Fisticuffs In The Fourth / What Did Roger Say?

First topic message reminder :

I was unable to watch today's semi between Federer and Murray (although I do have it on record) but reading match reports there is a lot of discussion of this incident in the fourth set when Federer said something to Murray. I'm curious to know what was said and the context. We are always hearing about how all the players are best of buddies but with these two I've never been convinced. Does anyone know what happened?

Here is a video. But it isn't clear what was said and we cannot see the context.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJatAb1IWAs

This is what Federer had to say afterwards about it

Q. You spoke earlier in the week about the good manners that exist between the players. There definitely seemed to be a bit of feeling between the two of you after 6 5 in the fourth. Can you talk about that. Was there an exchange between you?
ROGER FEDERER: I mean, it wasn't a big deal anyway. We just looked at each other one time. That's okay, I think, in a three and a half hour match. We were just checking each other out for bit.
No, I mean, that wasn't a big deal for me. I hope not for him.

http://www.australianopen.com/en_AU/news/interviews/2013-01-25/201301251359121946973.html

And what Murray says is even more intriguing

Q. How surprised were you by what he shouted when you were at the net at 6 5 in the fourth? You had a funny look on your face at that point.
ANDY MURRAY: I mean, I wasn't that surprised. I mean, stuff like that happens daily in tennis matches. You know, in sport, the stuff that some people say on football pitches and in basketball and all sorts of sports. I mean, it was very, very mild in comparison to what happens in other sports. It's just one of those things.



Q. Did it rattle you at all?
ANDY MURRAY: No. I think it didn't rattle me. I think he raised his game, you know, and that's what happens. Sometimes guys need to get, you know, emotion into the match.
He definitely raised his level and played in that game I think he hit two balls onto the line and was extremely aggressive after that.



Q. Can you repeat what he said?
ANDY MURRAY: It's not relevant what he said. You know, it doesn't really matter. It's something that happens, like I say, all the time on tennis courts, in sport, all the time.
Especially when it's a one on one sort of individual combat. It's not relevant. There's no hard feelings.



Q. Was it a word that we might struggle to get in our newspapers?
ANDY MURRAY: It's not relevant what was said, you know. I'm sure Roger won't talk about it and I have no interest in discussing it either, because, like I say, it happens all the time.
People will want to make a big deal of it and it isn't really a big deal.

My first thought was that Murray had tried to hit Federer with a ball as he did at Wimbledon. But I was wrong. So what did happen?

Have just found a description of what was going on from Kevin Mitchell from the Guardian

Serving for the match at 6-5 in the fourth, Murray stopped in mid-rally then passed Federer on his backhand side. Federer, irked at what he perceived to be gamesmanship, said something that provoked Murray into an ugly sneer in reply. From there until the end, it was no tea party.

When Federer forced a tie-break and took the match into a fifth set, the feelings did not subside. At 15-0 in the second game, Murray had the simple option of passing down the line with a backhand volley but drilled it at Federer, who celebrated when it went long. He was not so happy when he framed a backhand and again Murray broke, for 2-0. They went punch for punch to the final bell and indulged in the most rudimentary of pleasantries at the net after Federer had sent his final forehand long.

Federer smiled. Murray did not. Nobody present could remember such naked antagonism between them.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2013/jan/25/andy-murray-roger-federer-australian-open

Not nice! Not nice at all... Mitchell sums up by saying It is one they will want to forget and no doubt they will gloss over it but it was real, all right.

legendkillarV2 wrote:I am sure Mirka has said something similar to Roger

But I bet he followed it up with a

I do believe Federer has a tourettes moment in the 2nd set at 5-4.

People swear. It happens.

falzy21 wrote:

In terms of the other subject at hand, I think you reap what you sow, though it really should'nt spill out to name calling. Foe list is a bit ott, an ignore list is better. In fact an ignore button would be fantastic.

I have drawn a line under it and hawkeye is no longer on foe list for me.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed swore - "You f***ing stopped". IMHO Murray was intending to challenge the line call, then realised he had no challenges left, so had to change his mind play on.
Fed thought he'd stopped play to challenge, because of Murray's hesitation.

I think Murray expected an out call, because he literally stopped for the smallest fraction of a second. I didn't notice it at the time, as its so brief you can barely see it. But he definitely doesn't explode out of the blocks like usual.

I don't think Roger can have any complaints... But I also think its not a big deal either. It was a slam semi, I'd be disappointed if someone didn't lose their cool! I don't think either of them have anything to apologise for, and certainly not Murray.

CaledonianCraig wrote:

falzy21 wrote:

In terms of the other subject at hand, I think you reap what you sow, though it really should'nt spill out to name calling. Foe list is a bit ott, an ignore list is better. In fact an ignore button would be fantastic.

I have drawn a line under it and hawkeye is no longer on foe list for me.

Best thing Craig - she does give us all a laugh and it would be a shame if you missed it!

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed swore - "You f***ing stopped". IMHO Murray was intending to challenge the line call, then realised he had no challenges left, so had to change his mind play on.
Fed thought he'd stopped play to challenge, because of Murray's hesitation.

I have now watched that clip several times. I just don't see any unnatural hesitation at all whivh would support that opinion. Murray never looks at the umpire or linesman. He remains entirely focussed on the ball throughout. The hesitation Danny refers to is nothing more than balance recovery (also shown by the fact he takes one hand off the racquet). Dont get me wrong, i can see why Federer made a mistake viewing it out of the corner of his eye. Had Murray done as you imply thrn arguably it would have been hindrance - see Tomic against Dolgopolov from last year for an example of when the umpire should have considered such a step.

falzy21 wrote:Bottom line, you dont swear AT a player, you keep it to yourself if you think he's done wrong. Swearing at yourself isn't great either but at least its animosity to yourself.
Fed shouldn't be looking at Murray anyway, should be playing the ball no matter what the opponent does, he knows that. Like Julius said, Murray might have made a miscount on his challenges.
Either way it's hardly ban material, he just has to not do it again. I was more annoyed by the way he belittled the umpire in the third set.

In terms of the other subject at hand, I think you reap what you sow, though it really should'nt spill out to name calling. Foe list is a bit ott, an ignore list is better. In fact an ignore button would be fantastic.

He didn't swear at him, he used a swear work in talking to him

Not "you f*cking .....", rather "you f*cking stopped"

Still not the thing to do, but different.

All good fun and interesting in its own way I know, but perhaps just as well the players themselves don't have the time to endlessly analyse such incidents in the way that we do.

Instead their attention shifts promptly to the many challenges and tests that lie ahead, rather than dwelling on what's gone. That's not to say that both Federer and Murray will not spend some time reflecting on what might have been, after coming away from Melbourne with big cheques but no trophy. They will each have learnt a little more about themselves these past two weeks ; but unlike we armchair fans, one of the key strengths that separates a world-class athlete in any sport is I guess the mindset to move on pretty swiftly and focus on the future.

Riskysports wrote:


Not true HE, Federer swore at something he percieved Murray did - which it turns out was wrong.

Nobody knows exactly what Murray did so how do you know that Federer's perception was wrong?

Calder106 wrote:

You are unable to come up with an explanation of why Federer swore in Murray's direction. My own take was that it was just frustration. I agree with the ones offered earlier in this thread regarding the very slight stop as the ball landed very close to the baseline.

I agree I don't "know" why Federer was angry with Murray. But then neither do you. Your take is that it was just "frustration". Sorry but I don't buy that. Federer has lost many times before to lots of players. If he was going to express frustration at losing we would have seen evidence of it before. Did he swear at Rafa when Rafa destroyed him in the 2008 FO final? Can you even imagine him doing so? It just made him respect Rafa more.

The only similar occasion I can think of was when he got angry and told Djokovic's family to "shut up" or I think it was "be quiet". (one of my favorite tennis moments. Ha ha!) I believe Federer was winning on this occasion so he was expressing frustration at what he considered a sort of gamesmanship.

In tennis there are certain conventions that most players follow. Say sorry for a net chord, don't drill the ball at an opponent and don't do anything to try to win a point by faking in any way. Most players play by these guidelines although of course they are not rules. Most players know exactly what they are too.

My guess is that Federer was angry because Murray didn't follow these conventions. It is based on Federer's usual excellent behaviour, things that people noticed (including Murray's smirk), what both players said afterwards and the fact that Murray has a coach who made a point of breaking these conventions and has made it clear that he thinks Murray should do so too.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed swore - "You f***ing stopped". IMHO Murray was intending to challenge the line call, then realised he had no challenges left, so had to change his mind play on.
Fed thought he'd stopped play to challenge, because of Murray's hesitation.

JuliusHMarx. Federer was there he may have known what was going on. He must have felt pretty sure to risk looking bad in front of the few people that were watching. You are making a lot of assumptions about what the players are thinking in order to come to your conclusions. But why are you so sure that Federer was wrong?

So we all agree then that Hawkeye was wrong to throw mud at Murray again?

hawkeye wrote:You are making a lot of assumptions about what the players are thinking in order to come to your conclusions.

I guess that makes two of us

PS - hawkeye, did you pick up my PM?

hawkeye wrote:

Riskysports wrote:


Not true HE, Federer swore at something he percieved Murray did - which it turns out was wrong.

Nobody knows exactly what Murray did so how do you know that Federer's perception was wrong?

Calder106 wrote:

You are unable to come up with an explanation of why Federer swore in Murray's direction. My own take was that it was just frustration. I agree with the ones offered earlier in this thread regarding the very slight stop as the ball landed very close to the baseline.

I agree I don't "know" why Federer was angry with Murray. But then neither do you. Your take is that it was just "frustration". Sorry but I don't buy that. Federer has lost many times before to lots of players. If he was going to express frustration at losing we would have seen evidence of it before. Did he swear at Rafa when Rafa destroyed him in the 2008 FO final? Can you even imagine him doing so? It just made him respect Rafa more.

The only similar occasion I can think of was when he got angry and told Djokovic's family to "shut up" or I think it was "be quiet". (one of my favorite tennis moments. Ha ha!) I believe Federer was winning on this occasion so he was expressing frustration at what he considered a sort of gamesmanship.

In tennis there are certain conventions that most players follow. Say sorry for a net chord, don't drill the ball at an opponent and don't do anything to try to win a point by faking in any way. Most players play by these guidelines although of course they are not rules. Most players know exactly what they are too.

My guess is that Federer was angry because Murray didn't follow these conventions. It is based on Federer's usual excellent behaviour, things that people noticed (including Murray's smirk), what both players said afterwards and the fact that Murray has a coach who made a point of breaking these conventions and has made it clear that he thinks Murray should do so too.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Fed swore - "You f***ing stopped". IMHO Murray was intending to challenge the line call, then realised he had no challenges left, so had to change his mind play on.
Fed thought he'd stopped play to challenge, because of Murray's hesitation.

JuliusHMarx. Federer was there he may have known what was going on. He must have felt pretty sure to risk looking bad in front of the few people that were watching. You are making a lot of assumptions about what the players are thinking in order to come to your conclusions. But why are you so sure that Federer was wrong?

What about Federer swearing at the umpire - does that count? Not many have done that?

"My guess is that Federer was angry because Murray didn't follow these conventions. It is based on Federer's usual excellent behaviour, things that people noticed (including Murray's smirk)"

You say we don't know and in the same breath say Murray did not follow convention -

BTW - His smirk was after Federer swore at him - not before like you keep trying to make out - but why let truth get in the way of your character assasination

Yawn

lags72 wrote:All good fun and interesting in its own way I know, but perhaps just as well the players themselves don't have the time to endlessly analyse such incidents in the way that we do.

Instead their attention shifts promptly to the many challenges and tests that lie ahead, rather than dwelling on what's gone. That's not to say that both Federer and Murray will not spend some time reflecting on what might have been, after coming away from Melbourne with big cheques but no trophy. They will each have learnt a little more about themselves these past two weeks ; but unlike we armchair fans, one of the key strengths that separates a world-class athlete in any sport is I guess the mindset to move on pretty swiftly and focus on the future.

I don't know. Players are just people you know. Sometimes people get upset for all kinds of reasons. I wouldn't be surprised if Murray is on Federer's personal "foe" list. Ha ha! But I'm sure if asked he would say they are best buddies but Federer is no Nadal he will sometimes let slip what he really thinks.

Put it this way. Hawkeye, you yourself has tapped on bad blood between Federer and Murray in the past, correct? That being the case IF this incident was anything of Murray's doing or fault in Fed's mind would he have tried covering it up afterwards bearing in mind how it looked for him tarnishing an image? No I don't think he would have which in itself tells anyone with a balanced and unbiased mind that Federer knew he was wrong for what he did. And did you miss his earlier swearing in the first or second set. He hit a return out and swore saying BS which the commentators picked up on. I don't suppose that was Murray's fault as well was it?

I agree with Falzy, federer has done a lot things in the past that if other top players did we would all criticize. It is part of double standard that surrounds him. My favorite edberg award winning moment from federer came in his press conference after his loss to melzer in 2011 where he claimed one of the reasons his opponent won the match was because quote:"he shanked a lot of balls that went in".

Was this Murrays fault as well?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=koTTY3QuLcQ

I really like the fact that Murray hit the ball right at him on the next point and sneered at him. Shows the fact that murray is not intimidated and on the court considers himself to be up to that type of challenge.

CaladonianCraig. No. I think that whatever happened Federer wouldn't talk about it. Did you read what both players said when asked about it? Federer said nothing and Murray when asked what went on just talked about Federer and how he wasn't bothered. So we are none the wiser from listening to them about what prompted Federer's anger. But I'm pretty sure something did.

Nearly all players swear occasionally when they make a mistake. I think you'd agree that's very different to what went on here.

Out of interest what do you think of some of the things that Lendl used to do to try and anger an opponent? I understand that some think the game has been lacking something because Federer and Nadal would never do such things and most players have followed their lead. Some want a return to the days of Lendl, McEnroe and Connors in terms of their snarky approach to play.

socal1976 wrote:I really like the fact that Murray hit the ball right at him on the next point and sneered at him. Shows the fact that murray is not intimidated and on the court considers himself to be up to that type of challenge.

Oh!

I know you would like that one hawk, I just wish he would have plucked him in the jewels frankly.

"because Federer and Nadal would never do such things and most players have followed their lead"

Ha ha - again lies

- again you are painting half a picture to make Murray look bad - you really do have an issue about him

as PROVEN Federer has sworn before and at umpires (see link above of him doing it)

Nadel has bumped Rosol in frustration and has sworn before

Murray has swore at himself and got frustrated

Stop picking and chosing points to try to make one player look bad

They all get frustrated and all are human

It is such a non stroy apart from to people who are fixated by one player and do everything to make up stores to damage their reputation

Sorry hawkeye but you are clutching at straws here. People have provided you with their thoughts (non-Murray fans at that) and it was Federer that swore yet you want/ache/desire to pin the blame on Murray without a shred of evidence. Perhaps if you hadn't spent seven years non-stop of your life on forums fabricating stuff against Murray some people might have been taken in by this. Take it from me let it go and do yourself and the forum a favour and stick to discussing tennis and your favourite player. Is that too much to ask.

Hawkeye still desperately making it seem as if it is Murray's fault

If she was funny or at least a bit creative it would be fun

but this tirade of lies is really quite worrying

I guess she is away working on her next blockbuster lol

She must really dislike murray, because she volunteers for a lot of heat on this forum because of her one woman negative PR campaign. i find this kind of obsession a bit amusing myself.

socal1976 wrote:I know you would like that one hawk, I just wish he would have plucked him in the jewels frankly.

An interesting post there socal, and very much in line with your current predilection for having a little dig at Federer at every recent opportunity - whether in relation to his Edberg awards, his on-court behaviour (in just one or two isolated matches out of over a thousand played on the tour) or what you perceive to be his poor sportsmanship in general.

You are clearly on a high right now - and understandably so. Your man is in great shape after his great WTF win and now followed up with a record-breaking third successive AO title. It's only right that you should savour this to the max, and I'm in no doubt that there's lots more still to come.

But a gentle word of caution for the future if I may. A lot happens during the entirety of a career, things can and do change - often more quickly than we might expect. Novak has played only around half as many tour matches as has Federer to date, and there are, inevitably, many dark days to come as well as sunny ones for the current undisputed World Number One. There will be times when Novak, in the twilight of his career like Federer is now,(or even before) might well find himself frustrated for one reason or another ; and when that day comes you might want to ask yourself how you will re-act - and whether sneering or swearing makes one player seem wholly "good" and another player wholly "bad" Or, to put it another way, whether you will be just as keen as you have been in this episode to use the fisticuffs as a means of laying on the criticism of Federer nice & thick whilst implying all along that you won't see my man doing anything like that.

It's really quite sad socal as we shouldn't respond to what is usually just drivel, but she puts herself up to having rocks thrown at her and I think that's what keeps her going.

Fortunately it's only an Internet forum else It would even sadder!

OH Lags, I often i have said very nice things about federer and his game. Is he the goat, yes absolutely. Is he a very positive guy overrall, yes certainly. Has he done a lot for charity, most certainly. But I just don't buy federer as a good sport, he really isn't so it boggles my mind those Edberg awards.

As for the nutshot comment come on, it is the first rule of comedy nutshots are funny, as long as they aren't your nuts. I would pay 100 dollars to that pass hit roger squarely in the juevos. Now what a youtube controversy that would be. Hawkeye would set her herself on fire, metaphorically of course. Now I wouldn't want the man to be seriously injured. But I would laugh my arse off all the same. Now that would have been controversy worth talking about.

That is thing SL, it seems like she absorbs a lot of animosity for no reason. But you know what I have always found her pleasant to interact with although she refuses to get over her fedal myopia and won't give Djokovic much credit other than saying he is better than murray.

I've posted this before, but I once accidentally volleyed a ball into a guys nuts (during a match against another club, so I didn't know him as such). He accused me of doing it on purpose. I really felt like saying "If I could hit something that small I'd be playing in a higher division."

socal1976 wrote: and won't give Djokovic much credit other than saying he is better than murray.

lol

JuliusHMarx wrote:I've posted this before, but I once accidentally volleyed a ball into a guys nuts (during a match against another club, so I didn't know him as such). He accused me of doing it on purpose. I really felt like saying "If I could hit something that small I'd be playing in a higher division."

Wow, Julius you missed your calling in comedy. Come on be honest wouldn't have been a real tempest if the ball found Roger's lindt chocolates? And wouldn't be a bit amusing to see the regal federer get a doddy tap? Am I really that much less mature than the rest of you when it comes to comedic taste. I wouldn't want the guy to be injured but it would certainly be one of my favorite youtube videos of all time, almost like watching the pope get one in the balls.

socal1976 wrote:As for the nutshot comment come on, it is the first rule of comedy nutshots are funny, as long as they aren't your nuts. I would pay 100 dollars to that pass hit roger squarely in the juevos. Now what a youtube controversy that would be. Hawkeye would set her herself on fire, metaphorically of course. Now I wouldn't want the man to be seriously injured. But I would laugh my arse off all the same. Now that would have been controversy worth talking about.

JHM, that is brilliant. Did he try and nail you with a first serve at the next possible opportunity, by any chance?

It's always funny when a guy gets hit in the knacks - human nature. I always like the way cricketers can't help laughing when a batsman gets it.
Fed would be a good one - oh, the indignity!

Julius vouche for me on this one is it not the golden rule of comedy that nutshots are funny? And would federer and his regal presence not be one of the funniest of all time? And if Murray had been the one to target said sacred member could we imagine all the fun we would be having right now?

Imagining hawkeye's reaction is what does it for me. I think the sheer rage might just envelop the site and we'd all be getting 404s for days.

Too right socal - and we'd all have been thanking Lendl for teaching it to Murray!

Hell yeah we would, if Djoko got one in the jewels I would think it is funny as well but regal Roger taking one for the team is way better. And Silver, could you imagine the venom in Hawkeye's thread then. She would demand that he be deported to Sweden, (but I am not from Sweden).

I'll be very impressed if anyone gets that movie reference in my last line.

Not a clue Socal - what is it?

Does the original line have 'Sweden'? I think it may be another country, but can't quite remember.

Born Slippy wrote:
Laverfan is inaccurate as she has got her timings the wrong way around. There is no excuse for what Federer did, other than the fact he made a mistake. Are you going to answer the questions in my previous post?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEprAqJ_UAM

I am not trying to make an excuse for Federer, but looking for dynamics during play. I will watch the replay again to clarify.

Since both played it down, they did not think it important enough to discuss it publicly. I have seen public discussions that should have stayed private.

The fourth set was very emotional from both players.

Johny dangerously, michael Keaton 1984 I believe. Roman Moroni to be deported to Sweden, but I'm not from Sweden

"You fargin ice holes"

Not cursing at you that was his catchphrase

Brilliant film - you fargin corksoaker

My mother kicked me in the nuts once only once

I thought Murray hit Tsonga in the nethers at W, IIRC.