Everyone In The Locker Room Is Talking About Murray

First topic message reminder :

According to Tommy Haas everyone in the locker room is talking about Andy Murray

Haas, a 15-year veteran of the tour, was asked about the more extravagant on-court behaviour and replied: “Murray often acts like he can’t move, has the trainer out and then starts moving like a cat. Everyone in the locker room knows this and talks about it.”


Sometimes being the talk of the changing room is a pleasant experience, but to be the butt of innuendo is less appealing.

This is from an article in The Times by Neil Harman (sorry PPV)

CaladonianCraig

Roger didn't shed "crocodile tears" they were the genuine thing. That was a very emotional final. Federer has also been known to cry when winning. I can remember when he first won Wimbledon and he cried as he spluttered out "Thank you for this beautiful trophy".

legendkillarV2 wrote:CC,

The point BB is making in terms to the comments is that on the eve of the Slam in Murray's country, players are not likely to make negative comments about Murray. This would lead to booing before the player had even hit a ball in anger. The crowd are a source of support so I don't think anyone is going to be saying anything negative about a home favourite.

Yes but we also hear such topics/things said prior to the other slams (not on British soil) so that fear is not there of being booed. Similarly, for past players as well who have retired from the game. And like I said there is no need for players to over elaborate is there? Evidently Tipsarevic (who was also there) answered yes and left it at that whilst Wawrinka chose to elaborate. Are we to assume he said those words but never meant them?

Oh Craig, please!

List the number of times players, past or present, when asked in such circumstances (or indeed virtually any situation other than duting a dispute) to comment on another players talent or prospects, do anything negative or hostile.

Just for context, so we know all the nice stuff isn't just being diplomatic.

hawkeye wrote:CaladonianCraig

Roger didn't shed "crocodile tears" they were the genuine thing. That was a very emotional final. Federer has also been known to cry when winning. I can remember when he first won Wimbledon and he cried as he spluttered out "Thank you for this beautiful trophy".

And when Laver gave him the trophy in Australia in 2007.

Basically, he blubs.

hawkeye wrote:CaladonianCraig

Roger didn't shed "crocodile tears" they were the genuine thing. That was a very emotional final. Federer has also been known to cry when winning. I can remember when he first won Wimbledon and he cried as he spluttered out "Thank you for this beautiful trophy".

And tears are a way of expressing emotion are they not? Yes of course they are. Just as pain (feeling it) often causes people to hold that part of the body where the pain is. So tears are acceptable but not holding a hurting part of the body? As we all know Andy Murray leaves it all out on the court. If he is angry he shows it, if he is frustrated he shows it, when delighted at a win he shows it and when in pain he shows it. What you see is what you get and doesn't make him a drama queen. For drama queen tunes into Euro2012.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:CC,

The point BB is making in terms to the comments is that on the eve of the Slam in Murray's country, players are not likely to make negative comments about Murray. This would lead to booing before the player had even hit a ball in anger. The crowd are a source of support so I don't think anyone is going to be saying anything negative about a home favourite.

Yes but we also hear such topics/things said prior to the other slams (not on British soil) so that fear is not there of being booed. Similarly, for past players as well who have retired from the game. And like I said there is no need for players to over elaborate is there? Evidently Tipsarevic (who was also there) answered yes and left it at that whilst Wawrinka chose to elaborate. Are we to assume he said those words but never meant them?

Rusedski made comments about Sampras that didn't sit well with the crowd and he was jeered galore in the US Open 2002, even more so in their encounter.

I don't doubt that Wawrinka 'genuinely' likes Andy as I understand they came through the juniors together too and have often commented about each other in the past after post match interviews when they have met.

But what they said in the context of things of this thread which was misleading is not related. They said he is a nice guy, which off the court I guess he is. But everyone knows what happens on court is a different matter entirely.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

hawkeye wrote:CaladonianCraig

Roger didn't shed "crocodile tears" they were the genuine thing. That was a very emotional final. Federer has also been known to cry when winning. I can remember when he first won Wimbledon and he cried as he spluttered out "Thank you for this beautiful trophy".

And tears are a way of expressing emotion are they not? Yes of course they are. Just as pain (feeling it) often causes people to hold that part of the body where the pain is. So tears are acceptable but not holding a hurting part of the body? As we all know Andy Murray leaves it all out on the court. If he is angry he shows it, if he is frustrated he shows it, when delighted at a win he shows it and when in pain he shows it. What you see is what you get and doesn't make him a drama queen. For drama queen tunes into Euro2012.

The question is whether Andy expresses more pain than he's really feeling. Not necessarily for nefarious reasons but perhaps something someone may have grown up doing because it was positively reinforced.

No not at all bogbrush. He is just very emotive. Sometimes overly emotive and affects his game but not done in anyway to affect anyone else though sometimes it might but that is not intentional. Similarly, some players have other traits that may grait with others but it doesn't make him or them a drama queen it is just the way Andy is.

bogbrush wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

hawkeye wrote:CaladonianCraig

Roger didn't shed "crocodile tears" they were the genuine thing. That was a very emotional final. Federer has also been known to cry when winning. I can remember when he first won Wimbledon and he cried as he spluttered out "Thank you for this beautiful trophy".

And tears are a way of expressing emotion are they not? Yes of course they are. Just as pain (feeling it) often causes people to hold that part of the body where the pain is. So tears are acceptable but not holding a hurting part of the body? As we all know Andy Murray leaves it all out on the court. If he is angry he shows it, if he is frustrated he shows it, when delighted at a win he shows it and when in pain he shows it. What you see is what you get and doesn't make him a drama queen. For drama queen tunes into Euro2012.

The question is whether Andy expresses more pain than he's really feeling. Not necessarily for nefarious reasons but perhaps something someone may have grown up doing because it was positively reinforced.

However that then would mean the same doubts should be cast over everyone that winces or touches a body part. Their have been times on court when I have rubbed my tummy and then a mighty burp helps dispersing any aggrevation or twinge that may have impacted on my performance before hand.

The whole tears thing in defeat is a different issue all together. Andy blubbed in 2010. As my brother would say "pu$$ies cry in sport"

Yeah, it's emotive to fall like a shot stag because of cramp.

bogbrush wrote:Yeah, it's emotive to fall like a shot stag because of cramp.

That was funny

It is such a 'What happened next' material

Can’t remember the exact quote but didn’t Federer call Djoko ‘lucky’ for surviving match points against him by attacking without caution. Something along the lines of ‘to lose to someone like that..........’

But yes, I take your point that (probably all) the players when asked about Murray’s chances of winning a slam, especially at Wimbledon time, are always going to say ‘yes’; whether they thought it or not. I suppose they would run the risk of appearing churlish not to say so, given the fact that AM is ranked so highly and ‘the British public’ so desperately want a British Wimbledon winner. Problem is, if he was thwarted each year by different players playing blinders against him then you could argue that ‘his time will come’. But it’s, of course, one of the same 3 players meaning that he (very likely) will need to beat 2 of them…..not good odds IMHO

bradman99.94 wrote: But it’s, of course, one of the same 3 players meaning that he (very likely) will need to beat 2 of them…..not good odds IMHO

Good Post
You can see the record against rest of Top 3 here: https://www.606v2.com/t31322-top-4-record
He has 17% record vs rest of top 3 in Slams.

bogbrush wrote:Yeah, it's emotive to fall like a shot stag because of cramp.

Or better.

Fognini who was annoyed at the FO 2011 when against Montanes when he was told all he had was cramp!

That was dramatic!

bogbrush wrote:Yeah, it's emotive to fall like a shot stag because of cramp.

Yes it is actually. Watch in any sport when someone is in full motion and they come to an abrupt halt. Much like those that pull a hamstring.

It Must Be Love wrote:

bradman99.94 wrote: But it’s, of course, one of the same 3 players meaning that he (very likely) will need to beat 2 of them…..not good odds IMHO

Good Post
You can see the record against rest of Top 3 here: https://www.606v2.com/t31322-top-4-record
He has 17% record vs rest of top 3 in Slams.

Yes, I've been following that thread. Very interesting stats and excellent views expressed

CaledonianCraig wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Yeah, it's emotive to fall like a shot stag because of cramp.

Yes it is actually. Watch in any sport when someone is in full motion and they come to an abrupt halt. Much like those that pull a hamstring.

Are you trying to define "emotive" as being a derivative of "motion"?