[Trollicki]

Originally Posted by Orka_n

Wrong. The majority of fans wants variety. Fans want a fast US Open (because the AO is slow). Fans want a Masters 1000 on grass. Fans want long rallies as well, but they will get them during the clay season which is fairly long. A few HC tourneys could be kept slow as well.

But you remember Bercy 2010? The fastest hard court on the tour. People loved that tournament, especially the semi finals were excellent. Faster courts do NOT equal non stop serve fests, it's been proven.

I wholeheartedly agree with this post.

Meanwhile, I´d like to thank Nadal for making me chuckle, I needed that

[Kiedis]

The umpire must to flexible with that rule. After an epic rally a player should be allowed to take a few seconds more to serve. Its all what he was saying and I agree.

[EddieNero]

Originally Posted by Kiedis

The umpire must to flexible with that rule. After an epic rally a player should be allowed to take a few seconds more to serve. Its all what he was saying and I agree.

No, he shouldn't. This rule forces players to shorten rallies and pushes them to apply more agressive tactics thus make exchanges more attractive for the observer.
First of many steps to bring tennis back to the shape it had 10 years ago.

[AntiTennis]

[drazyc]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

People comparing tennis to a full contact sport like football and are surprised that football has more injuries, really? It helps that the guy you're playing doesn't come across the net and kicks you off the court in tennis, you know.

As for continuous strain on the body when you play on hardcourts with the sharp movements in tennis, it's definitely much tougher on the body than other hardcourt sports

Well, I was not the one comparing tennis to football. Nadal did. The point is that tennis does not have that many serious injuries hurting players after their careers end.

As many has pointed out already Nadal could have proposed faster courts and/or lighter balls if he was so concerned about the future of the sport when it comes to injuries. Nadal is only trying to make ATP have more important clay tournaments, which would benefit himself. Nadal has not won a hardcourt tournament since Tokyo 2010.

[JayR]

Originally Posted by dropvolley

http://www.tennispanorama.com/archives/35199

“People want to see long matches,

We do? Did Rafa have somebody canvas the tennis watching public on a day I was out?

I wasn't aware that it was enshrined in stone that 'long matches' = entertainment. Doesn't necessarily equate that because a match was long, it was full of 'competitive rallies' and 'amazing shots'. Half the time they're error strewn borefests in which neither player apparently has the werewithal or the desire to change things in order to try and win the match. Hence, we have these manufactured dramas which acquire legendary status and are then held up as a shining example of just how exciting the game really is, when in reality they deserve no such exaltations.

[timafi]

stfu Rafa and FOLLOW those rules

[spaniel]

Originally Posted by GSMnadal

People comparing tennis to a full contact sport like football and are surprised that football has more injuries, really? It helps that the guy you're playing doesn't come across the net and kicks you off the court in tennis, you know.

As for continuous strain on the body when you play on hardcourts with the sharp movements in tennis, it's definitely much tougher on the body than other hardcourt sports

Is it you Rafa? You sound as out of mind as him.

Everything Rafa says make me wanna vomit. When I see him playing, same thing.

[Matt01]

Originally Posted by August

All they need to do to hardcourts is to speed up them. That way points become shorter and thus less gruelling for the body. Also, faster HCs are easier for grinders bodies because if you rely on your defensive abilities, you lose earlier, thus play less matches and your body gets rest.

Now that is some comedy.
Every sane tennis fan knows that there to many tournments on HC but when Nadal says it, he's labeled as a whiner. As for the "25-second rule will harm the fans"-quote...he didn't even say it like that.

[Looner]

Lol . Nadal at his comedy best.

[Matt01]

Originally Posted by EddieNero

No, he shouldn't. This rule forces players to shorten rallies and pushes them to apply more agressive tactics thus make exchanges more attractive for the observer.
First of many steps to bring tennis back to the shape it had 10 years ago.

No, thanks. No need to go back to the dark ages of men's tennis.

[GOATsol]

crybaby dull

who cares if he can't play other sports after tennis

whining about hard courts

stupid dull, as usual

his fans will blindly follow him

[Sanya]

I can`t believe he really told it. Well, that`s great logic by Nadal - what suits him, suit tennis, great.

[Fishnet]

Originally Posted by Kiedis

The umpire must to flexible with that rule. After an epic rally a player should be allowed to take a few seconds more to serve. Its all what he was saying and I agree.

No. Rules are rules.

Originally Posted by EddieNero

No, he shouldn't. This rule forces players to shorten rallies and pushes them to apply more agressive tactics thus make exchanges more attractive for the observer.
First of many steps to bring tennis back to the shape it had 10 years ago.

It's not set in stone like that, but yeah, let's hope this pushes players into a more aggressive way of playing.

10 years ago? More like 15 years ago.

Originally Posted by JayR

We do? Did Rafa have somebody canvas the tennis watching public on a day I was out?

I wasn't aware that it was enshrined in stone that 'long matches' = entertainment. Doesn't necessarily equate that because a match was long, it was full of 'competitive rallies' and 'amazing shots'. Half the time they're error strewn borefests in which neither player apparently has the werewithal or the desire to change things in order to try and win the match. Hence, we have these manufactured dramas which acquire legendary status and are then held up as a shining example of just how exciting the game really is, which in reality, deserve no such exaltations.

Perfect. I couldn't have put this any better.

Originally Posted by Matt01

No, thanks. No need to go back to the dark ages of men's tennis.

It can't get any darker than right now, honestly.

[Dougie]

Originally Posted by JayR

We do? Did Rafa have somebody canvas the tennis watching public on a day I was out?

I wasn't aware that it was enshrined in stone that 'long matches' = entertainment. Doesn't necessarily equate that because a match was long, it was full of 'competitive rallies' and 'amazing shots'. Half the time they're error strewn borefests in which neither player apparently has the werewithal or the desire to change things in order to try and win the match. Hence, we have these manufactured dramas which acquire legendary status and are then held up as a shining example of just how exciting the game really is, which in reality, deserve no such exaltations.

Exactly. As much as I love watching tennis, nothing is more boring than watching a 5-hour GS final where Djokovic and Murray feed each other identical balls, bounce the ball and wipe sweat. When the match is over, you realise your sundays is spent, tomorrow´s work, and you wonder where the hell that 5 hours went, because you can´t even remember a single point that stands out.

Point is, I really don´t think fans want the matches to be any longer than they are. And certainly not if the matches are prolonged by toweling or picking the ass.