Unfair, Unprofessional, Misleading and a "Greek Tragedy"

First topic message reminder :

Just listening to Virginia Wade and Greg Rusedski discuss Murrays dramatic match against Neiminen. I'm not sure of all the details but for the first set and a half Murray gave all the impession that he was in agony and was going to withdraw and had 3 MTO's. Neiminen must have thought he was through to the 3rd round. Then Murray completely recovered as far as his game goes.

Wade and Rusedski didn't hold back with their criticism of Murray's behaviour. Wade said she was in no doubt that Murray was hurting but he turned it into a "Greek tragedy" and that this was not professional. At one point he talked to the umpire and it looked like he was going to default. Rusedski wondered about the injury (is it his back a pinched nerve... what is the "reasoning" behind it... it will be interesting for us all to see what the real injury is) and how he was able to suddenly start playing so well. This put Neimenen in a difficult position. Wade called it "unfair" and said it was no longer a competative match.

They both went on to say it's not the first time Murray has woken with something hurting and been indecisive about whether or not to play and people are left not knowing whats going on. Wade wanted to go on and talk about a particular Davis cup match but didn't get the chance as it looked like she was told they were moving on to the next live action. In fact both looked like they were itching to say more.

IMO Murray will have to try a little harder if he doesn't want people to talk about his back... It does appear to be a big weapon (his back that is... )

Golden wrote:Is this guy ever 100% fit for a whole tournament??

Yes. Around 95% of them. The previous three Slams, spring to mind. You obviously have doubts, which makes his Masters and twenty odd tournament wins all the more remarkable

Goodness knows what he'll achieve when he finally becomes at least 95% fit, for all of the tournament

hawkeye wrote:Just a few things to add before I tire of this subject...

What Murray? Are you telling us, that these boards will become free of your negative gush?

hawkeye wrote:Neimenen was not fully fit himself. That could explain why he played so poorly and made so many unforced errors. He said this in his post match interview. It's funny that no one noticed

Do you think he was injured during the previous beatings that Murray gave to him. It's no surprise that we didn't notice, given the subtle nature of the injury. Or are you saying that Neimenen has a better 'stiff upper lip' than Murray? I actually don't recall Murray ever moaning about an injury or ever making it an excuse for a defeat. Quite the reverse actually. For instance he was badly compromised at the Aus and US Opens of 2009 - such was his determination not to make excuses, this is hardly remembered

hawkeye wrote:On Eurosport this morning Virginia Wade responded to the anger of Murray over her comments. She laughed and said "actually I thought I was being circumspect"

What wit!!

hawkeye wrote:When it was pointed out to her that as a multi slam winner her expert opinion was valuable you could see her visibly preen as only someone with a Wimbledon trophy, a US Open trophy and an Austalian Open trophy safely at home on her mantlepiece can

Ouch!! More shot, into the body of Murray, eh? We all know that being a former Open Champion means you can be disrespectful of the current crop, don't we, eh? Isn't it ironic that the grumps of the past Connors, Mac, Lendl and Courier have turned out to be the most considered and respecful of the current era - certainly Courier is an obvious fan. Not certain I'm interested in the views of someone who played most of her best Tennis before the game really blossomed. Not certain you were, until it suited your argument of course!!

hawkeye wrote:All won in one of the toughest eras in womens tennis

When she won those slams back in 68' and 72', everyone was commenting how tough the era was - well at least the 16 Ladies that took part, discussed it. Strange that her career when severly pear shaped once Nat and Chrissie got their acts together, never mind the exploits of Austin, Mandlikova etc.

hawkeye wrote:Murray should think carefully who he picks a fight with as with Wade he has more than met his match

Please stop the humour!! Being attacked by Wade might be as dangerous a drunk with a sawn off machine gun, if only they weren't blind as well

hawkeye wrote: I also checked and was impressed to discover that Wade also has doubles titles at the Australian Open, the French Open and two at the US Open... all in an era when doubles was very competative with most top singles players playing)

Do you think they are as impressive as all those Masters victories that Murray has or his record versus Top 10 opponments, where he is actually 10th on the all time list. I ask because strangley when it comes to anyone giving Andy the bird, you are a big fan

Best part of it is that hawkeye chooses to believe Wade purely because it fits her warped agenda. Now don't get me wrong I respect Wade for her achievements but does that make everything she ever says as gospel? No of course not. I mean if she was gushing praise hawkeye would claim it was pro-British bias and dismiss it.

Also who was better placed to judge? Virginia Wade ensconced in studios many many miles away who as far as we know hasn't suffered back spasms or Jim Courier with more slam success than Wade who was courtside commentating and saw every movement and has suffered back spasms himself whose views were backed up by another sufferer Ivan Ljubicic - both may I add without any British bias.

Go figure hawkeye.

Caladonian Craig

That's a great idea for a poll! Who do you trust? Virginia or Jim? You should go for it.

Or better still who gives least inciteful posts hawkeye or jersey. Oooh that would be tough.

And by the way is it really up for debate? Courier was courtside and has suffered back spasms whilst Wade wasn't and hasn't as far as we know. So do we take an eye witness viewpoint with no personal bias or an observer in a studio many miles away. Go away and think about it but it may take you quite some time to work it out.

But Courier only has only two slam titles (to Wades 3) won in a weak era. Notably he didn't have to beat the great Billy Jean King in either. Also we don't know if Wade had back spasm's or how bad she may have felt as she may have been the type to hide the symptoms and not talk about them. I am sure if the great Billy Jean King had seen any sign of weakness she would have gone for the kill!

Who gives a flying fig? Eye witness account and personal experience of Jim courier wins out over a TV viewer's opinion anytime and lets not forget Nieminen who could see the injury. You must have a haystack at home you clutch at so many straws.

hawkeye wrote:Caladonian Craig

Who do you trust? Virginia or Jim?

Difficult question.
We've either got a current Davis Cup Captain of the USA, who not only talks the most sense about Murray's game than any other commentator (just the other day, he was saying that actually you often should just wear down your opponents by consistently getting the ball back into play - whilst cautioning that this won't work with the Top 3. What a refreshing change from the 100% aggression bull we get from the likes of Grinning Greg!!) played his peak Tennis at the time the power merchants were just evolving and who had to use his on court craft to outwit the likes of Sampras and Agassi, to say nothing about Beker, Edberg, Willander, Chang, Stich or even the late career Lendl

Or someone who was at their peak, when the pace of the play was so slow - that when looking at the replay of the 1977 final my son thought that if it wasn't appearing in slow motion, then there must have been something wrong with TV

hawkeye wrote:Also we don't know if Wade had back spasm's or how bad she may have felt as she may have been the type to hide the symptoms and not talk about them.

Like Rafa? I keep asking this question and you keep ignoring it!! I wonder why

Well even if she did she would not have been best placed to judge many miles away in a studio whilst Courier was an eyewitness as was Niemenen. Give it up will you.

HE,

Courier has actually won four slams iirc, and he was world number one.

I hates Greg Rusedski.

That horrible, false, grinning monster..

I hates it I hates foreveeeeeeeeer...

It just babbles and babbles endlessly with not a sound thought amidst all that blabber, and the whole while it has a huge crooked grin that looks like it's going to swallow your soul.

I hates it I hates iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit



emancipator

Well said Andy on ITV4 just now. He and Roger Federer have called for trainer and quit matches the least of all players on tour so how can he therefore be a 'drama queen' Suck it up hawkeye.

hawkeye wrote:But Courier only has only two slam titles (to Wades 3)

emancipator wrote:HE,

Courier has actually won four slams iirc, and he was world number one.

It gets worse!! Supporting the nonsense with lies. This is brilliant HE, keep it coming...

Appologies to Jim Courier. I knew he had won the AO and the FO but didn't realise he had won both twice. In my defence he won all his slam titles during the 90's when I didn't watch mens tennis it was so boring. Zzzzzz.... I quite like him as a commentator now and it is very unfair that he appears to be getting better looking with age.

Some comments that I should respond to what Courier said about Murray's behaviour. He was "misled" into thinking Murray had a serious back injury and should retire to prevent doing further damage. In fact he thought it was so bad it could affect his Wimmbledon, Olympics and US Open. Murray didn't have a serious back injury he had a spasm caused he said partly by the cold and having to play early.

I was particuarly shocked by Lendl's comment after the match that "Andy’s having so much fun at the moment". Shocked but not surprised because Murray's writhing in agony is just the sort of disruptive tactic that both alluded they would continue to use when the parnership started. I don't approve. Neimenen may have been an opponant that Murray should beat (especially considering Neimenen was carrying an injury) but Murray was down in the score when his dramatics started.

I like it that both Rusedski and Wade despite having to be to a certain extent "pro Murray" on British Eurosport have not backed off. Rusedski said yesterday before Murray's match that if Murray was ok his game would be too much for Giraldo and if Murray tried any "funny business" Giraldo would not know how to respond. I get the impression that Wade is just sort of laughing at Murray. She said something like he was better behaved in the Giraldo match and didn't to any lying on the court exaggerating any injuries he may have or imagine he has.

Wade is also loving all the talk of her slam titles as they are used to give weight to her views. But maybe Greg has more insight into how Andy feels as he is in a similar position because he got as far as a slam final but didn't manage to win one.

Hopefully all the talk about Andy's dramatics will limit the effect as other players will be more aware of what to expect. Although I have to admit I am often surprised at how many players spend too much time practising forehands and backhands and not enough time looking at things like this.

hawkeye wrote:Appologies to Jim Courier. I knew he had won the AO and the FO but didn't realise he had won both twice. In my defence he won all his slam titles during the 90's when I didn't watch mens tennis it was so boring. Zzzzzz.... I quite like him as a commentator now and it is very unfair that he appears to be getting better looking with age.

Some comments that I should respond to what Courier said about Murray's behaviour. He was "misled" into thinking Murray had a serious back injury and should retire to prevent doing further damage. In fact he thought it was so bad it could affect his Wimmbledon, Olympics and US Open. Murray didn't have a serious back injury he had a spasm caused he said partly by the cold and having to play early.

I was particuarly shocked by Lendl's comment after the match that "Andy’s having so much fun at the moment". Shocked but not surprised because Murray's writhing in agony is just the sort of disruptive tactic that both alluded they would continue to use when the parnership started. I don't approve. Neimenen may have been an opponant that Murray should beat (especially considering Neimenen was carrying an injury) but Murray was down in the score when his dramatics started.

I like it that both Rusedski and Wade despite having to be to a certain extent "pro Murray" on British Eurosport have not backed off. Rusedski said yesterday before Murray's match that if Murray was ok his game would be too much for Giraldo and if Murray tried any "funny business" Giraldo would not know how to respond. I get the impression that Wade is just sort of laughing at Murray. She said something like he was better behaved in the Giraldo match and didn't to any lying on the court exaggerating any injuries he may have or imagine he has.

Wade is also loving all the talk of her slam titles as they are used to give weight to her views. But maybe Greg has more insight into how Andy feels as he is in a similar position because he got as far as a slam final but didn't manage to win one.

Hopefully all the talk about Andy's dramatics will limit the effect as other players will be more aware of what to expect. Although I have to admit I am often surprised at how many players spend too much time practising forehands and backhands and not enough time looking at things like this.

Told you beeman.