Australian Open 2014 Men's Final

First topic message reminder :

We seem to have overlooked this. It's tomorrow apparently. Or today in Australia. The bad news is it that rain is forecast - no, not for Oz, for my doubles match at midday 

I could watch that backhand all day, yes Stan may not dominate throughout the year but his tennis when on is a sight to behold.

To another point, all those times Federer struggled to move last year (Stakhovsky, Robredo) no mention of injuries now Nadal can't win we have to accept he was injured. Double standards.

funny that, as everyone accepted Federer was injured or impeded, which seems the correct term, during the Indian wells clash, without argument. Nadal can't win when he loses,

lydian wrote:JJ, what you are saying is completely & utterly ridiculous.
I've not heard one Rafa fan stating the win is actually asterisked today but you can't separate events.

Fact: Nadal was injured today, he says from the outset but obviously worst in Set2
Fact: Nadal's serve and movement were significantly affected
Fact: Stan was playing very well
Fact: Stan won

Is saying that Stan beat an injured Nadal an untruth? No.
Was injury a factor in the win? Yes.
Does the injury lessen Stan's win? No.

Again, you are slipping in your opinion in between some facts hoping that we will interpret it as fact. i.e. Was injury a factor in the win? Yes.

Really? That is complete and utter conjecture and entirely your opinion. Please do not dress it up as fact. You have no way of knowing if the injury was a factor because it involves a completely different chain of events that we cannot predict.

You are right about not one Rafa saying it is actually asterisked. But they are not doing a very good job of hiding the fact they actually think this is the case.

It's like one compliment for Stan..but can't do it without telling everyone about poor old Rafa.

Congratulations to Stanislas Wawrinka for a fantastic win today. It couldn't have happened to a nicer man. I think he remains only one of two players who have won a Slam inspite of the challenges of being married and having kids.

re Asterisks, Stan has had an incredible tournament and is one of the very few players who has defeated nos 1 and 2 in the same event and gone on to win it. he has earned his win and there is no stigma at all to his win.

a lot of the media is headlining that Wawrinka won by defeating an injured Nadal..in fact Pat Cash has an article in today's Times that says 'No sets, No wins, No chance.'

every player who beats another player,deserves his win, regardless of the state of health of the other player. that other player's health is not his concern. each player has to take care of his own well being and if they step out on court and stay on court, they remain to be beaten or to win.

Rafael Nadal is a monster of a player....and also a smart one to know that his style of play has given him massive success but also is a style that comes with a high risk of injury. Djokovic and Murray also have similar styles and are already displaying wear and tear.

this is not to say that any one style is superior to the other. any player adopts a style that maximises his chances of success, accepting the downsides of such style.

i am not here to further any GOAT debate. that's one that will rage on forever and is a stupid one imo, but the BOAT debate has only one winner.

Stanislas Wawrinka has the Backhand Of All Time.

there was one passage of play that just took your breath away. Nadal serving a very good first serve, only for Stan to backhand an outrageous rocket that Nadal could just stand and watch fly past.

i have been searching for a video of that passage, so if anyone finds one, will be obliged if you can post a link.

I actually like the win for promoting the SHBH. I hope it encourages more to play the shot.

I've been saying for ages Stan has the best SH but people keep shouting Gasquet!

lydian wrote:I actually like the win for promoting the SHBH. I hope it encourages more to play the shot.

I've been saying for ages Stan has the best SH but people keep shouting Gasquet!

Wawrinka> Haas> Almagro> Gasquet  

kingraf wrote:funny that, as everyone accepted Federer was injured or impeded, which seems the correct term, during the Indian wells clash, without argument. Nadal can't win when he loses,

He's not supposed to win when he loses. He loses when he loses, like everyone else. He's probably won slams carrying injuries. He's probably lost matches carrying none.

Bizarrely, I think Stan might've been playing too well anyway. If he'd kept that level going before the MTO, I think it might have been 3 sets. That's how impressive it was. He lost focus because Rafa was struggling and it let Rafa back in. I don't think anyone would've stopped him this fortnight. We'll never know of course, but he looked unbelievably good. The SHBH looked as solid as a DHBH.

Agree with some elements of that...however, would expand:

Wawrinka > Haas > Kohlscreiber > Dimitrov > Gasquet > Federer > Almagro

I expect Dimi's to move up the list though.

Brilliant win for Stan, played very well and we shouldn't underestimate how difficult it must've been to keep his concentration throughout the match. Full credit to him for a great match.

Commiserations to Rafa and his fans, it simply wasn't to be. The back looked like it was hammering his serve, particularly in that second set. He'll come back stronger though (no pun intended).

lydian wrote:Agree with some elements of that...however, would expand:

Wawrinka > Haas > Kohlscreiber > Dimitrov > Gasquet > Federer > Almagro

I expect Dimi's to move up the list though.

I assume that's topspin only?

banbrotam wrote:

lydian wrote:Errr....helloooo...JJ, he was injured or do you suffer from hard of thinking having just watched the match? What are we going to say, Nadal played brilliantly but Stan was just too good? It was what it was. His fans are gracious in defeat so just stop with the predictable wumming.

Lydian the problem is that whenever Rafa has a slam defeat, it nearly always appears to come down to an injury. I can guarantee you that in a couple of years this defeat will 'asterixed' along with the Soderling one of 2009, the Murray won of 2010 and of course the last two Wimbedons

I genuinely like Rafa, but if this had been Murray or Federer we'd not have definitely known that there was a problem - simply because neither take injury timeouts (or very rarely do).I think they should - but they have this 'never complain never explain' when it comes to injuries and that included going off midway though a match. Of course this gives them difficulties, because it's obvious that at times that these injuries were factors in defeats. So, nobody ever mentions Murray's only defeats to Verdasco and Cilic but we of course know about all the Rafa ones

Personally, I think that Rafa's injuries are a result of how he plays and it's the price he pays, i.e. it's given him this extraordinary career and so he can't have it both ways - he puts his body through such stress for every match, niggles etc are inevitable. It's an equaliser and thank goodness it happens as it shows he's human

The bolded is simply untrue and I don't know what you base it on. You think both players would hide a back spasm? Federer, maybe. But you give too much credit to Muray. He probably dramatizes his injuries on court more than the others. Even his match in this tournament against Federer, he went throuugh a phase where he only grimaces and clutches his back when he loses a point. He's got some stick in the past for it in the last 2 years. Even Evert had a subtle dig at it in this tournament.

Maybe he didn't take as many time-outs cos he hasn't had as many injuries. And Murray or his team do talk about his injuries, no less than Nadal's. He probably just happens to have less of them than Nadal. I certainly remember a fair deal of fuss when he lost to Verdasco, Cilic and Wawrinka in slams.

Danny - I meant in the court of public opinion... of course he loses when he loses, I mean he lost! has the runner-up trophy and everything.

like I said, haven't caught the match, and probably will only see highlights, as I'm swamped at the moment, but Stan played some serious tennis this month, and I wouldn't be surprised if he played as well today, just don't understand some of the animosity towards the MTO. understand the booing even less, as I assume you buy a final ticket at that exorbitant price with the idea of watching a competitive match... just seemed odd that they booed a player who took the time out after getting broken.

Though Stans 1 hander is a lot to do with his super stan barrel chest too, he big around that area, which lets it stand up to punishment. I stil think the one hander is designed for slice, and is gonna struggle against the more solid 2 handers in baseline play

Yes Silver. Federer is king of BH slice...with probably (strange for a DHBHer) Nadal next. I actually was surprised Nadal didn't mix it up earlier on today but then if his back was sore a single arm shot on that wing might have felt bad. Perhaps it's why he didn't slice all match...?

lydian wrote:Yes Silver. Federer is king of BH slice...with probably (strange for a DHBHer) Nadal next. I actually was surprised Nadal didn't mix it up earlier on today but then if his back was sore a single arm shot on that wing might have felt bad. Perhaps it's why he didn't slice all match...?

Would suspect so lydian. The movement is different...and generally a slice would encourage further slice from the opponent leading to more stooping - not something Rafa would've wanted at any stage! Agree with you that his slice is excellent though.

I'm just wondering on the nature of the injury. Strained multifidus, maybe? That would severely affect rotation and it's difficult to treat when inflamed. Usually has a root cause though (eg, sacral torsion). Such a shame, regardless.

lydian wrote:Yes Silver. Federer is king of BH slice...with probably (strange for a DHBHer) Nadal next. I actually was surprised Nadal didn't mix it up earlier on today but then if his back was sore a single arm shot on that wing might have felt bad. Perhaps it's why he didn't slice all match...?

Would Nadal's slice put more strain on the left or right side of his back?

KingRaf - I think the booing is probably more the umpires fault than anyone else. I don't know how much you know about it, but Rafa went off the court and Stan was asking the umpire 'what's going on? What's he done? You're supposed to tell me!' To which the umpire said pretty much nothing resulting in a frustrated Stan is a suspicious crowd.

They were sympathetic to Rafa later, but I think if the umpire had addressed the crown and Stan correctly he wouldn't have got such a bad reaction on his return.

He's left handed, so left side...but would use some right too with rotation. The injury was on the left side. I actually said to myself in the first set "why isn't he slicing to mix it up with Stan playing so well/hard" as this what he does so well against Djokovic and Del Potro. By reverting to DHBH only he was able to let his right arm, so right side of back, take more strain.

lydian wrote:He's left handed, so left side...but would use some right too with rotation. The injury was on the left side. I actually said to myself in the first set "why isn't he slicing to mix it up with Stan playing so well/hard" as this what he does so well against Djokovic and Del Potro. By reverting to DHBH only he was able to let his right arm, so right side of back, take more strain.

Fair point then. I was trying to work out, in my head, which side takes more strain when slicing the ball (and was failing miserably).

Well if you're RH, stand up and play an imaginary slice shot...you'll note the muscular tension down the right side of your back as you prepare then execute the shot. If you then revert to a DH BH shot the tension isn't anywhere near the same. I really think this is why Nadal didn't use slice today...when it would have certainly helped mix up play. It doesn't mean anything changes....he needed to be fit to win the match, he wasn't plus Stan was great. So game over.

Danny_1982 wrote:I don't * any slams. I think the guy holding the trophy is the deserving champion every time. Of course you could * almost every one if you try hard enough. Let's take Murray's defeats and victories for example. Here's both my blinkered Murray fan AND anti Murray perspective:

2008 USO v Fed - he played the day before the final. Fed had a days rest. Asterix.

2010 v AO v Fed - again Murray had a days less rest. Had to beat Rafa and Federer to win it. Harsh draw. Asterix.

2011 AO v Novak - Andy days less rest again. Plus hurt his back hence MTO in final. Asterix.

2012 W v Fed - was the better player until the rain came. We all know indoor favours Fed. He'd have won if it stayed outdoors. Gods were on Feds side.

2012 OG v Fed - Murray only won because Fed had long semi against Delpo. Plus Novak and Fed didn't really care about it anyway, it's not a slam.

USO 2012 v Novak - Murray only won because of the wind. Plus Novak had played the day before. Big asterix.

AO 2013 - Murray only lost because of 'feather-gate' and the blister on his foot. Those 2 things turned the match on its head. Asterix.

W 2013 v Novak - Murray only won because he had the easier semi. Novak was drained after Delpo match. Plus he got lucky home team line calls. Asterix.


That was almost without thinking. I bet it would be easy for all fans to asterix slam finals they've lost. There are circumstances behind every win and loss, there always is.

But I think putting an asterix next to slam wins is disrespectful to the winner and I've always thought that. No such thing as an asterixed slam in my opinion. They guy with the trophy deserves it.

We can also, away from the finals, add

Australian Open 2009 - QF loss to Verdasco, due to virus
US Open 2009 - QF loss to Cilic, due to a dodgy wrist
US Open 2013 - QF loss to Stan, due to a dodgy back
And of course there was that terrible 2010 US Open loss, again to Stan. That was simply due to the shock Andy felt, when Kim Sears took him back   

I felt it down both sides!! (creak) Seriously though, I did feel it so I get what you're saying. I also got some strange looks from the neighbours...

Haha TSJ....just part of the Tai Chi routine hey?

I think this AO has been great anyway. I think there are a lot of things up in the air. And plenty of things to talk about. For all the required dominantion needed to create stars and superstars needed to market the game, that takes away the one thing about sport that makes it what it is...and that's the unpredictable nature of it.

Great stuff.

mthierry wrote:But you give too much credit to Muray. He probably dramatizes his injuries on court more than the others. Even his match in this tournament against Federer, he went throuugh a phase where he only grimaces and clutches his back when he loses a point. He's got some stick in the past for it in the last 2 years. Even Evert had a subtle dig at it in this tournament

Rarely goes off for the trainer though does he? And that's my point. It only becomes 'news' if there is an ITO

mthierry wrote:Maybe he didn't take as many time-outs cos he hasn't had as many injuries. And Murray or his team do talk about his injuries, no less than Nadal's. He probably just happens to have less of them than Nadal. I certainly remember a fair deal of fuss when he lost to Verdasco, Cilic and Wawrinka in slams.

The Verdasco and Cilic losses actually support my point. No-one in the media mentions the issues Andy had. We do - coz we're Tennis geeks!! But out in the big wide world is was Andy 'bottling it' again. Injury time outs in either of these and the loss gets legitimately excused

That's the difference. Murray is the biggest hypochondriac going - but it rarely results in trainers coming on etc

Absolutely, I once drove my son 125miles to a tournament...on the way we stopped for food/drink and he caught his ankle on a kerbside, going over on it. As we were near we still arrived but his day was ruined...couldn't move properly and lost to a boy he normally has no problem with. It's just a part of life...unpredictability. 24 hrs later he was okish...bad timing will always play a part...but you have to admit Nadal was very unlucky as it has nothing to do with his style of play.

Roll on Dubai, IW, etc...

mthierry wrote:And Murray or his team do talk about his injuries, no less than Nadal's

In fairness to the Fab 4, this is only when pressed. I certainly don't remember Andy going into a press conference and saying "I lost because I was injured" or even talking about an injury

The Verdsasco virus episode was so under-reported, that no-one realised it was an issue until he changed his schedule the following year. Even then (i.e. January 2010) all he said is that he wanted to avoid the risk of virus's

He talked about his how is recovery was going from back surgery after his Roger defeat here - simply because it was the only thing journos wanted to here

As you've said they are a bit damned if they do or don't

Man, Stan the slam winner... still cant get my head quite round it

kingraf wrote:Danny - I meant in the court of public opinion... of course he loses when he loses, I mean he lost! has the runner-up trophy and everything.  

like I said, haven't caught the match, and probably will only see highlights, as I'm swamped at the moment, but Stan played some serious tennis this month, and I wouldn't be surprised if he played as well today, just don't understand some of the animosity towards the MTO. understand the booing even less, as I assume you buy a final ticket at that exorbitant price with the idea of watching a competitive match... just seemed odd that they booed a player who took the time out after getting broken.

He didn't though, it was before stan served. He held his own serve then took it.

I started watching just at the point Wawrinka was arguing with the umpire - had no idea of the score or what was happening. The Eurosport commentators (Reed, McMillan) were strongly suggesting a tactical MTO ( there was no doubt that it was an MTO), so I assume the crowd felt the same way - hence the booing upon Rafa's return.
Then when they saw him struggling, they started to believe something was really wrong.

Incredible play by STan i had this match dead wrong but I have to say I am very happy I was wrong because Stan was on fire and played great tennis all tournament and really for a year now. Certainly his narrow 5 set losses to Djokovic at slams and finally coming through against him in a 5 setter allowed him that added confidence he needed. Nadal's injury really didn't play that much of a role as Nadal was down a set and a break and stan was on fire. If anything the 4th set Nadal's injury caused Stan to lose a bit of focus it can be hard playing an injured player.

socal1976 wrote:Incredible  play by STan i had this match dead wrong but I have to say I am very happy I was wrong because Stan was on fire and played great tennis all tournament and really for a year now. Certainly his narrow 5 set losses to Djokovic at slams and finally coming through against him in a 5 setter allowed him that added confidence he needed. Nadal's injury really didn't play that much of a role as Nadal was down a set and a break and stan was on fire. If anything the 4th set Nadal's injury caused Stan to lose a bit of focus it can be hard playing an injured player.

Indeed, I once played an injured player.  They were crawling on the floor shouting for an ambulance, but I still lost the match 6-0 6-0 6-0.  I had the match in the grasp of my hands but the ambulance turned up 15 minutes late and by then it was all over. 

KingRaf - Just seen this from Toni Nadal:


"The doctor said its a tightening of the muscles and a few days rest should be enough. He went into the match after feeling twinges during the week, but very minor ones that do not affect you at all."

"Then in the second game of the second set he felt a pinch. When I asked him after treatment what was happening he said 'it's over'."


A strangely generic description of the problem, but the bottom line is he will be fine in a couple of days.

JuliusHMarx wrote:I started watching just at the point Wawrinka was arguing with the umpire - had no idea of the score or what was happening. The Eurosport commentators (Reed, McMillan) were strongly suggesting a tactical MTO ( there was no doubt that it was an MTO), so I assume the crowd felt the same way - hence the booing upon Rafa's return.
Then when they saw him struggling, they started to believe something was really wrong.

Certainly the crowd thought Rafa was feigning and only realised their mistake when he resumed serving.

The consensus appears to be that prior behaviour has gone against Rafa on this one, which ultimately proved harsh on him. However, this will have had an impact on his record and by my estimation he needs only 3, perhaps 4, more truly genuine injury MTO's to begin to win over impartial observers.