!!"....or let me translate you "Ban Rafa or anyone else who can beat Roger from wimbly!"....don't you see how pathetic this is? And do you honestly belive player who barely escapes a triple bagel in a clay, could be so dominant on the other surface? I realy don't...after all it's tennis. If you can't hit forhand at clay, you can't do it on grass eather. Exept maybe Karlovič here would be example if he would feed you with a 12314 aces per match, but apart from him, ninete.:cool:

:rolleyes:

moon language
01-18-2009, 04:29 PM
Haha Federer the greatest volleyer of all time, good one.

reggie1
01-19-2009, 09:33 AM
Have a think about it.
I did! I'm glad Henry was being sarcastic, I didn't like to think of him as an avid Daily Mail reader! ;)

JolánGagó
01-19-2009, 09:43 AM
Nadal will never get where Roger is going, that should be pretty obvious. The way he plays just wont allow him to go on for long, and we all know that the players who peak so early burns out sooner or later. Nadal cant really be compared to Roger anyway, Roger have talent that Rafa can only dream of and he plays with ease. Rafa is just a difficult matchup for Roger thats all, and he stil leads Rafa in h2h on all surfaces but clay. Nuff said.

Utter bullshit and silly cliches at their best.

vincayou
01-19-2009, 10:24 AM
British newspaper preparing an anticlimax. Nothing new.

vbn
01-19-2009, 04:20 PM
Please keep in mind that this was written by the same newspaper which today presented us this journalistic masterpiece

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1122262/Muscle-man-Andy-Murray-apes-Incredible-Hulk-gears-Australian-Open.html

The Times it is not.

reggie1
01-19-2009, 04:45 PM
Please keep in mind that this was written by the same newspaper which today presented us this journalistic masterpiece

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1122262/Muscle-man-Andy-Murray-apes-Incredible-Hulk-gears-Australian-Open.html

The Times it is not.

Yes, it helps to keep it in perspective, it's a dreadful newspaper ;)

Arkulari
01-19-2009, 06:42 PM
it's not a newspaper, it's not even worth the trees that were cut to print it :rolleyes:

ORGASMATRON
01-19-2009, 07:32 PM
Utter bullshit and silly cliches at their best.

What is cliched about the truth? I think you better wake the fuck up and crawl out of Murrays ass.

The Oracle
08-15-2009, 09:23 PM
That is a cruel joke, I am certain that Federer will be very graceful when he becomes number two.

Forehander
08-16-2009, 06:45 AM
This explains Federer actually didn't choke against Tsonga.

tennis2tennis
08-16-2009, 07:41 AM
5 > 2
come back and do the > when Andy amasses 15 majors, a career grand slam ..60 career titles, 237 consecutive weeks as no1, 21 consective major semi-final appearances, 20 major finals appearances, 10 consecutive major finals appearances, 4 consecutive years winning at least 2 majors, 5 years winning at least 2 majors, 3 years winning at least 3 majors, 36 consecutive major sets and 7 consecutive initial major finals.....:wavey:

LinkMage
08-16-2009, 07:41 AM
WTF is this shit?

Mugray sucks ass.

amonb
08-16-2009, 08:25 AM
come back and do the > when Andy amasses 15 majors, a career grand slam ..60 career titles, 237 consecutive weeks as no1, 21 consective major semi-final appearances, 20 major finals appearances, 10 consecutive major finals appearances, 4 consecutive years winning at least 2 majors, 5 years winning at least 2 majors, 3 years winning at least 3 majors, 36 consecutive major sets and 7 consecutive initial major finals.....:wavey:Will do

Wolbo
08-16-2009, 08:58 AM
Will doNo you won't. :wavey:

amonb
08-16-2009, 09:43 AM
No you won't. :wavey::wavey:

Matt01
08-16-2009, 10:57 AM
come back and do the > when Andy amasses 15 majors, a career grand slam ..60 career titles, 237 consecutive weeks as no1, 21 consective major semi-final appearances, 20 major finals appearances, 10 consecutive major finals appearances, 4 consecutive years winning at least 2 majors, 5 years winning at least 2 majors, 3 years winning at least 3 majors, 36 consecutive major sets and 7 consecutive initial major finals.....:wavey:


5 > 2 still.

And besides, Murray never had the luxury to get his titles handed on a silver platter in the clown era. With Nadal, Djokovic and Del Potro around now one actually has to work hard to win something. And Fedmug only wins the big titles nowadays when he can avoid Nadal and Djokovic because of injuries or ilnesses ;)

:wavey:

oliverbwfc
08-16-2009, 11:15 AM
^ Daily Mail, UK
Your argument just lost any credibility in this one post, you should have just lied. :rolleyes

And Murray has tamed Nadal? :spit: Since When?

Nadal has a 7-2 H2H record against Murray

This entire article is just a load of :bs:

Expected from the Mail though

MacTheKnife
08-16-2009, 11:47 AM
Does any one actually believe that any of these guys is scared of the other.. :lol: All of their egos are WAY to big for that.

Skyward
08-16-2009, 11:58 AM
And Fedmug only wins the big titles nowadays when he can avoid Nadal and Djokovic because of injuries or ilnesses ;)

It's ashame that 22-23 yo guys are prone to injures and illnesses. :sad: They should learn something from the old, healthy goat.

Matt01
08-16-2009, 12:05 PM
It's ashame that 22-23 yo guys are prone to injures and illnesses. :sad: They should learn something from the old, healthy goat.


If you mean goat=Fed, then his fans will tell you something different...everytime he loses he has a bad injury or it's because of his mono :spit:

Skyward
08-16-2009, 12:11 PM
If you mean goat=Fed, then his fans will tell you something different...everytime he loses he has a bad injury or it's because of his mono :spit:

He is a real Spartan. :shrug: He is still playing when he's not a his best. Youngsters like to call trainers, struggle against mugs Fed used to beat in his prime time, retire from matches/hide at home from the competition. (*sarcasm*). :angel::wavey:

tennis2tennis
08-16-2009, 12:21 PM
5 > 2 still.

And besides, Murray never had the luxury to get his titles handed on a silver platter in the clown era. With Nadal, Djokovic and Del Potro around now one actually has to work hard to win something. And Fedmug only wins the big titles nowadays when he can avoid Nadal and Djokovic because of injuries or ilnesses ;)

:wavey:

you mean the Djokovic that federer beat in the US open final and Oz semi-finals, or the nadal that federer beat in 2 wimbledon finals...or do you mean the del potro that federer beat in the OZ quarter-final and RG semi-final, you're 100% right federer never had to face any of the above mentioned trio in any of his majors quests, that were handed to him in a silver platter!!!!

Matt01
08-16-2009, 12:25 PM
you mean the Djokovic that federer beat in the US open final and Oz semi-finals, or the nadal that federer beat in 2 wimbledon finals...or do you mean the del potro that federer beat in the OZ quarter-final and RG semi-final, you're 100% right federer never had to face any of the above mentioned trio in any of his majors quests, that were handed to him in a silver platter!!!!


Nice to see that you agree with me ;)

murray_2k8
08-16-2009, 12:26 PM
Fed isnt scared, and certainly wont be now the pressure of going for the record is off him.

Lets hope for a showdown at the US - I cant see it being so lobsided this time ;)

Quadruple Tree
08-16-2009, 12:33 PM
2 > 1, so Gasquet > Murray. Glad we got that out of the way.

tennizen
08-16-2009, 02:07 PM
Nice to see I am the thread starter of such interesting threads:D

Jaz
08-16-2009, 03:10 PM
In a grandslam Fed is not scared of Murray. The pressure is all on Murray to perform in the grandslam, and also even if Federer screws up, he know that Murray can too in the best of 5.

In the best of 3 however, the pressure is on Federer. And quite frankly, Fed has been shit in the TMS on hardcourt since 07.