That Match Should Have Been A Final

by hawkeye Sun Mar 18, 2012 1:37 pm

A rain delay (in southern California!), hostile windy conditions and a depleted audience didn't bode well for the semi final meeting of Nadal and Federer. As soon as they came on court however it was possible to sense the added tension that a match between two such great champions brings. Nadal did his usual pre-match run to the base line but I also noticed Federer dancing about in anticipation and preparation. Does he usually do that?

They produced a great match. Some spectacular ralleys finding angles that other players don't appear to have access to. In fact angles that they don't use against other players. Despite the straightforward (on paper) scoreline the match was close and had quite a few twists and turns. If a few points had gone a different way in the 2nd set the outcome could very well have been different. What a bizzare rain delay on match point at the end. For anyone unable to stay up so late I can recommend watching a repeat...

Federer will gain a lot of confidence of course from this match. Nadal I'm sure will be disapointed but he too should as he usually does take positives from playing in such a high quality match. He will be difficult to beat by any player including Federer when they next meet.

I will be surprised if the final is not an anti climax. I will be cheering for Federer as he needs to get his ranking up. Nadal and Federer bring something special to the court. It will look wrong in the history books to see their meetings as semis... also the winner deserves a trophy.

by Veejay Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:21 pm

The quality,variety and standard of tennis coming off Federer's racket has never been achieved by any other player in draw
Amazing how Nadal who grew up on a windy island couldnt handle the conditions as a well as Federer did,but I think a lot of that had to do with that fact that he was completely stunned as how well Federer was playing

There'd a lot of tension between these two players of late,a lot of word in press conferences,Nadal has clearly been acting like a child.Federer was aright to vice his opinion about how Nadal always breaks the serving rules and when he said he considered the court to be too slow,Nadals reaction to that was that they will probably speed the court up for him next year seeing how suddenly his comments about the serving rule affected him this past week
Nadal is just peed cause when Roger speaks,people listen and when he speaks theres usually some kind of backlash to his outrageous comments

by Guest Sat Mar 24, 2012 11:58 am

hawkeye wrote: "It will look wrong in the history books to see their meetings as semis"

Yeah, but their history did fool us. I’m
still being tricked into thinking of that semi as a final, having actually referred to it as the
IW final in one of my recent posts! Guess which self-promoting rafa fan with the
most trusted “tennis knowledge” wasted no time to point out my “mistake”, as
though it makes any difference whether it was the semi or final or even
the 1^st round when Roger CRUSHED rafa and changed a little history? Talk of “sore loser”! That Match Should Have Been A Final 810156456

That Match Should Have Been A Final 810156456

In any even, I don’t think Roger will win in Miami. He said: “Just because I'm playing well doesn't mean
that the rest of the group is not.” Doesn’t sound like something he’d say if he
really believes he’d win. More likely rafa vs djoko again, but I hope I'm wrong.

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:39 pm

I can't quite understand how you can get confused between a final and a semifinal.
As for Rafa, it would have been better for him to reach the final, so really I was taking away credit (from Nadal) by pointing out your mistake.
I'm still shocked you can't tell the difference between a SF and F.

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 12:55 pm

CommonSense wrote: when Roger CRUSHED rafa and changed a little history?

Crushed?

Nadal won as many games in the 2nd set as games Federer won in all 3 sets of a certain GS final.

by Tennisanorak Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:16 pm

Interesting. Btw, the last 3 sets Federer and Nadal played at the WTF (Federer's strongest surface) have been won by Federer 6-1 6-3 6-0. Does that scoreline sound familiar, Amritia?

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:19 pm

Yes that was the same scoreline as when Nadal beat Federer in the FO final 2008.
Good to see Federer fans linking up different matches from different years to try and match that scoreline.

by Tennisanorak Sat Mar 24, 2012 2:22 pm

Amritia, the WTF is best of three sets and is Federer's strongest surface. The only way to compare it with Nadal's strongest surface where the matches are best of 5 sets is to combine two years.

In any case, the last meeting at WTF, 6-3 6-0 meant that Nadal won an average of 1.5 games every set, marginally better than the 1.33 games Federer won in that 1-6 3-6 0-6 loss.

So both defeats were equally one-sided.

by Guest Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:11 pm

amritia3ee wrote:
CommonSense wrote: when Roger CRUSHED rafa and changed a little history?
Crushed?
Nadal won as many games in the 2nd set as games Federer won in all 3 sets of a certain GS final.

YOu're free to believe what you what to believe. Rolling Eyes

But I stand by what I said: given their long h-2-h history, Fed being WAY passed his prime and rafa (age-wise) smacked right in the height of his prime, plus, ALL the conditions were in Nadal's favour. It was a CRUSHING defeat from where i'm sitting. No way around it and I'm not the only one taking this position.

Finally, you've implied that you've good tennis knowledge. Now don't waste that talent, genius. I'm inviting you to write an article to ELABORATE on your own reasons why you think Roger didn't crush rafa. Don't copy from anyone, an original analyisis will be much appreciated. That Match Should Have Been A Final 732107

That Match Should Have Been A Final 732107

by Guest Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:14 pm

Tennisanorak wrote:Amritia, the WTF is best of three sets and is Federer's strongest surface. The only way to compare it with Nadal's strongest surface where the matches are best of 5 sets is to combine two years.

In any case, the last meeting at WTF, 6-3 6-0 meant that Nadal won an average of 1.5 games every set, marginally better than the 1.33 games Federer won in that 1-6 3-6 0-6 loss.

So both defeats were equally one-sided.

That Match Should Have Been A Final 3610695981

Thank you, I rest my case. Very Happy

by Josiah Maiestas Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:44 pm

Ancient history the 2008 match now Amrit. However since that match Nadal has failed to live up to those heady expectations of keeping Federer's games won below 3 a set. Why is that?

Why can error machine Fed easily deal with number 2 in the world in the last meeting?

Clinging on to history won't do him any favours with Roger now only 800 points behind him in the ranks Yahoo

by noleisthebest Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:28 pm

CommonSense wrote:
amritia3ee wrote:
CommonSense wrote: when Roger CRUSHED rafa and changed a little history?
Crushed?
Nadal won as many games in the 2nd set as games Federer won in all 3 sets of a certain GS final.

YOu're free to believe what you what to believe. But I stand by what I said: given their long h-2-h history, Fed being WAY passed his prime and rafa (age-wise) smacked right in the height of his prime, plus, ALL the conditions were in Nadal's favour. It was a CRUSHING defeat from where i'm sitting. No way around it and I'm not the only one taking this position.

Finally, you've implied that you've good tennis knowledge. Now don't waste that talent, genius. I'm inviting you to write an article to tell everyone your own reasons why you think Roger didn't crush rafa. Don't copy from anyone, an original analyisis will be much appreciated.

by **laverfan** Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:43 pm

The usual. Doh

by Tenez Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:47 pm

laverfan wrote:The usual.

Just without me this time!

by hawkeye Sat Mar 24, 2012 4:52 pm

Of course the Indian Wells semi should have been a final. Everytime Federer and Nadal meet it is seen to have a significance beyond one mere match because of how important their previous (and future) meetings have been.

Look at the way even the 606v2 posters who are stubbornly blind to the talents of one of these two all time greats continue to discuss the significance of their latest meeting.

Hopefully next Sunday their rivalry will continue in a more appropriate setting.

by lags72 Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:04 pm

I know this pretty much flies in the face of what the great man himself has been saying in recent times, as well as the view of many pundits and observers, but I remain of the opinion that RF will come to a decision to hang up the racket within a year or so from now

I say we should enjoy this particular rivalry whilst we can ...... it may not be a feature of the tennis world for too much longer.

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:06 pm

CommonSense wrote:I'm inviting you to write an article to ELABORATE on your own reasons why you think Roger didn't crush rafa.

Because Nadal won more than 4 games.

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:07 pm

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Ancient history the 2008 match now Amrit. However since that match Nadal has failed to live up to those heady expectations of keeping Federer's games won below 3 a set. Why is that?

Miami 2011?

by amritia3ee Sat Mar 24, 2012 5:09 pm

hawkeye wrote:Of course the Indian Wells semi should have been a final. Everytime Federer and Nadal meet it is seen to have a significance beyond one mere match because of how important their previous (and future) meetings have been.

Look at the way even the 606v2 posters who are stubbornly blind to the talents of one of these two all time greats continue to discuss the significance of their latest meeting.

Hopefully next Sunday their rivalry will continue in a more appropriate setting.

Yes the greatest rivalry of all time, between two of the greatest players of all time. A rivalry to savour. And as much as me, and other Nadal fans, try to claim otherwise they have played some thrilling classics even in the most important tournaments (Grand Slams)- Wimby 2008 and AO 2009 are 2 of my favourite matches.

by **laverfan** Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:23 pm

Tenez wrote:
laverfan wrote:The usual.

Just without me this time!

Absolutely. Laugh

by Guest Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:14 am

amritia3ee wrote:
CommonSense wrote:I'm inviting you to write an article to ELABORATE on your own reasons why you think Roger didn't crush rafa.
Because Nadal won more than 4 games.

That’s all you got? Where’s the rest? Shocked

I’ll give you an F for resourcefulness, an A for
effort and A+++ for blind devotion to a pseudo-champ. Everyone, a round of
applause for amrit, pls. That Match Should Have Been A Final 1710857839

That Match Should Have Been A Final 1710857839

by lags72 Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:02 pm

CommonSense - I know there have been contentious remarks traded by both opposing parties here. Not the sort of stuff I particularly wish to be involved in directly, it's not something that appeals to me as a forum member.

But on this occasion I do feel - as a bystander/observer- that you are being unreasonable and, to coin the phrase, out of order.

I'm really not sure that Fed 'crushed' Nadal at IW. It was a comfortable and convincing win, no doubt on that. But crushed to me usually (though not necessarily) smacks of breadsticks and bagels.

When I first came across certain posts by amritia3ee I began to wonder whether he/she was a kindred spirit of S_A, aka UE. But I was very wrong. Being a keen Nadal fan doesn't necessarily equate to the irrationality and perverse bias (allied to hatred of a certain player) which characterised S_A.

If proof were needed that amritia3ee is a very different and much more balanced individual, then nothing could be more clear than the article originated by him/her recently titled Congratulations to Federer in the immediate aftermath of his IW Final victory. This was a genuine, warm recognition not just of Fed's win at IW but of his impressive start to 2012 overall. And there have been many other complimentary remarks towards Federer from amritia3ee, most recently on his fine play yesterday vs Harrison, and on his standing and past achievements in the sport overall.

S_A, in total contrast, once penned a typically childish article (one of many..... Rolling Eyes

!!) on the old 606, soon after Fed had beaten Rafa in the WTF Final 2010. It was laced with heavy sarcasm by giving all credit to coach Annacone for the win but of course absolutely none to Fed himself. I see no such parallel-world nonsense coming from amritia3ee.

I know that you feel amritia3ee can be unduly critical of Fed whilst defending Rafa but I do get the impression that he/she does so only when 'provoked' into it. (The likes of S_A needed no such provocation and I'm convinced will happily write vitriol about Fed to his dying day - on whichever forum he now resides .....)

I could be wasting my time & breath, but something tells me you two could very likely both get along much better with just a little understanding that you each support different players for different, but personal and justifiable reasons. And along the way, it might just help the tone of the Forum in general ........ rose

by Guest Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:22 pm

lags72 wrote:CommonSense - I know there have been contentious remarks traded by both opposing parties here. Not the sort of stuff I particularly wish to be involved in directly, it's not something that appeals to me as a forum member.

But on this occasion I do feel - as a bystander/observer- that you are being unreasonable and, to coin the phrase, out of order.

I'm really not sure that Fed 'crushed' Nadal at IW. It was a comfortable and convincing win, no doubt on that. But crushed to me usually (though not necessarily) smacks of breadsticks and bagels.

When I first came across certain posts by amritia3ee I began to wonder whether he/she was a kindred spirit of S_A, aka UE. But I was very wrong. Being a keen Nadal fan doesn't necessarily equate to the irrationality and perverse bias (allied to hatred of a certain player) which characterised S_A.

If proof were needed that amritia3ee is a very different and much more balanced individual, then nothing could be more clear than the article originated by him/her recently titled Congratulations to Federer in the immediate
aftermath of his IW Final victory. This was a genuine, warm recognition not just of Fed's win at IW but of his impressive start to 2012 overall. And there have been many other complimentary remarks towards Federer from amritia3ee, most recently on his fine play yesterday vs Harrison, and on his standing and past achievements in the sport overall.

S_A, in total contrast, once penned a typically childish article (one of many..... !!) on the old 606, soon after Fed had beaten Rafa in the WTF Final 2010. It was laced with heavy sarcasm by giving all credit to coach Annacone for the win but of course absolutely none to Fed himself. I see no such parallel-world nonsense coming from amritia3ee.

I know that you feel amritia3ee can be unduly critical of Fed whilst defending Rafa but I do get the impression that he/she does so only when 'provoked' into it. (The likes of S_A needed no such provocation and I'm convinced will happily write vitriol about Fed to his dying day - on whichever forum he now resides .....)

I could be wasting my time & breath, but something tells me you two could very likely both get along much better with just a little understanding that you each support different players for different, but personal and justifiable reasons. And along the way, it might just help the tone of the Forum in general ........

That Match Should Have Been A Final 291114

from the bottom of my heart!

by LuvSports! Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:23 pm

amrit will like this ^ ^

nice post bud, i agree i think they have mellowed and he has to put up with alot of crap 2bh so good on them.

by amritia3ee Sun Mar 25, 2012 6:45 pm

Lags 72, Luvsports Hug

Thanks

Maybe even a rose

to CS too

(I said maybe Wink

)

by Guest Tue Mar 27, 2012 6:30 pm

amritia3ee wrote:Lags 72, Luvsports Thanks

Maybe even a to CS too (I said maybe )

Let me know when you've made your mind up. I'll inform the press.

by Sponsored content

That Match Should Have Been A Final

That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final

Re: That Match Should Have Been A Final