The plot thickens -"cry baby"

First topic message reminder :

Found this interesting comment on a tennis blog I was reading, thought it would be worth sharing. Still has an element of speculation but have to say it doesn't look too good. Also at the end you can see Federer grimace at match point, rarely see him do something like that. Seems it was one of the most dramatic matches you are likely to ever see.

http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid2344262030001?bckey=AQ~~,AAAB3OVQoyE~,bQIJFW4YgkSAcqiAMKK4W3j6jM523fde&bctid=3894620532001



Listen carefully here but its pretty clear what is happening.
Here is a comment from some Swiss guy in some other post.
shnicshnac
I am swiss and I can tell you what happened, its in the papers here.
At 5 all and deuce in the 3rd set, between first and second serve.
Mirka is cheering very loud.
Stan interrupts Rogers Serving motion.
Mourier asks in French: “Whats up?”
Stan looks to Mirka and says: “Not just before the serve..”
With that he means, she should be quiet between the serves and not cheer so close before the serve.
Then she replies: “Cry, Baby, cry.”
And the Stan gets mad and answers to her: What?!?”
He adresses Mourier: “Did you hear what she say?”
Stan also says: “She did it already at Wimbledon..”

If you listen really carefully, you can just about make out "cry baby" very faintly

Mad for Chelsea wrote:I thought "the King is dead, long live the King" came after the AO thrashing in 2008, whereas what people are refering to is the "Be quiet!" comment Feds directed at the Djokovic box (I'm not even sure it was at Mrs Djokovic in particular) during some clay-court match sometime. IIRC Djokovic hit a ball close to the line, called out, Djoko camp starts making noise, Fed shouts "be quiet" and wipes out the mark, indicating ball was good.

Here it is, Monte Carlo apparently
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4fB5Tp-FGU

It was thought at the time that Federer didn't like how noisy the Djokovic camp were being at times, and this was perhaps exarcebated by the "the king is dead" comments. TBH I don't see much in the incident, Fed gets a little heated, but there's nothing particularly nasty about "be quiet, ok!" is there?

I do think the Mirka incident is worse though, for two reasons:

1) shouting out between serves (or just before) is known by anyone who follows tennis fairly regularly to be pretty poor behaviour at best. Mirka has obviously followed Fed on tour and should know this. Stan seems to indicate it is not the first time this has happened: in IMBL's dailymotion vid he first brings it up at 4-4 in set 2 before it all boils over in set 3, and Wimbledon is also mentioned.

2) the "cry, baby" (or "crybaby" as it might be) comment is clearly a little bit out of order, and much worse IMO than a simple "be quiet".

In any case, I wonder if the umpire wouldn't have been better off taking some action after the first reporting of the incident in set 2...

Agree except for the fact that if you look at the way Federer say be quiet it was filled with hostility. And you are correct it was in response to Djokovic's parents claiming a ball that was called out was actually in. It makes Fed's behavior worse because contrary to opinion it was not due to being heckled but down to Djokovic's parents protesting a call that was actually in, nothing they did approached what it is that Mirka is accused of.

I do agree that a pro like Mirka yelling out before Stan's return is more sinister in that she understands fully what she is doing and is trying to impact Stan's performance.

socal1976 wrote:Agree except for the fact that if you look at the way Federer say be quiet it was filled with hostility.

I think you mean to say "Agree except for the fact that if you look at the way Federer say be quiet in the same was as I do, it was filled with hostility, in my non-biased opinion".

Sad to think this incident will be the most discussed/remembered thing on this forum for 2014.

Yes, instead of getting ready to enjoy the soon to come Festive season, we are dealing with cry baby and wifes.

socal1976. I think you raise some very good points about the comparisons between Federer's "Be quiet" and Mirka's "Cry Baby" calls. Djokovic would get totally dismissed here sometimes if not for you

I feel a little guilty myself because I loved it when Federer told Djokovic's family to be quiet and yet I agree with Mirka that Wawrinka is a bit of a cry baby. In that match Wawrinka had been getting his knickers in a twist over a few things before the "cry baby" incident and yet it was Federer who really had more cause to cry. If Wawrinka had ended up winning the semi and Mirka had kept quiet we would most likely still be talking about controversy in this match. Wawrinka was gifted the break in the first game of the third set when Federer didn't challenge that ball that was called out and he clearly saw it out.

Can you imagine if Federer and Djokovic had had "words" after the "Be quiet" incident   Maybe it is more about Federer and Wawrinka's words after the match than the calling out during the match that is the biggest controversy? Well that and Fed not playing the final, Mirka being outspoken, Fed and Stan having to play the Davis Cup final in a few days, the Stefan Edberg sportsman award winner being given a room to sort his differences with another player, Federer's bad back... not to mention all the similarities between the AO final and the WTF final that didn't happen. Who did win the WTF? I've forgotten Was it John McEnroe? Or maybe even Andy Murray?

HE, you have a well developed Fantasy and virtual scene creation.

You would be amazing for RP Erotic novels.

IMBL is not even up to your knees in that department

Jahu wrote:

You would be amazing for RP Erotic novels.

You sir deserve a hand shake and bottle of Moet for that gem!

hawkeye wrote:socal1976. I think you raise some very good points about the comparisons between Federer's "Be quiet" and Mirka's "Cry Baby" calls. Djokovic would get totally dismissed here sometimes if not for you

I feel a little guilty myself because I loved it when Federer told Djokovic's family to be quiet and yet I agree with Mirka that Wawrinka is a bit of a cry baby. In that match Wawrinka had been getting his knickers in a twist over a few things before the "cry baby" incident and yet it was Federer who really had more cause to cry. If Wawrinka had ended up winning the semi and Mirka had kept quiet we would most likely still be talking about controversy in this match. Wawrinka was gifted the break in the first game of the third set when Federer didn't challenge that ball that was called out and he clearly saw it out.

Can you imagine if Federer and Djokovic had had "words" after the "Be quiet" incident   Maybe it is more about Federer and Wawrinka's words after the match than the calling out during the match that is the biggest controversy? Well that and Fed not playing the final, Mirka being outspoken, Fed and Stan having to play the Davis Cup final in a few days, the Stefan Edberg sportsman award winner being given a room to sort his differences with another player, Federer's bad back... not to mention all the similarities between the AO final and the WTF final that didn't happen. Who did win the WTF? I've forgotten Was it John McEnroe? Or maybe even Andy Murray?

You may have forgotten due to your binge drinking of Moet but the record books and Novak's bank account, and his ATP point total bear record to his victory. The fact is that Mirka was influencing the play much more than Djokovic's parents after a ball was called out claiming a shot was in when in fact it was in. Contrary, to reports that they were heckling Fed the real story is they were in perfect position to see a missed call and cried out after a blown call against their son, which frankly is quite normal and no one would take offense to it in the manner that his Federship did.

As for the rest of your post it really is quite funny keep up the good work. Regardless of anything you say John McEnroe claims Novak is definitely one of the ten best players in the open era, if you claim he is toiling in obscurity and no one cares about his successes there seem to be a few people who differ from your learned opinion.

socal. Novak isn't toiling in obscurity. He is just under a bit of a shadow... For what it's worth I like him and feel guilty when I cheer for him to lose.

hawkeye wrote:socal. Novak isn't toiling in obscurity. He is just under a bit of a shadow... For what it's worth I like him and feel guilty when I cheer for him to lose.

He was very circumspect in his presser after his WTF win. Novak is keeping a low profile... "he is keeping his head whilst all around him are losing theirs" sensible me thinks. Just quietly going about his business Socal

Bit OT, but Djokovic has come a long way from the USO fan confrontation days and has maturity commensurate with his new fatherhood. He deserves credit for being where he is today.

Back to the topic, USO had experimented with microphones in players boxes. I think Center/main courts of MS, Slams, DC, WTF should permanently adopt this, to put pressure on boxes of players, and, on players themselves to keep their noggin, even if in the middle of a battle royale.

Mourier should have been clearly instructed to know the boundaries of what he could and could talk to 20min about.

Mirka's role is getting murkier in this episode, and it should be a moment for her to recognize and remain supportive, yet follow Tennis decorum and tradition.

Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it, so should v2, and move on.

laverfan wrote:
Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it

This is simply an assumption and speculation, is it not ?

How could you possibly know whether Fed and Stan have or haven't got over it really?

It Must Be Love wrote:

laverfan wrote:
Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it

This is simply an assumption and speculation, is it not ?

How could you possibly know whether Fed and Stan have or haven't got over it really?

That's a bit like asking how can we possibly know if a player is really injured/smug/desperate for attention/dour/lazy etc - we can only go on what we see and make the judgement that we feel most comfortable with.

It Must Be Love wrote:

laverfan wrote:
Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it

This is simply an assumption and speculation, is it not ?

How could you possibly know whether Fed and Stan have or haven't got over it really?

Have they not came out and proclaimed they have put it behind them.

Or is that pesky PR again?

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Have they not came out and proclaimed they have put it behind them.

Yes, that's what they said

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Have they not came out and proclaimed they have put it behind them.

Yes, that's what they said

So where is the speculation?

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Have they not came out and proclaimed they have put it behind them.

Yes, that's what they said

So where is the speculation?

and we are to believe what they said?

well that would be the end of Hello and OK and People and what not, wouldn't it?

legendkillarV2 wrote:

So where is the speculation?

LF didn't say 'Federer and Wawrinka say they've gotten over it', but she said 'Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it'. The first claim would be accurate, the second is simply an assumption.
Of course that doesn't mean assuming the opposite is correct either, we can't just assume because PR wise with the DC final coming up it would be savvy to say they're friends again means they're actually not.

coolpixel wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:
Have they not came out and proclaimed they have put it behind them.

Yes, that's what they said

So where is the speculation?

and we are to believe what they said?

well that would be the end of Hello and OK and People and what not, wouldn't it?

On that basis I will discount anything said by anyone.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

So where is the speculation?

LF didn't say 'Federer and Wawrinka say they've gotten over it', but she said 'Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it'. The first claim would be accurate, the second is simply an assumption.
Of course that doesn't mean assuming the opposite is correct either, we can't just assume because PR wise with the DC final coming up it would be savvy to say they're friends again means they're actually not.

So the players have said they have gotten over it.

LF said they have gotten over it.

No error or speculation.

Equally we don't know if Fed was ever really injured. In fact, we don't know for sure that any player has ever been injured. They may say they are, but we don't know

So from now on we can't say anything is true, we just have to say "Player A says it's true".

Haddie-nuff wrote:

hawkeye wrote:socal. Novak isn't toiling in obscurity. He is just under a bit of a shadow... For what it's worth I like him and feel guilty when I cheer for him to lose.

He was very circumspect in his presser after his WTF win.  Novak is keeping a low profile... "he is keeping his head whilst all around him are losing theirs" sensible me thinks.  Just quietly going about his business Socal

Interestingly, Haddie I believe that the baby and marriage have been good for him. He always struck me as a guy who places a lot of pressure on himself and holds on too tight. A good marriage and family can properly ground you and give you that release from tennis that gives you the right perspective on highs and lows.

laverfan wrote:Bit OT, but Djokovic has come a long way from the USO fan confrontation days and has maturity commensurate with his new fatherhood. He deserves credit for being where he is today.

Back to the topic, USO had experimented with microphones in players boxes. I think Center/main courts of MS, Slams, DC, WTF should permanently adopt this, to put pressure on boxes of players, and, on players themselves to keep their noggin, even if in the middle of a battle royale.

Mourier should have been clearly instructed to know the boundaries of what he could and could talk to 20min about.

Mirka's role is getting murkier in this episode, and it should be a moment for her to recognize and remain supportive, yet follow Tennis decorum and tradition.

Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it, so should v2, and move on.

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

legendkillarV2 wrote:

So the players have said they have gotten over it.

LF said they have gotten over it.

No error or speculation.

No, it is clearly an assumption, because LF is assuming that what they have said is accurate, which is speculation.

Think about this logically and rationally. When a situation occurs where there is a conflict of interest, or more specifically when it is in someone's interest to say a certain thing, and then this person goes on to say that thing- it is less likely to be accurate than if there was no conflict of interest at all.
In this case, it strikes me as obvious that with a DC final coming up, Federer and Wawrinka will want to show a united front and concentrate on the final, irrelevant of whether the matter is truly behind them or is lingering on in their minds.
Before people accuse me of making the opposing assumption, check my last post where I reiterated that the fact it's in their interest does not necessarily mean it's untrue either.

The moment you said "Think about this logically and rationally" I lost interest.

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

socal1976 wrote:

Haddie-nuff wrote:

hawkeye wrote:socal. Novak isn't toiling in obscurity. He is just under a bit of a shadow... For what it's worth I like him and feel guilty when I cheer for him to lose.

He was very circumspect in his presser after his WTF win.  Novak is keeping a low profile... "he is keeping his head whilst all around him are losing theirs" sensible me thinks.  Just quietly going about his business Socal

Interestingly, Haddie I believe that the baby and marriage have been good for him. He always struck me as a guy who places a lot of pressure on himself and holds on too tight. A good marriage and family can properly ground you and give you that release from tennis that gives you the right perspective on highs and lows.

Believe me I want to like him Socal.. I have enormous respect for his tennis, but his manner has always prevented me getting behind him. Yes married life and children have a habit of grounding most people

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

I don't think socal pays much attention to what happens on this forum. Not enough Federhadis here.

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

Mirka yells out and distracts stan and she knows what she is doing because she played herself, calls him a crybaby, Fed goes on to win the match in controversial fashion, and now the umpire and Stan are the bad guys. Just hilarious if you ask me. This completely vindicates what I have been saying about how his sportsmanship awards are fake, and how he has better PR than kittens and puppies.

It Must Be Love wrote:

legendkillarV2 wrote:

So the players have said they have gotten over it.

LF said they have gotten over it.

No error or speculation.

No, it is clearly an assumption, because LF is assuming that what they have said is accurate, which is speculation.

Think about this logically and rationally. When a situation occurs where there is a conflict of interest, or more specifically when it is in someone's interest to say a certain thing, and then this person goes on to say that thing- it is less likely to be accurate than if there was no conflict of interest at all.
In this case, it strikes me as obvious that with a DC final coming up, Federer and Wawrinka will want to show a united front and concentrate on the final, irrelevant of whether the matter is truly behind them or is lingering on in their minds.
Before people accuse me of making the opposing assumption, check my last post where I reiterated that the fact it's in their interest does not necessarily mean it's untrue either.

IMBL do you disbelieve all players statements? Or do you at least accept that believing anything any player says is just speculation?

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

This whole sorry affair keeps rumbling on and I have to stand up for Stan here.. was he not the wronged party in all of this.. why is anyone angry with him.  You are making him out to be the bad boy  and a scapegoat. I truly cannot understand why the blame is not put squarely on one person and that is Mirka Federer.  What if, when Fed was serving to save the match, had Stans wife heckled Federer ..would you have been blaming Fed for complaining about it.? . no of course you wouldnt and rightly so

Who on here is making Stan out to be the bad boy?

laverfan wrote:

Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it, so should v2, and move on.

Dam it! I was expecting them to reveal exactly what went on in that closed off room in the O2. Now I will just have to continue to speculate...

I have got this fascinating insight though. Nadal was asked about the reported row but apparently according to this report in a national newspaper he has "no opinion".

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/18/rafael-nadal-australian-open-comeback

We can only wonder if he does really have "no opinion" or if he has an opinion but prefers not to tell the national press

Haddie-nuff wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

This whole sorry affair keeps rumbling on and I have to stand up for Stan here.. was he not the wronged party in all of this.. why is anyone angry with him.  You are making him out to be the bad boy  and a scapegoat. I truly cannot understand why the blame is not put squarely on one person and that is Mirka Federer.  What if, when Fed was serving to save the match, had Stans wife heckled Federer ..would you have been blaming Fed for complaining about it.? . no of course you wouldnt and rightly so

Haddie both you and I know that if the reverse had happened Stan's reputation would have never lived it down. Djokovic's mother made the "king is dead" remarks 6 years ago, not Djokovic mind you his mother, and she didn't say it during a match like Mirka but to a reporter and to this day Djoko detractors bring this up like he told his mom to say that eventhough he disowned the comments right away. But Federer is like Teflon Don John Gotti, with somes nice pr and snazzy clothes he gets away with murder. No matter what he does he will never, ever get criticized in the media or online.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Who on here is making Stan out to be the bad boy?

Well I think he's a bit of a cry baby...

hawkeye wrote:

laverfan wrote:

Federer and Wawrinka have gotten over it, so should v2, and move on.

Dam it! I was expecting them to reveal exactly what went on in that closed off room in the O2. Now I will just have to continue to speculate...

I have got this fascinating insight though. Nadal was asked about the reported row but apparently according to this report in a national newspaper he has "no opinion".

http://www.theguardian.com/sport/2014/nov/18/rafael-nadal-australian-open-comeback

We can only wonder if he does really have "no opinion" or if he has an opinion but prefers not to tell the national press

So the fascinating insight on this was 'no opinion'



My waffle iron produces less waffle than this!

Great way to put more Nadal spam on a non-Nadal thread.

It's odd isn't it legendkillarV2? There is just no information about what went on. Maybe it didn't really happen

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

I went onto a large site that sells equipment (hint) and the fed apologists are running rampant. Mourier is getting ripped. I love the logic of the fedfans we have been seeing. Roger's wife abuses you and yells out before your return well shut up about it or you are awful. And Mourier if you tell the truth about what happened then you are evil. This is just plain hilarious. Everything I have said about this guy is proven correct. He could have just shut the hell up and said no comment. But instead he goes on the attack and tries to assassinate Mourier's character. This guy is a real piece of work, greatest PR in history.

JuliusHMarx wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

I don't think socal pays much attention to what happens on this forum. Not enough Federhadis here.

Getting a bit personal here surely?  Let's all stop the bickering or move on. Gossip shouldn't always lead to people being on "sides"

JuliusHMarx wrote:

IMBL do you disbelieve all players statements? Or do you at least accept that believing anything any player says is just speculation?

I don't automatically believe/disbelieve people, I see each case individually.

As for what I was saying to LK, and your question on what is speculation and what isn't- I think people can come to they own judgements.
This would be my take, bear in mind we are straying off topic here, and you can remove this post if you want to:

When you're in a situation where you don't have direct evidence in front of you, but have to come to a judgement of some sort, I think you have to judge what is more likely to be true. If you enter a raffle and there's 99% chance you don't win anything, and then you permanently lose your raffle ticket so you can't find out if you've won, at that point in time speculation that you haven't won has 99% chance of being accurate. So there are degrees of probability, meanwhile if it was a Tescco scratch card and there was a 80% chance you'd win atleast something, and the same thing happened, 'speculation' that you haven't won anything at all would only be 20% likely to be accurate. So both are 'speculation', but are different due to degrees in probability.
This is the point I was making to LK, when there is a conflict of interest, and in this case I did feel it was in Federer and Stan's interest to give the idea this incident was behind them and they were friends showing a united team ahead of a big final, it strikes me as less likely that what they would say would be accurate than if there was no conflict of interest at all. If Federer was asked what the colour of his wallpaper was, and he replied blue, I would be much more inclined to believe him than this case- as there is no particular reason I know of why it would be in his interest to not state the actual colour of his wallpaper.
On this particular case of Fed and Stan, if you were to ask me to make a judgement on whether they are friends after this as Federer said, I haven't yet made one- I will wait till this week. I suspect also that if they win the Davis Cup, it's also more likely they'll put any differences behind them, but that's another story altogether.

I feel like Yossarian in Catch-22. When the Army psyche asks him why he is paranoid he responds that people are trying to kill him. And the psyche is outraged replying that no one is trying to kill him. Then Yossarian replies oh yeah then what about all those Germans who are shooting at me.

socal1976 wrote:I feel like Yossarian in Catch-22. When the Army psyche asks him why he is paranoid he responds that people are trying to kill him. And the psyche is outraged replying that no one is trying to kill him. Then Yossarian replies oh yeah then what about all those Germans who are shooting at me.

Well this is the first controversy involving roger for a very long time and not everyone's happy about each other's opinion on it . Hopefully it's a reminder to people that when a controversy happens that isn't their player to be considerate. This shouldn't be going down line this .

temporary21 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

I don't think socal pays much attention to what happens on this forum. Not enough Federhadis here.

Getting a bit personal here surely?  Let's all stop the bickering or move on. Gossip shouldn't always lead to people being on "sides"

Simply pointing out that the behaviour socal is so upset about isn't happening here. I'd prefer it if socal didn't lump this forum in with other forums where people behave differently. What's personal about that?
Can I at least ask what a Federhadi is? Or is that going too far?

JuliusHMarx wrote:

temporary21 wrote:

JuliusHMarx wrote:

It Must Be Love wrote:

socal1976 wrote:

Mourier did nothing wrong. If he responded honestly as the saying goes the truth will set you free. He showed Rosa Parks like courage standing up to the Nike/Harman/MMS/ATP spin machine that will now turn their guns on him like Julian Assange on a sex romp in Sweden. The Federhadis in the media and online will now assault him verbally and assassinate him professionally. We have seen the same script over and over again. Just like they attack Djokovic, Nadal, their parents etc. continually for having the audacity to stand in the way of his pomposity.

On this forum this hasn't really happened, but on other forums, especially one American one, some are extremely angry at the role of the umpire and Stan in this.

I don't think socal pays much attention to what happens on this forum. Not enough Federhadis here.

Getting a bit personal here surely?  Let's all stop the bickering or move on. Gossip shouldn't always lead to people being on "sides"

Simply pointing out that the behaviour socal is so upset about isn't happening here. I'd prefer it if socal didn't lump this forum in with other forums where people behave differently. What's personal about that?
Can I at least ask what a Federhadi is? Or is that going too far?

Wait no one on this site mentioned how Stan should let it go and that Mourier shouldn't have talked to the media? Ok, my bad. (sarcasm)

Federhadi? What is that?

JuliusHMarx wrote:Federhadi? What is that?

Its called bait Julius, you know when you want to catch a fish you stick a worm on the hook, would you like some help getting the hook out?

temp21 - look - socal's getting personal

socal1976 wrote:Haddie both you and I know that if the reverse had happened Stan's reputation would have never lived it down. Djokovic's mother made the "king is dead" remarks 6 years ago, not Djokovic mind you his mother, and she didn't say it during a match like Mirka but to a reporter and to this day Djoko detractors bring this up like he told his mom to say that eventhough he disowned the comments right away. But Federer is like Teflon Don John Gotti, with somes nice pr and snazzy clothes he gets away with murder. No matter what he does he will never, ever get criticized in the media or online.

Federer didn't do anything wrong, so why are you having a go at him? When has Federer 'got away with murder'? Incidents involving Federer that I can recall place him largely in the right. For example 2009 us open Del potro, 2008 monte carlo was nothing- just getting irritated at their rowdiness.

I get the feeling a much bigger deal has now been made of it as finally the Federer aura has shown some weakness. Mirka was clearly out of order to call Stan a cry baby, Federer has said he just wanted to see if there was any hard feelings after the match. I think people are making out like he attacked Stan for shouting at his wife. I imagine, he went in there said "what happened there out there?" How do we know Federer didn't like what Mirka said and apologised to Stan? That would be a boring story though wouldn't it