Yep it was not even in the Sun lol, i know it fnished late and the print was probs out, but the mirror caught it. but i guess like you say its not wimbledon.Originally Posted by Syn
I guess had this been england winning a big tournament the hype would be much more.
I do like to consume the hype. It's picking up slightly now that more have caught onto the fact that Murray won. But it's still lacking little bit sharpness.
I will create my own hype.
I think Murray is the favourite for the Australian Open now, but only if there is the same pressure on him to win. Playing with freedom will generally not work to Muzza's favour however because he is a talentless ghel who needs instructions.
Lets be honest, if there was no wind about yesterday for the first two sets, the Muzzatron would've lost in straight sets. The conditions were a nice equaliser; much like Barcelona playing Chelsea on a waterlogged wreck. But like most Brits, I do rate resilience and Murray is the most resilient player around. He could hack it on a windy night in New York.
I guess his future chances also depend on whether Nadal comes back as the freak he used to be.
Nadal
What a 6 season wonder.
Murray had to win a rain-delayed semi against Nadal in 2008 and Federer had a day extra to prepare for the final. Federer got lucky.
The roof was closed in the Wimbledon final. Federer got lucky.
Everyone gets lucky.
If you win a Slam, you deserve it.
Players have to handle all conditions and situations at all tournaments. Luck doesn't exist. Just a series of events you master or you don't. Whoever wins is a worthy champion.
He'll probably win a few more French Opens on one leg.
On hardcourts though, you'd favour Djokovic over Nadal in any condition. On the faster stuff, Federer is also better than Nadal. With Murray's newly-discovered Belief™, Spirit™ and Grit™, he has the potential to get one over Nadal too on hardcourts.
The main point being, men's tennis is awlsome and the next few years should continue to be deserving of the hyberbole.
I'm not saying Murray was lucky but more than the conditions suited him. When the roof is closed and there are not many external factors, usually - the more aggressive player that goes for his shots wins. But Murray with his slightly more defensive game gets an advantage because he deals with the weather better. Personally I think it's a good trait. At least in cricket, a batsman being able to handle different pitch conditions is seen as a indicator of quality.
It was more directed at Charlie seemingly downplaying the achievement.
If you went through every tournament in the Open Era, there would be something you could use to say this or that could have caused this or that to happen. Djokovic came back at him when the wind subsided. But Murray nullified him even then.
Was not downplaying anything. Just said he was a bit lucky thats all. but i also said sometimes you need that luck.
Never said he did not deserve it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote