Jesus wept. That final couldn't have been more entertaining if aliens landed on centre court, Elvis started playing an impromptu comeback karaoke concert behind the umpire's chair and Ana Ivanovic did a striptease using the net as a prompt
[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]Jesus wept. That final couldn't have been more entertaining if aliens landed on centre court, Elvis started playing an impromptu comeback karaoke concert behind the umpire's chair and Ana Ivanovic did a striptease using the net as a prompt
I disagree. Bored to tears. Kept watching almost out of duty. Couldn't have been less interesting if my telly had stopped working. Sorry if disagreeing with you is offensive. Or something.
I thought the men's final was superb- do take the point that the mega serve has damaged the game but lets be honest- the mega serve player lost ( inho unfortunately) and actually didn't even win the tie breaks.
i think to be honest, last years final kind of set the bar way too high. Todays final was a great match. Although I always felt Roddick would not have enough to see off Federer, and in the final set you could see the perfomance dip point by point and I think it was really a case of how long he would hang on. To hold in there as long as he did is fantastic, but there were none of the long, outstanding rallies of the previous years final.
[cite]Posted By: Leroy Ambrose[/cite]Jesus wept. That final couldn't have been more entertaining if aliens landed on centre court, Elvis started playing an impromptu comeback karaoke concert behind the umpire's chair and Ana Ivanovic did a striptease using the net as a prompt
I disagree. Bored to tears. Kept watching almost out of duty. Couldn't have been less interesting if my telly had stopped working. Sorry if disagreeing with you is offensive. Or something.
Its not offensive. Just wrong.
Yeah, if you say so. I forgot to check my opinions against the Leroy barometer of correctness.
Stop being so silly., it doesn't become you.
I tend to agree with lordromford, 3 breaks of serve in 4 hours of tennis is not wildly exciting tennis. Thing is, when Roddick plays it never is. However it was an entertaining match in so far as how close it was and that kept me entertained for most of it...was bloody glad when Federer finally won though as I couldn't have watched too much more.
I don't profess to be a tennis expert never having played the game to any standard.
However I found the match today riveting viewing. You had a guy absolutely determined to do all it took to grasp his big chance of finally winning (take note Mc Henman) against a supreme true champion seeking to make history.
It's a shame there had to be a loser.
Reading this thread though shows how sport polarises opinion. I enjoyed six consecutive seasons of mid table Premiership football a few years back. Plenty didn't though as searching the archives of this forum and netaddicks will tell you.
Judging by most of the responses on here, it seems I'm very much in a minority on this.
I'm surprised, to be honest, but fair enough because, as Len says, we all have different views I guess.
[cite]Posted By: valleyman[/cite]I tend to agree with lordromford, 3 breaks of serve in 4 hours of tennis is not wildly exciting tennis. Thing is, when Roddick plays it never is. However it was an entertaining match in so far as how close it was and that kept me entertained for most of it...was bloody glad when Federer finally won though as I couldn't have watched too much more.
I'm in the Romford camp too. 72 games(?) where service was held and only 3 breaks. Only a handfull of gripping rally's. I'm not saying the standard of tennis was poor, just predictable in the main.
Rothko, I've read back through the thread again and seen a dig at Murray?
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]the McHenman comment is
Maybe a little granted.:-)
The underlying point wasn't though. Today demonstrated the determination and strength of character needed to win a Grand Slam as much as the technical skill.
Murray lost his focus in the Roddick match at times and it cost him. That was the underlying point.
At 22 Murray has more chances and as I've said before I always support the British players so I hope he takes note and toughens up mentally.
He's been to a final of a slam at 22 already, think that shows the strength needed to be a top player. Roddick produced two of his best Wimbledon performances in the last 72 hours. Two points the other way on Friday, and Murray would have been in the final, sometime the opponent pull out a special performance Roddick did Friday, and did today.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]He's been to a final of a slam at 22 already, think that shows the strength needed to be a top player. Roddick produced two of his best Wimbledon performances in the last 72 hours. Two points the other way on Friday, and Murray would have been in the final, sometime the opponent pull out a special performance Roddick did Friday, and did today.
He has reached a final (the US Open) which is more than Henman ever did. He lost it though against an out of form Federer who dug in and showed greater mental strength which as I said was the point I was trying to make.
He was out served....Murray got far fewer 1st serves in than Roddick and his second serve simply isn't up to scratch which is what allowed Roddick to return with some depth and penetration on 'far too many' occassions.....it's not that much harder than that of the top women.
A much better final would have been Federer/Murray......and I'm saying that purely as a tennis match.I'm not much of a Roddick fan as far as his style goes, though I admire his never say die spirit of course....he's just way too predictable.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]He's been to a final of a slam at 22 already, think that shows the strength needed to be a top player. Roddick produced two of his best Wimbledon performances in the last 72 hours. Two points the other way on Friday, and Murray would have been in the final, sometime the opponent pull out a special performance Roddick did Friday, and did today.
He has reached a final (the US Open) which is more than Henman ever did. He lost it though against an out of form Federer who dug in and showed greater mental strength which as I said was the point I was trying to make.
21, first time in a final got beat by a bloke who had won 13 or 14 times in that situation, just happens, he'll learn from that, and he'll probably make the final at Flushing Meadow this year and do better.
He'll also learn on second serve as well, it'll come, the improvements in the past year have been massive, another year developing he'll get even better
I dunno, those of you moaning about the lack of breaks of serve remind me of Americans moaning about the lacks of goals in football. Very few of the service games were won to love, there were some absolutely cracking rallies and several last ditch "how the hell did he get that in?" shots. May not have been a display of the most technically excellent tennis ever, but was great entertainment. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
[cite]Posted By: valleyman[/cite]I tend to agree with lordromford, 3 breaks of serve in 4 hours of tennis is not wildly exciting tennis. Thing is, when Roddick plays it never is. However it was an entertaining match in so far as how close it was and that kept me entertained for most of it...was bloody glad when Federer finally won though as I couldn't have watched too much more.
I'm in the Romford camp too. 72 games(?) where service was held and only 3 breaks. Only a handfull of gripping rally's. I'm not saying the standard of tennis was poor, just predictable in the main.
I agree, I found it pretty boring unlike last year's final. A match which is extremely close and goes on forever isn't necessary a classic.
[cite]Posted By: valleyman[/cite]I tend to agree with lordromford, 3 breaks of serve in 4 hours of tennis is not wildly exciting tennis. Thing is, when Roddick plays it never is. However it was an entertaining match in so far as how close it was and that kept me entertained for most of it...was bloody glad when Federer finally won though as I couldn't have watched too much more.
I'm in the Romford camp too. 72 games(?) where service was held and only 3 breaks. Only a handfull of gripping rally's. I'm not saying the standard of tennis was poor, just predictable in the main.
I agree, I found it pretty boring unlike last year's final. A match which is extremely close and goes on forever isn't necessary a classic.
Comparing yesterday to last year's final is like comparing every match we've played since to our play off final against Sunderland for excitement and entertainment.
Federer v Nadal was possibly the greatest ever final. Yesterday was very good and decidedly above average.
Comments
That was awesome! Absolute thriller of a match!
I don't even normally like tennis!!!
Elvis and Ana ?
I disagree. Bored to tears. Kept watching almost out of duty. Couldn't have been less interesting if my telly had stopped working. Sorry if disagreeing with you is offensive. Or something.
I thought the men's final was superb- do take the point that the mega serve has damaged the game but lets be honest- the mega serve player lost ( inho unfortunately) and actually didn't even win the tie breaks.
And i did see most of the Borg McEnroe finals!
A shame somebody had to lose but Federer has earnt his record.
I know, she's Mike Tyson in a tennis outfit but....
No, I am just sick.
Yeah, if you say so. I forgot to check my opinions against the Leroy barometer of correctness.
Stop being so silly., it doesn't become you.
However I found the match today riveting viewing. You had a guy absolutely determined to do all it took to grasp his big chance of finally winning (take note Mc Henman) against a supreme true champion seeking to make history.
It's a shame there had to be a loser.
Reading this thread though shows how sport polarises opinion. I enjoyed six consecutive seasons of mid table Premiership football a few years back. Plenty didn't though as searching the archives of this forum and netaddicks will tell you.
Great final, not quite as dramatic as last year, but the game was special
I'm surprised, to be honest, but fair enough because, as Len says, we all have different views I guess.
Still doesn't make me wrong though!
:-P
I'm in the Romford camp too. 72 games(?) where service was held and only 3 breaks. Only a handfull of gripping rally's. I'm not saying the standard of tennis was poor, just predictable in the main.
Rothko, I've read back through the thread again and seen a dig at Murray?
Maybe a little granted.:-)
The underlying point wasn't though. Today demonstrated the determination and strength of character needed to win a Grand Slam as much as the technical skill.
Murray lost his focus in the Roddick match at times and it cost him. That was the underlying point.
At 22 Murray has more chances and as I've said before I always support the British players so I hope he takes note and toughens up mentally.
He has reached a final (the US Open) which is more than Henman ever did. He lost it though against an out of form Federer who dug in and showed greater mental strength which as I said was the point I was trying to make.
A much better final would have been Federer/Murray......and I'm saying that purely as a tennis match.I'm not much of a Roddick fan as far as his style goes, though I admire his never say die spirit of course....he's just way too predictable.
21, first time in a final got beat by a bloke who had won 13 or 14 times in that situation, just happens, he'll learn from that, and he'll probably make the final at Flushing Meadow this year and do better.
He'll also learn on second serve as well, it'll come, the improvements in the past year have been massive, another year developing he'll get even better
Bit like allowing Beckham two goes at a free kick on the edge of the box.
Comparing yesterday to last year's final is like comparing every match we've played since to our play off final against Sunderland for excitement and entertainment.
Federer v Nadal was possibly the greatest ever final. Yesterday was very good and decidedly above average.