POOR SPORTSMANSHIP

In light of all the celebrations,we are over looking something very disturbing thats rotting our game from within
If Roger had lost it would certainly have been a serious topic so I see no reason why it shouldn't be highlighted regardless of the out come

On ESPN Pam Shriver and Cahill were pretty horrified by Nadals behaviour.. Shriver at one point said when Nadal was grabbing at his leg-- "seems like Nadal always finds aches and pains when he's losing" and the another announcer said "the last thing anyone - esp Federer fans- want to hear is Nadal blame some injury for another loss"
What they found really disturbing was how Nadal called the umpire to check the court on match point

How desperate are Nadals tactics these days? When Roger is serving for the match Nadal runs off court for a bathroom break.He may have been quick cause he had to be but it was a pure mind tactic to upset Roger serving rhythm and it worked as Roger started having problems finding his 1st serve
Then on match point Nadal calls to stop the match!
I know it was starting to rain slightly but I doubt he would have called to stop the match if it was him who was serving at match point .Not only that,its widely regarded as an unwritten rule that when such a instance arises,the player down usually waits for the umpire to call it,they don't decide to stop playing themselves

Roger may have ignored all this but it was once again a pretty poor display of sportsmanship coming from the Spaniard

I love it not only are you guys sore losers you are sore winners as well. I don't even know why I bothered reading this.

PS I hear Nadal was the second gunmen on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963.

Yes, I was watching the broadcast when Shriver said what she said. And it was not as vehment as you present it. Roger was in clear control and I think Shriver was saying that Roger's fans would be very annoyed if Nadal withdrew or called an MTO. Hardly, controversial statement. The guy stretch's out his leg and that is bad sportsmanship, I suppose if you say so.

socal1976 wrote:PS I hear Nadal was the second gunmen on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963.

No, that was Uncle Toni.

socal1976 wrote:I love it not only are you guys sore losers you are sore winners as well. I don't even know why I bothered reading this.

PS I hear Nadal was the second gunmen on the grassy knoll in Dallas in 1963.

Yes, I was watching the broadcast when Shriver said what she said. And it was not as vehment as you present it. Roger was in clear control and I think Shriver was saying that Roger's fans would be very annoyed if Nadal withdrew or called an MTO. Hardly, controversial statement. The guy stretch's out his leg and that is bad sportsmanship, I suppose if you say so.

While you're at it ignore calling a toilet break when your opponent is serving for the match or god forbid even stoping play on match point!!
Smacks of the medical time out Nadal called when Roger served for the 1st set at RG last year,but as usual your rose coloured glasses blinds you
You want to attack this thread..look at your own one!!!
Aren't you ashamed? If I were you Id go ban myself before someone else does!
Blaming Fed fans for Djokovic losing to Isner
And then vowing to even support Hitler over Federer..who is looking like the sore loser now?

You are probably right, however it is possible Julius that uncle toni the evil genius he is invented a time machine and sent Rafa back to kill Kennedy. I wonder is their any forensic evidence that could shed light on whether the assassin was right handed or left handed, or maybe converted right hander?

In answer to your question, no I am not ashamed of myself.

Could care less about match point at that stage in the match Roger had pretty much complete control and how do you know how slick the court was or wasn't. Maybe it was gamesmanship maybe it was real concern, frankly so?

socal1976 wrote:In answer to your question, no I am not ashamed of myself.

Could care less about match point at that stage in the match Roger had pretty much complete control and how do you know how slick the court was or wasn't. Maybe it was gamesmanship maybe it was real concern, frankly so?

Of course you could care less,if Nadal did this to Djokovic Im sure your attitude would be completely different
Speaks volumes doesn't it
And it comes as no surprise that you're not ashamed of your nazi comments

Godwins alert!

Veejay, is it possible for Hitler to play tennis with Federer, and does the fueher beating Roger not strike you as odd? Here we go hypothetical world tour finals round Robin:

Fed
Hitler
Stalin
Ghenghis Khan

I hope Fed goes 0-6 in sets, because some of his fans online are so charming. Does that show you how ashamed I am about that, lighten up it was a joke, maybe in poor taste but obviously it was ludicrous scenario meant to be such.

bogbrush wrote:Godwins alert!

Socal was the one who said this : "Anyone, and I mean anyone (yes think of the best most evil possible person in history) v. Federer. I root for anyone. "

He's completely lost it. If this is what happens after a Djokovic match were in for an interesting year.

socal1976 wrote:Veejay, is it possible for Hitler to play tennis with Federer, and does the fueher beating Roger not strike you as odd? Here we go hypothetical world tour finals round Robin:

Fed
Hitler
Stalin
Ghenghis Khan

I hope Fed goes 0-6 in sets, because some of his fans online are so charming. Does that show you how ashamed I am about that, lighten up it was a joke, maybe in poor taste but obviously it was ludicrous scenario meant to be such.

I doubt it was a joke,you were pretty serious in your outrage about Djokovic losing to Isner
If anything that was the humour in all of it
Why say something like that anyway?
I will give you credit for sticking to your word cause you've quite clearly defended the evil poor sportsmanship of Nadal over Federer

"best evil" is pretty funny.

Anyway, in my opinion players should be timing their toilet breaks so they don't occur at 5-4. I guess you need to remember to go at 4-3. Or maybe they should be allowed one at 5-5 instead?

As for the match point, I think Rafa should have waited one point more. Better to assess at deuce. You have to think of the fans, too. They've got homes to go to. What if the delay by Rafa ultimately allows the rain to get in and cause a 4 hour delay for 15,000 spectators?

However I thought I heard FEderer say a "come on" on a double fault so let's not get too anti-Rafa...

Honestly, veejay you can't see a tennis match between Hitler and Fed as a joke, you don't see the ridiculousness of the comment? How exactly is hitler going to play tennis against a dictator that has been dead for over 65 years?

Hello



Oh minions and minionettes it is a day of celebration.

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaalleluuuuuuuuuuuuuujah.

This is what another poster who was at the match posted afterwards regarding the 'bathroom break'.

I think it sums up quite nicely what many people feel about Nadal's 'sportsmanship'.

------------------------

Just got back home from IW, seeing the Nadal-Fed game.
FYI: Because I'm a French Canadian living in LA and a huge Tennis fan, it was always easy for me to respect, like and root for both, Nadal and Fed, my perfect Yin and Yang of tennis, despite my dislike for their personality-flaws (Fed's arrogance / Nadal's hypocrisy).

Today, I was hoping for Nadal to win the second set, simply because I wanted to see an epic third, and when Nadal broke Fed in the second set, the game got tighter. Federer was up 5-4, SERVING FOR THE MATCH, tension peaking and then the oddest thing happens: Nadal walks off the court -- for a bathroom break!! The crowd went: ohhhmg-shhhshhhoohh, the guy next to me said: 'what a scumbag!'.
I know, it's not the first time that Nadal is accused of bad sportsmanship. Or puzzles people with perfectly-timed game interruptions, like for example the bathroom break against Fish at the WTF 2011, or the dodgy MTO against Del Potro at WI 2011, or the MTO against Fed at RG 2011 when Nadal was down 2-5 with Federer serving. But watching these matches on TV, I always used to say: so what, moving on.
But this time it was different: I was there. It was the first time that I actually witnessed Nadal doing it -- and I must sadly say, it was disgusting.

First of all, being there in the stadium, it was all too obvious that it was a dirty trick. Bathroom break before the last game and the opponent serving for the match? C'mon man. Ever seen Kobe running to the bathroom with the clock winding down? Ever seen another tennis player doing this? Besides, bathroom breaks are to be taken before your OWN serve, and if Nadal really had to go to the bathroom, he could have gone 5 minutes earlier before his serve.

And here is the second difference for me: because there aren't any tv-commercials at live matches, all I got to see during the break saw was Federer alone on court. Every second of it. Waiting and waiting. Minute after minute. Taking deep breaths. Staring at his racquet. And I could almost feel what went through Feds head: he had time to realize that Nadal just successfully adjusted his game, that Nadal just started to play better, he was possibly thinking of RG 2011, the missed match points against Nole at USO 2011, the Tsonga melt-down... gosh, even for me, as a regular Tennis fan in the stands, these minutes became AGONIZING!

When Nadal came back, I no longer rooted for Nadal to win the second set. Instead I hoped and prayed that Fed would close it out. And I was afraid that the match would slip away, that Nadal has managed to get into Fed's head once again to cake-walk the third. But then, it didn't happen. And Fed won.

Which left me relieved for Fed, but also sad that after what I saw in person, my personal, 7-year-old, perfect Yin and Yang of tennis, has just been thrown out of whack.

--------------------



emancipator - universal tennis correspondent

PS no outrage at Djoko losing to Isner. Happy for John, he deserved it, he is a talent and was better on that day. See Veejay is that so hard? YOu have had 18 chances over the years to come out and once say that sentence. But you have failed miserably every time. YOu can't even hold back and must kick a man after he loses as well.

Henman Bill wrote:"best evil" is pretty funny.

Anyway, in my opinion players should be timing their toilet breaks so they don't occur at 5-4. I guess you need to remember to go at 4-3. Or maybe they should be allowed one at 5-5 instead?

As for the match point, I think Rafa should have waited one point more. Better to assess at deuce. You have to think of the fans, too. They've got homes to go to. What if the delay by Rafa ultimately allows the rain to get in and cause a 4 hour delay for 15,000 spectators?

However I thought I heard FEderer say a "come on" on a double fault so let's not get too anti-Rafa...

The thing about these sort of medical time outs,toilet breaks etc is a regular tactic by Nadal that he uses/abuses to gain an unfair advantage over his opponent by upsetting their rhythm or stealing their momentum away from them
There is always something with the guy
Federer saying "come one" is hardly the same as that doesn't have a direct effect on the outcome of a match

socal1976 wrote:Honestly, veejay you can't see a tennis match between Hitler and Fed as a joke, you don't see the ridiculousness of the comment? How exactly is hitler going to play tennis against a dictator that has been dead for over 65 years?

You never said Hitler,you said :

"Anyone, and I mean anyone (yes think of the best most evil possible person in history)"

emancipator wrote:Hello



Oh minions and minionettes it is a day of celebration.

Haaaaaaaaaaaaaalleluuuuuuuuuuuuuujah.

This is what another poster who was at the match posted afterwards regarding the 'bathroom break'.

I think it sums up quite nicely what many people feel about Nadal's 'sportsmanship'.

------------------------

Just got back home from IW, seeing the Nadal-Fed game.
FYI: Because I'm a French Canadian living in LA and a huge Tennis fan, it was always easy for me to respect, like and root for both, Nadal and Fed, my perfect Yin and Yang of tennis, despite my dislike for their personality-flaws (Fed's arrogance / Nadal's hypocrisy).

Today, I was hoping for Nadal to win the second set, simply because I wanted to see an epic third, and when Nadal broke Fed in the second set, the game got tighter. Federer was up 5-4, SERVING FOR THE MATCH, tension peaking and then the oddest thing happens: Nadal walks off the court -- for a bathroom break!! The crowd went: ohhhmg-shhhshhhoohh, the guy next to me said: 'what a scumbag!'.
I know, it's not the first time that Nadal is accused of bad sportsmanship. Or puzzles people with perfectly-timed game interruptions, like for example the bathroom break against Fish at the WTF 2011, or the dodgy MTO against Del Potro at WI 2011, or the MTO against Fed at RG 2011 when Nadal was down 2-5 with Federer serving. But watching these matches on TV, I always used to say: so what, moving on.
But this time it was different: I was there. It was the first time that I actually witnessed Nadal doing it -- and I must sadly say, it was disgusting.

First of all, being there in the stadium, it was all too obvious that it was a dirty trick. Bathroom break before the last game and the opponent serving for the match? C'mon man. Ever seen Kobe running to the bathroom with the clock winding down? Ever seen another tennis player doing this? Besides, bathroom breaks are to be taken before your OWN serve, and if Nadal really had to go to the bathroom, he could have gone 5 minutes earlier before his serve.

And here is the second difference for me: because there aren't any tv-commercials at live matches, all I got to see during the break saw was Federer alone on court. Every second of it. Waiting and waiting. Minute after minute. Taking deep breaths. Staring at his racquet. And I could almost feel what went through Feds head: he had time to realize that Nadal just successfully adjusted his game, that Nadal just started to play better, he was possibly thinking of RG 2011, the missed match points against Nole at USO 2011, the Tsonga melt-down... gosh, even for me, as a regular Tennis fan in the stands, these minutes became AGONIZING!

When Nadal came back, I no longer rooted for Nadal to win the second set. Instead I hoped and prayed that Fed would close it out. And I was afraid that the match would slip away, that Nadal has managed to get into Fed's head once again to cake-walk the third. But then, it didn't happen. And Fed won.

Which left me relieved for Fed, but also sad that after what I saw in person, my personal, 7-year-old, perfect Yin and Yang of tennis, has just been thrown out of whack.

--------------------



emancipator - universal tennis correspondent

Ha ha! Nadal was back on court before the the usual change of ends ad break had finished on TV. Wonder why he had to leave anyway? There has been a lot of sickness about at Indian Wells this week. Phew. good job he didn't mention anything. Can you imagine what people would say if he had? Are you telling the truth about "rooting" equally for both Federer and Nadal?

Emancipator
That is a brilliant comment,thank you very much for adding it to the discussion
I think a personal account of someone actually being there really helps adds more perspective

Haweke:"Ha ha! Nadal was back on court before the the usual change of ends ad break had finished on TV. Wonder why he had to leave anyway? There has been a lot of sickness about at Indian Wells this week. Phew. good job he didn't mention anything. Can you imagine what people would say if he had? Are you telling the truth about "rooting" equally for both Federer and Nadal?


Please if Nadal was really sick he would have retired instead of allowing Roger an outright win over him,but only once he was a set and double break down
If he was rally sick,he would have mentioned it in the press conference
If he was really sick he would have thrown a tantrum like he did last year in Doha calling the trainer even after being told theres nothing they can do for someone who is sick
I too wonder why he was sick at that precise time,or why he need the toilet before Roger was serving for the match..how can one always be sick or need MTO at such precise moments?

As a fairly impartial observer of this great rivalry, the post by emancipator, tilts the balance clearly in favour of or rather against Rafa. It is possible that he had to go, but for a well toned body like his, some bumhole control, just for one game or two, should be easy. To put a spin, if he indeed did that as a gamesmanship, hats off to him, for being so thorough. I wouldn't have had the courage to do that.

socal1976 wrote:Honestly, veejay you can't see a tennis match between Hitler and Fed as a joke, you don't see the ridiculousness of the comment? How exactly is hitler going to play tennis against a dictator that has been dead for over 65 years?

For one thing, the conditions have changed out of all recognition in that time.

Awful post relayed by emancipator.

I don't see how Hawkeyes claim that ths all happened inside the change of ends break tallies with the spectator saying Fed was stood there waiting.

bogbrush wrote:Awful post relayed by emancipator.

I don't see how Hawkeyes claim that ths all happened inside the change of ends break tallies with the spectator saying Fed was stood there waiting.

Especially since Hawkeye watched from behind a screen and the spectator was there in person

Why does Nadal, The #2 Greatest of all Time, in his own righ, want to do things that will only stain and reduce the lustre of his legacy?

Here is my daily special quote of the day, an answer to the above question I posed re Nadal's gamesmanship:

“I had it explained to me by several in the know people that much of it
stems from the Spanish sports culture. Even from hundreds of years ago, the
Spanish upper class had a theory of there is glory in winning by deception, and
that's permeated through all their sports and cultures. It's actually
celebrated if you can win while using some trip up your sleeve or not getting
caught. That's partly why the Spanish have such a poor sportsmanship reputation
in al their sports and an inordinate amount of caught cheaters given their
size. In some ways- itps prob not Nadals fault. he very well could be a nice
guy- but he has beeen taught since a child by people he loves ,respecet- his
family, his leaders- that it's okay to win by any means necessary- as long as you
win.
so when he denies things with a straight face- he's prob thining there is
nothign wrong with that because his whole life he has been told that if he can
pull off deception- its a good thing. You see it through many cultures, gypsies
being one obvious example. We know Tony is a blatant cheat and he has created
in Nadal a - you and i together have to do these things to win, just deny and
it's glorious to pull it off.” Courtesy, TRuffin

I would've been more impressed had he taken a leaf from Jens Lehmann's book and relieved himself on court

legendkillarV2 wrote:I would've been more impressed had he taken a leaf from Jens Lehmann's book and relieved himself on court

Not so easy. The best of times, we are beneficiaries of the good side of our tradition; the worse of times, we are victims of the evil side of the same tradition. He was only a lad when he started. He didn't know he was being brandwashed by a pro-cheating culture. Perhaps he knows now, because he's lost focus and THE DRIVE in a very important match last week. Nevertheless, it is not easy to remove yourself from the tradition that raised you. The saga continues............

I watched the match yesterday on youtube finally.

It wasn't Nadal's finest hour, but it is par for the course that he will try and disrupt if the match is swinging away from him. Having got one of the breaks back I am sure he thought there was a very good chance that to leave court before Fed served for the match might just cause the latter to tighten up.

I don't know whether it was necessary to stop play at match point either, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

I wouldn't go so far to say it is cultural - David Ferrer is a terrific sportsman on the court who has a fairly grinding physically exhausting game without needing to conduct himself like Rafa.

Gamesmanship is rife throughout all sports and some sportsmen are more proficient at it than others. I think it will begin to be commented on more in the press, just as there is a little more scepticism about the 'career threatening injuries' in the media, and perhaps that will give the tournament officials a little more backbone.

Latin athletes are known for using dirty tricks: hand of God, Materazzi Zidane incident, Delpo's/ Nalby's hour long meditations before asking for Hawkeye, Nadal's coaching from Toni etc...that's always been like that and you just have to see it for what it is.

That's why Nadal was never comfortable as a number one.

noleisthebest wrote:Latin athletes are known for using dirty tricks: hand of God, Materazzi Zidane incident, Delpo's/ Nalby's hour long meditations before asking for Hawkeye, Nadal's coaching from Toni etc...that's always been like that and you just have to see it for what it is.

That's why Nadal was never comfortable as a number one.

I think the cheating behaviour is going on almost everywhere. Just that the Latins may not be as good as hiding it. I would say it's an instinctive behaviour which they cannot control and therefore can be more obvious. Other nations may have a much more thought through approach and do all the work behind the scene and at the end cheat as much if not much more...without being suspected.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:Latin athletes are known for using dirty tricks: hand of God, Materazzi Zidane incident, Delpo's/ Nalby's hour long meditations before asking for Hawkeye, Nadal's coaching from Toni etc...that's always been like that and you just have to see it for what it is.

That's why Nadal was never comfortable as a number one.

I think the cheating behaviour is going on almost everywhere. Just that the Latins may not be as good as hiding it. I would say it's an instinctive behaviour which they cannot control and therefore can be more obvious. Other nations may have a much more thought through approach and do all the work behind the scene and at the end cheat as much if not much more...without being suspected.

you have missed my point. Football is the best/easiest sport to see how various nations carry on.

Tennis has always had the "gentlemen's sport" ticket to it, which is why it irks when you see the cheap little tricks being attempted.

Trying to brush everyone under the same carpet is just political correctness as far as I'm concerned. You'll always have exceptions to the rule.

My point is a Connors, a Hewitt, or a Becker were not much better than Nadal but did it in such a way that they often had teh crowd behind them and were not seen as cheat though to me they were...maybe worse.

Stuff going on behind the scenes (whatever that might be, and however 'significant' or not) will always be difficult to control and police.

As regards stuff that happens on court : Umpires must be clear, firm, fair and - above all - consistent ; regardless of the status of any particular player.

It's not like the old days when umpires were just picked from a local club and acted in a sort of honorary role. These guys are now paid good money to travel the world with the Tour, and have a duty to maintain the highest professional standards throughout every match at which they officiate.

(wishful thinking on my part perhaps ....... ? )

Tenez wrote:My point is a Connors, a Hewitt, or a Becker were not much better than Nadal but did it in such a way that they often had teh crowd behind them and were not seen as cheat though to me they were...maybe worse.

There are different levels of gaining advantage in the match, but you have to draw the line somewhere. Tennis is as "decent" as you can get in professional sport in my opinion.
Nadal's antics may have given him a bit of advantage here and there, that's one of the main reasons I never liked him AT ALL, which is quite rare for me, because I like almost all the players for different things they bring to the game.

The thing I don't understand is how on earth he got that Edberg reward (was it more than once, I can't remember), his drama queening and having people wait at the net etc, just wind me up no end.

I can perfectly believe and accept that some even a lot of people don't mind it, I'll never understand how, but that's another story...

All in all, no big deal in the big picture, they all get the place they deserve in the end.

noleisthebest wrote:The thing I don't understand is how on earth he got that Edberg reward (was it more than once, I can't remember), his drama queening and having people wait at the net etc, just wind me up no end.
.

Don't get me started. I just want to know who votes? The top 10, the top 20, the 2000 ATP players?

To be fair I coudl have thought of other players getting the Edberg award besides Fed but I also understand one needs to stick a famous face on it.

Regarding the more cunnig ways of other countries, I have an example:

Remember that AO09 QF between your man and Roddick. Djoko had a gruelling long match v Baggy (finished at 4am or something) in the previous round and Stefansky and Roddick knew that Djoko was tired and asked the organisers to put him first in the day so he'd have less recovery time and also knew he would suffer under the heat.

Djoko, though the defending champion had no say in it, played, lasted a set and lost the next 3 completely exhausted.

This to me is a form of cheating behind the scene. You use your status, sponsors, to force a match to your advantage.

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:The thing I don't understand is how on earth he got that Edberg reward (was it more than once, I can't remember), his drama queening and having people wait at the net etc, just wind me up no end.
.

Don't get me started. I just want to know who votes? The top 10, the top 20, the 2000 ATP players?

To be fair I coudl have thought of other players getting the Edberg award besides Fed but I also understand one needs to stick a famous face on it.

Regarding the more cunnig ways of other countries, I have an example:

Remember that AO09 QF between your man and Roddick. Djoko had a gruelling long match v Baggy (finished at 4am or something) in the previous round and Stefansky and Roddick knew that Djoko was tired and asked the organisers to put him first in the day so he'd have less recovery time and also knew he would suffer under the heat.

Djoko, though the defending champion had no say in it, played, lasted a set and lost the next 3 completely exhausted.

This to me is a form of cheating behind the scene. You use your status, sponsors, to force a match to your advantage.

I'll try not to open Pandora's box.....I'll leave a hint... the "coincidental" 1st round draw at Wimbledon on court 18...

noleisthebest wrote:I'll try not to open Pandora's box.....I'll leave a hint... the "coincidental" 1st round draw at Wimbledon on court 18...

???which one? Borg's?

Tenez wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:I'll try not to open Pandora's box.....I'll leave a hint... the "coincidental" 1st round draw at Wimbledon on court 18...

???which one? Borg's?

NO, Isner Mahut 2011.

Ah yeah. Roughly 1 in 10 000 chance.

It should happen once every 10 000 years...funny it happened the following one.

Tenez wrote:Ah yeah. Roughly 1 in 10 000 chance.

It should happen once every 10 000 years...funny it happened the following one.

"funny"?

Wasn't it a 1 in 98 chance?

I used a simplified version....100 instead of 127 cause of the seeding. But I made the mistake to apply 1/100 x 1/100....

But you are right!

CommonSense wrote:Why does Nadal, The #2 Greatest of all Time, in his own righ, want to do things that will only stain and reduce the lustre of his legacy?

Here is my daily special quote of the day, an answer to the above question I posed re Nadal's gamesmanship:

“I had it explained to me by several in the know people that much of it
stems from the Spanish sports culture. Even from hundreds of years ago, the
Spanish upper class had a theory of there is glory in winning by deception, and
that's permeated through all their sports and cultures. It's actually
celebrated if you can win while using some trip up your sleeve or not getting
caught. That's partly why the Spanish have such a poor sportsmanship reputation
in al their sports and an inordinate amount of caught cheaters given their
size. In some ways- itps prob not Nadals fault. he very well could be a nice
guy- but he has beeen taught since a child by people he loves ,respecet- his
family, his leaders- that it's okay to win by any means necessary- as long as you
win.
so when he denies things with a straight face- he's prob thining there is
nothign wrong with that because his whole life he has been told that if he can
pull off deception- its a good thing. You see it through many cultures, gypsies
being one obvious example. We know Tony is a blatant cheat and he has created
in Nadal a - you and i together have to do these things to win, just deny and
it's glorious to pull it off.” Courtesy, TRuffin

Ruffin may be right but we cant make excuses for Nadal.He knows what he does is fundamentally wrong in the spirit of sport and its frowned upon so he should know better
Every time he resorts to such tactics it taints his win,and this seems to be a problem thats getting a little out of hand with him.He never used to do this before,but now its getting worse and worse
As some others have said,we need to draw the line somewhere

Veejay....I just cant quite put my finger on it but something about your posts the past 2 months tell me you're not Nadal's biggest fan?

I still think him stopping play when Roger was on fire in the final of the French Open did a similar thing, it ended Federers purple match. Its only in tennis that this behaviour is frowned upon though, in penalties in football the keeper will do everything in his power to put him off. And its thought as clever, same with fouls that will break down a teams good play. Its normal for that to happen

CAS wrote:I still think him stopping play when Roger was on fire in the final of the French Open did a similar thing, it ended Federers purple match. Its only in tennis that this behaviour is frowned upon though, in penalties in football the keeper will do everything in his power to put him off. And its thought as clever, same with fouls that will break down a teams good play. Its normal for that to happen

The most obvious case of such a effect a distraction can have, we have to go back to the 2008 Hamburg final between Nadal and Federer.

5/1 up for Federer with set point on his serve when Nadal stops the momuntum on Fed's serve asking the referee to call for the trainer. I don;t think Nadal expected to see federer collapse that much....but Fed lost the set point(s), the set and the match.

The one I remember vividly was against Philipp Petzschner at Wimbledon 2010, Nadal called for the trainer when he was on fire, was yet to break the German and then we his treatment was done he came out flying and broke him instantly.

That may well have been because the problem was sorted as why call for the trainer? We will never know, but I am curious as to why its frowned upon in tennis but in football if you dont do it that is what is actually frowned upon. Nadal may just be thinking I am doing everything it takes to win? Just like rolling around late on with few minutes to go, or running to the corner flag. I don't agree with it, but maybe as a sportman you have to deal with it?

McEnroe would put off his opponent as would Lendl, is it that Nadals is more mischievious? As it was blantant that Mac and Lendl were doing it, and I dont think they would deny it either.

Well to be fair and to inject some objectivity into this conversation, Roger has done this also, albeit not during the course of play, but at the end of the first set of a match. Here's an article from his 2010 match with Davydenko, which indicates his bathroom break (I bolded that portion of the article):

By Kevin Garside, Chief Sports Writer, in Melbourne

12:00PM GMT 27 Jan 2010

Roger Federer was invited to have a go and did not know where he was at the end of a match described by Brad Gilbert as the craziest he had ever seen.

Federer won the third set to love while hitting only two winners off his own bat. And this after Davydenko had Federer lunging around the baseline like a novice.

At a set and a break down Federer appeared cooked, his run of 22 consecutive grand slam semi-finals at an end. Then Davydenko did what only he can; he morphed into someone else, someone who had never hit a tennis ball before.

At least Goran Ivanisevic only had good Goran and Bad Goran to worry about. Who knows how many Nikolays are running around in Davydenko’s head.

He had only to lift the ball over the net to establish a lead of 6-2, 4-1. Instead he buried the ball in it and would not win another game for an hour.

During that grim sequence, in which 13 consecutive games were pillaged by Federer, Davydenko was pronounced dead on court before being upgraded by Gilbert to the rank of zombie.

The BBC should consider a bid to ESPN for the services of Gilbert before the January transfer window closes. He would make some strike partner for John McEnroe at Wimbledon. It was hard to disagree with his assessment of Davydenko, who had no explanation for his sudden decline.

Asked how he felt during the winless streak, he raised his arms and smiled: “P***** off. Everything was s***. Come on guys. What can you do? Go home tomorrow and relax.”

From the edge of oblivion Davydenko suddenly returned to himself in the fourth set, breaking back as Federer served for the match.

“When he hit those returns I though it was so unnecessary, you know. I was saying why now? Why not some other time when it wasn’t so important,” Federer said. “Match point, I send down a great serve and he blocks it back. I did not have a chance to play the point.”

Federer, as he mostly always does, got there in the end to stretch the semi-final elastic band to an unprecedented 23. Of those he has won all but three.

“Ladies and gentleman, the master is in the house - 23 consecutive grand slam semi-finals,” was how the stadium announcer hailed our hero.

Federer looked almost embarrassed at the fuss being made of him. He recognised that caprice played as much a part in this journey as his racket.

“I knew I wasn’t looking very good. But I wasn’t panicking. It is the best of five sets. I just relaxed and thought if the sun goes and maybe his level drops a little bit the whole match might change for the better. It did. I can’t believe the way it changed, you know.

“It is incredible looking back how many years that I have been able to deliver a grand slam semi, especially this year. Looking at the draw with Hewitt in the fourth round and Davydenko in the quarters I knew it was going to be tough.

"I thought I was not going to make it this time. You are always worried that your streak is going to be broken. I stopped thinking about it after the second round and just started to concentrate on the tournament. It’s definitely one of the most amazing things I have done.”

Federer made 11 unforced errors in the opening three games. The first went to five deuces before Federer prevailed. He was 4-1 down in 20 minutes. It could have been five had Davydenko converted the break points in the opening game.

Federer opted for the bathroom break after the first set. Judging by the prolonged time it took to go through his ablutions the principal motive for the hiatus was not the need to spend a penny.

It made no noticeable difference. Having hung on just to his opening service game, Federer was torched by Davydenko’s howitzer returns in his second. The Russian was behaving like a Bolshevik in 1917 St Petersburg; irreverent beyond belief.

The spell was broken when Davydenko netted an easy pass, which would have given him a 4-1 lead. Federer fed on the momentum swing to hold on to his serve and break back in the next.

Davydenko was back in his box, barely able to put the ball in court. Federer broke again en route to taking the set. That was that save for Davydenko’s weird rally at the close.

“I can’t explain what happened,” Davydenko said. “I was confident in the beginning. I have so many chances to make that break in the second, I know if I take one I can win the match. But something changed. I don’t know what happened. I could not win any more games. Maybe Federer was lucky today. Again.” That raised a laugh.

Federer will play Tsonga in the semi-finals after his five-set victory over Novak Djokovic.

Djokovic, who quit with heat stroke in the quarter-finals last year, left the court during the fourth set for another medical timeout and threw up in the locker room.

On this occasion he returned to complete the match but that did not change the outcome.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/tennis/australianopen/7081743/Australian-Open-2010-Roger-Federer-beats-Nikolay-Davydenko-to-reach-semi-finals.html

CAS wrote:
McEnroe would put off his opponent as would Lendl, is it that Nadals is more mischievious? As it was blantant that Mac and Lendl were doing it, and I dont think they would deny it either.

I don;t think McEnroe was doing it purposedly as it certainly cost him much more than he gained from.

And I don't remember Lendl trying to unsettle his opponents other than with his FH!