I Hope You're Happy Now Lukas!

First topic message reminder :

I hope you're happy now Lukas Rosal. You've had your 5 minutes of fame. You've pocketed some extra prize money. You've gained some fair weather fans. You may even have carved out a tiny bit of tennis history with your win against Nadal the other night. So I hope you are really really happy and are enjoying this years Wimbledon because thanks to you lots of tennis fans are not quite as happy.

Of course you have opened up the draw and other tennis players (and maybe fans of players who would have great difficulty beating Nadal) might be happy with you. But tennis fans who were looking forward to watching some exciting tennis will be less than happy at a multi slam winning all time great and joint favourite for the title being the victim of your never to be repeated best tennis you have ever played in your life.

No Billie Piper fans? How disappointing

reckoner wrote:As for Seifer's contributions - they are of the same level in terms of bias as hawkeye's or socal's so don't think it's fair to call him out in that way IMO.

I think that is grossly unfair on HE and socal. They may be biased but I have yet to see them brand someone 'scum', which is above and beyond bias.

I do find it odd just how much some posters enjoy someone losing. As for Rosol, no surprise that he couldn't back it up today. He must have been on an almighty high yesterday and was probably a little drained mentally. He executed superbly on Thursday but I have rarely seen Nadal hit the ball so poorly, the first set was atrocious. No length on his shots, and his slice was looping through the air asking to be whacked. In a strange way I am relieved not to have to watch him struggle any more and can enjoy the rest of the tournament now. Hope Murray can make the final, it would be a great occasion.

I agree the rubbing in must stop. Come on, it's not fair.

But let's also not try to twist facts and pretend that Rosol did anything other than a great job. The OP wasn't an anti-Rafa wum.

Positively 4th Street wrote:

reckoner wrote:As for Seifer's contributions - they are of the same level in terms of bias as hawkeye's or socal's so don't think it's fair to call him out in that way IMO.

I think that is grossly unfair on HE and socal. They may be biased but I have yet to see them brand someone 'scum', which is above and beyond bias.

I do find it odd just how much some posters enjoy someone losing. As for Rosol, no surprise that he couldn't back it up today. He must have been on an almighty high yesterday and was probably a little drained mentally. He executed superbly on Thursday but I have rarely seen Nadal hit the ball so poorly, the first set was atrocious. No length on his shots, and his slice was looping through the air asking to be whacked. In a strange way I am relieved not to have to watch him struggle any more and can enjoy the rest of the tournament now. Hope Murray can make the final, it would be a great occasion.

They may not have used that particular word but hey socal was branding federer fans Nazis not long ago - far worse than calling someone scum IMO.

Hawkeye drip drip drips a daily hate campaign against Murray - how is that any better?

Fair enough reckoner, I missed socal doing that. Generally I like him as a poster though, sure he gets carried away but he is quite tongue-in-cheek. These posts just seem one-dimensional. Hawkeye gets a lot of stick, but I don't get a sense of malice.

Overall it seems posters are willing to turn a blind eye if the player they follow isn't the target, myself included. Much better to judge the post on its merits, irrespective of player bias.

Is cheat better? Plenty of supporting evidence....

Positively 4th Street wrote:Fair enough reckoner, I missed socal doing that. Generally I like him as a poster though, sure he gets carried away but he is quite tongue-in-cheek. These posts just seem one-dimensional. Hawkeye gets a lot of stick, but I don't get a sense of malice.

Overall it seems posters are willing to turn a blind eye if the player they follow isn't the target, myself included. Much better to judge the post on its merits, irrespective of player bias.

Fair enough +vely!

So the consensus is it's acceptable to be happy that Nadal lost and opened up the draw for other players who would have found it difficult to beat him... but unacceptable to be sad that the tournament was deprived of one of the favourites for the title?

meh if you choose to see it that way hawkeye.

You ratbags need to watch your language

Rosol was clearly cramping after his 4 hour epic you are a disgraceful poster this time hawkeye.

lydian wrote:JHM and LF...let's hope this simmers down or there'll be an exodus as only WUMs want to post in an unfriendly, vitriolic forum. Sure let good debate take place, we don't want yes yes yes all the time, but surely it can take place with good humour and conviviality.

I agree. The more so-called 'good' posters leave, the less likely the forum is to attract balanced posters. You know what I am implying.

Bans get handed out, if the spiral shows no signs of abating.

laverfan wrote:

lydian wrote:JHM and LF...let's hope this simmers down or there'll be an exodus as only WUMs want to post in an unfriendly, vitriolic forum. Sure let good debate take place, we don't want yes yes yes all the time, but surely it can take place with good humour and conviviality.

I agree. The more so-called 'good' posters leave, the less likely the forum is to attract balanced posters. You know what I am implying.

Bans get handed out, if the spiral shows no signs of abating.

Why not publish lists of good, bad and borderline posters, so we know where we all stand?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Much as I disagree with the OP on this one, there have some equally pathetic, or worse, anti-Nadal threads started in the last couple of days.

Emotions are clearly running high - let's hope when it simmers down a greater measure of intelligence, perspective and friendliness will re-appear on the forum. At the moment several people are letting themselves and the forum down.

One of the better things about tennis forums is when we take the mickey out of players getting beat. Nadull's annoying personality brings out the joy from fans of his rivals.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:You ratbags need to watch your language

Rosol was clearly cramping after his 4 hour epic you are a disgraceful poster this time hawkeye.

I thought Benneteau got two massages yesterday in the fifth set.

emancipator wrote:I'm not a Rafa fan and I was quite pleased to see him lose but it's quite unbecoming to rub it in like this.

Emanci. Well said!

reckoner wrote:
Why not publish lists of good, bad and borderline posters, so we know where we all stand?

Any such list, will show bias, because of varying opinions and affinities and jealousies. BTW, there is no such list, and, as a moderator, it is unfair for me to create and/or maintain one. It means I cannot distinguish between good and bad posts, from posters. I have previously stated that a poster is a sum of all their posts, but I do not see a contradiction in either viewpoint, before someone quotes me back.

reckoner wrote:

laverfan wrote:

lydian wrote:JHM and LF...let's hope this simmers down or there'll be an exodus as only WUMs want to post in an unfriendly, vitriolic forum. Sure let good debate take place, we don't want yes yes yes all the time, but surely it can take place with good humour and conviviality.

I agree. The more so-called 'good' posters leave, the less likely the forum is to attract balanced posters. You know what I am implying.

Bans get handed out, if the spiral shows no signs of abating.

Why not publish lists of good, bad and borderline posters, so we know where we all stand?

Quite.

Half the time this forum is frothing because of anti-Murray posts from....... hawkeye. So what's the deal here? Is it considered balanced to write ridiculous articles like this and inappropriate to call them the nonsense they are? This OP wasn't the call for rational, polite posts; it was a whine at a player for depriving hawkeye of Nadal. As such, though I agree with the call for general good order, I think the author put herself in the way of whatever she gets.

For Godsake, its a competition, no one has a God given right to make it to a final or win it.

hawkeye wrote:So the consensus is it's acceptable to be happy that Nadal lost and opened up the draw for other players who would have found it difficult to beat him... but unacceptable to be sad that the tournament was deprived of one of the favourites for the title?

But that wasn't the post though was it... it was anger against a player for playing well and knocking Nadal out. Yes, many people (me included) are sad that Nadal is out in some ways - for each top player knocked out the tournament does lose a certain degree of interest since there's less chance of a "big" match (e.g. Nadal v Murray semi). But you can't be angry at a tennis player for playing well in a match (and then not playing so well in his next one). That's just bizarre.

What you said above is fine, what you said in the OP was not imho....

Yellowgoatboy -

hawkeye wrote:laverfan

I think Lukas Rosol got loads of credit for his win over Nadal. In that last set he played tennis that was out of this world. So I have only respect for Rosols once in a lifetime win. But I am talking as a tennis spectator who wants to see the best possible show. I want to see the players that are capable of doing this. Rosol is not capable of doing this but he stopped someone who is very capable of doing so. Sorry if this sounds harsh.

You are reducing tennis to an analysis of income and cost streams and the calculation of marginals. You seem to have lost your excitement for tennis focusing only on forms of personal validation through the matching of external events with internalised ought notions. To be fair you're not the only one.

Nore Staat wrote:

hawkeye wrote:laverfan

I think Lukas Rosol got loads of credit for his win over Nadal. In that last set he played tennis that was out of this world. So I have only respect for Rosols once in a lifetime win. But I am talking as a tennis spectator who wants to see the best possible show. I want to see the players that are capable of doing this. Rosol is not capable of doing this but he stopped someone who is very capable of doing so. Sorry if this sounds harsh.

You are reducing tennis to an analysis of income and cost streams and the calculation of marginals. You seem to have lost your excitement for tennis focusing only on forms of personal validation through the matching of external events with internalised ought notions. To be fair you're not the only one.

Your account seems to have been taken over by psychiatric accountant ...

Hawky come and join good ole LK on the Murray bandwagon. You will enjoy it. That I can promise

Reading through this thread I would say for the most part posters have been open in representing their own viewpoints and emotional content. The only contrived wum word I spotted was Nadull, I think everything else came from the heart.

Anyway this hopefully will blow over but consideration needs to given to those looking in from the outside wondering whether this is a worthwhile forum to contribute to during the highest profile tennis tournament of the year (at least from a UK centric perspective).

Are you thinking people shouldn't be posting articles like this?

I love it when 1 of the favourites goes out really early to an unknown player.

Remember Hewitt losing 1st round of Wimbledon as defending champion to Ivo Karlovic and Sampras losing to George Bastl in his last Wimbledon.

Its embarrassing that Nadal lost to a nobody, criticising Rosol when you should criticise Nadal for losing sets 2 and 3.

drsambo1928 wrote:For Godsake, its a competition, no one has a God given right to make it to a final or win it.

Of course it is and the top players are given every possible chance to progress to the later stages through the seedings. Occasionally someone will have the sort of dream day that Rosol had on Thursday and we get a huge shock. But unpredictability is what is good about in sport. I've seen comments on this site over the past months about how boring it is when Djokovic, Nadal, Federer and Murray are monopolising the semi final places at most of the slams. So it is refreshing when someone else gets there. I say this with no disrespect to Nadal.

bogbrush wrote:Are you thinking people shouldn't be posting articles like this?

If I hadn't posted it you wouldn't be able to hang around here thinking such thoughts.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:I love it when 1 of the favourites goes out really early to an unknown player.

Remember Hewitt losing 1st round of Wimbledon as defending champion to Ivo Karlovic and Sampras losing to George Bastl in his last Wimbledon.

Its embarrassing that Nadal lost to a nobody, criticising Rosol when you should criticise Nadal for losing sets 2 and 3.

Of course it can be exciting when a top seed goes out unexpectedly. Well it is exciting for as long as the match lasts. But then the tournament is left poorer. Rosel Kohlschrieber was put on a court that was accessible with a ground pass. Imagine if Federer had gone out last night too. Wimbledon for most would not be as exciting. The only exception is when a top seed goes out to an emerging young talent making a breakthrough.

I've never said Rosel shouldn't be congatulated for his win but the truth is Wimbledon has lost some potentially very good matches because of it.

It's not the best article in the world, well I don't agree with it anyway.

But to claim that Hawkeye's anger at Rosol is as bad as the anti-Nadal trolling here is frankly a disgraceful claim.

hawkeye wrote:

bogbrush wrote:Are you thinking people shouldn't be posting articles like this?

If I hadn't posted it you wouldn't be able to hang around here thinking such thoughts.

I was asking the other guy, but yes, your thread has a purpose, much like the Fognini nonsense did.

I can type of see what HE is saying, a Nadal Murray semi would be probably more competitive than a murray-kohli semi, but so soon after the match it can come across as a sour grapes article.

Positively 4th Street wrote:Fair enough reckoner, I missed socal doing that. Generally I like him as a poster though, sure he gets carried away but he is quite tongue-in-cheek. These posts just seem one-dimensional. Hawkeye gets a lot of stick, but I don't get a sense of malice.

Overall it seems posters are willing to turn a blind eye if the player they follow isn't the target, myself included. Much better to judge the post on its merits, irrespective of player bias.

Thanks for the support positevly, for the record I did not call all or most fed fans Nazis. I said that a certain faction of fed fans acted like federnazis. It was a mistake, I instantly apologized for it and of course I wasn't being serious. Reckoner I actually am pretty objective I have a pro-Novak bias but I give the players their due. Since I don't engage in conversation with certain wums and trolls who just follow me around threads like a groupie goading me I have had very little problems with the quality fed fans I choose to converse with. People like Barry, Kemet, and Lucius when I used that term it was directed at basically 3 people, 2 of whom I think have been banned.

But you were joking, right? It's a little unclear.

hawkeye wrote:...but the truth is Wimbledon has lost some potentially very good matches because of it.

And in return gained a classic match. One of the greatest upsets ever and a match that will be remember for a long time. Probably, for the general public, the most memorable of Rafa's matches since he beat Fed in the final. I think Wimby overall probably comes out on top for having a huge upset.

Yes Herr Goerring I was joking and I apologized.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

hawkeye wrote:...but the truth is Wimbledon has lost some potentially very good matches because of it.

And in return gained a classic match. One of the greatest upsets ever and a match that will be remember for a long time. Probably, for the general public, the most memorable of Rafa's matches since he beat Fed in the final. I think Wimby overall probably comes out on top for having a huge upset.

Really? For you it was that good? Wow!

Hawkeye, I think the fans of Murray, Fed, and Djoko are happy to see him go out. The same reaction would exist if Djokovic went out early. People like to see the little guy have his day and to see someone play the best they have ever played. Nadal for my part has not been as well of the clay as he is capable of doing for quite some time so I don't know if he was as heavy a favorite as many made him. I think from the outset Novak and nadal were co favorites and Murray and Fed both still have great chances.

C'mon HE, the underdog plays out of this world tennis and, ranked 100, beats the 2-time champion and world No.2. What a script! From an impartial viewpoint it's the story of this year's Wimby and got loads of interest and headlines. With 3 of the top 4 still in it, including the home favourite (i.e. plenty of great tennis still to come), an upset like that can only be good for the tournament.

Cos it's a bittersweet symphony that's life...

HE... you do realise that Challenge Round was abolished in 1922, IIRC.

Arhhh, the story of a Wiganer LK...

I can understand the frustration element in terms of Rosol going out in straights. You would sooner someone who topples Nadal to go in the Slam or even win it. As many people say, sh!t happens.

It Must Be Love wrote:I can type of see what HE is saying, a Nadal Murray semi would be probably more competitive than a murray-kohli semi, but so soon after the match it can come across as a sour grapes article.

But we've seen it before and we know what the result would be, boring.

Murray bends over for Nadal almost the same as Juan Monaco

I can't believe you missed off Ferrer.

Although I'm a Fed fan, I am kind of saddened (strangely enough) that Nadal is out, mainly because yes, Nadal could have gone further but actually, I felt Nadal could have dealt with Rosol and beaten him. It felt like the Federer vs Tsonga match last year all over.

A few crucial differences of course: this was R2 so was unexpected but so was Fed being 2 sets up to love and then losing! However the similarities are more striking: all the sets Tsonga and Rosol won were 6-4 sets. This suggests to me that it was nerves from the opponent more than anything else that lost them the sets. One of the two sets both Fed and Nadal won were tie breakers too. Both Rosol and Tsonga were big hitters. I've always felt that Fed shouldn't have lost to Tsonga but I also think Nadal shouldn't have lost. It was remarkable how the dejected and forlorn look both Fed and Nadal had etched on their faces were so similar in there own different ways.

I may not be Nadal's biggest fan but I do hope he bounces back to his rightful place at the top of the game and not scraping around in the lower rounds where a champion like him shouldn't be.

bogbrush wrote:Are you thinking people shouldn't be posting articles like this?

It's a reflection of an attitude that is quite endemic in the me me world that we live in.

hawkeye wrote:laverfan

I think Lukas Rosol got loads of credit for his win over Nadal. In that last set he played tennis that was out of this world. So I have only respect for Rosols once in a lifetime win. But I am talking as a tennis spectator who wants to see the best possible show. I want to see the players that are capable of doing this. Rosol is not capable of doing this but he stopped someone who is very capable of doing so. Sorry if this sounds harsh.

\

Your so mean to say only Rafa can give the best show, the one who wins deserves the praise for giving the best show, Nadal lost coz he didn't give the best show, so should Rosol lose and let Nadal with a walkover win so Rafa fans don't get disappointed?

How on earth winning is not giving a great show?

Nadal will be back strong and hard after this defeat, so technically Rosol has done good for tennis fans, i.e he made sure even players like Rafa will go down if they don't give their best show, so Hawk just wait for Rafa to come back stronger and he will give the best tennis, till then enjoy the current Wimbledon, let Murray have his moments

bogbrush wrote:

hawkeye wrote:laverfan

Yes it was close with Federer too. Federer said after the match that he thought Benneteau may have been inspired by Rosals performance. I'm glad he wasn't too inspired... I hope that's not interpreted as being mean to Benneteau.

bogbrush

Why should I retract? Are we not allowed to cheer for who we wish. I would have thought cheering for someone who could put on a good performance in later rounds is as good a reason as any. Do you think we should always cheer the underdog? I have a sneaky suspicion that you may not have been cheering for Benneteau last night. If Benneteau had won would you have been happy for Benneteau for what would have been a huge win or sad that there would be no more matches featuring Federer this Wimbledon? Try and be honest.

I'll answer directly and honestly.

I was very much pro-Federer last night but if he'd have lost I've have harboured no resentment towards Julien Benneteau, and I've have seen no loss to the event as the loser doesn't deserve to go forward.

I really don't get your OP. You seem angry towards the guy, it makes no sense to me. It's not cheering, it's moaning. He deserved to win, he was the better player for most of the match. If you want to be angry at anyone, or blame them, then you shoud look at Nadal.

Bogbrush! You said this was an honest and direct answer and then I found this

Well, the result just in means that Wimbledon isn't cancelled in the bogbrush home.

So let's have a thread.

Andy and Rafa take the stage tomorrow. Oh wait.........

https://www.606v2.com/t31845-wimbledon-day-6

So not only would you be sad but you would have cancelled Wimbledon! Pfft and you take the opportunity to make a little dig at Rafa even in a moment of happyness...

You're upset, so I'll be gentle.

That my shorthand way of saying just how disappointed I'd have been. You couldn't see that?

Well in defense of hawkeye from her perspective as a fan of certain spaniard the tournament loses some luster when her favorite player loses. I mean we are all fans of the sport I watch all the men's matches I can. But at the same time we have our favorites to watch. So she voiced that opinion. I obviously will be honest and say I am happy Nadal lost. I like Nadal and his fans for the most part don't have any problem with him or them. But I will say I was slightly annoyed by how many were overselling Nadal after he held serve on clay at RG. He was most certainly dominant but clearly we saw a minislumping Djoko and the conditions favoring Nadal (not to mention the draw). All of sudden many people where talking about Nadal 3.0 and how he now had the edge over Djoko and the points lead and all this other pie in the sky talk. Another favorite was how Nadal was slumping and he was to blame for the rise of Djoko and now with the french normalcy has returned and stuff like that. Well to say the least I like both the fact that some of that wild talk dies down and that my favorite player's chances got better with Nadal's loss. Not trying to rub it in though, Nadal fans generally take their losses much better than a certain player's fans. .