Delpo will beat Nadal

First topic message reminder :

Having beaten Nadal in a semi before and now fitter than before, I reckon that Delpo will come triumph in the last 16 encounter with Nadal.

Delpo has a respectable 3-5 h2h against him and with few matches under his belt, he is gaining back his old confidence which helped him in winning the 2010 US open by beating Nadal and Fed.

It will be good for the sport if Delpo wins tomorrow as it will open the race to no. 1 wide open.

Let's hope and pray for the best.

Wishful Thinking talking again. We can all dream.

It wasn't Nadal's ankle that was causing the discomfort, it was his heel. He'll be A1 by Friday.

Well - Whatever you want to look at it, that first set was key and Nadal knew that. Exactly like in that FO final v Federer. Again he took a MTO and that is a disgrace. Once again, Nadal's injury completely heal the longer and harder he runs.

He gets the win but certainly not the respect.

Tenez wrote:Well - Whatever you want to look at it, that first set was key and Nadal knew that. Exactly like in that FO final v Federer. Again he took a MTO and that is a disgrace. Once again, Nadal's injury completely heal the longer and harder he runs.

He gets the win but certainly not the respect.

The chair umpire was well within his rights to deny the MTO if he wanted as it wasn't called at the end of the set ot change of ends. But he didn't. So any criticism of the MTO being recieved should be directed to him and not the player.

It was obvious Nadal will use the slice more today but after set 1, I thought Del Potro played it well. Apologies for seriously underestimating Del Potro, a truely great player but I thought he couldn't play Nadal too well on grass but no. He was great at the net and to be fair both players played great at the net. Wimbledon slower than FO I heard? Rubbish. Great match and Del Potro can play on grass.

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:Well - Whatever you want to look at it, that first set was key and Nadal knew that. Exactly like in that FO final v Federer. Again he took a MTO and that is a disgrace. Once again, Nadal's injury completely heal the longer and harder he runs.

He gets the win but certainly not the respect.

The chair umpire was well within his rights to deny the MTO if he wanted as it wasn't called at the end of the set ot change of ends. But he didn't. So any criticism of the MTO being recieved should be directed to him and not the player.

tenez is never going to respect Nadal even if he wins fair. I think Nadal did really well in coming back after that injury and winning the match. Delpo failed to seize the moment during the opening set and paid the price for it. However he has shown that Nadal is not invincible and can be beaten.

Michael-o , you might say that wishful thinking but any injury affects more when you have rested, the pain spray and physio thing did work for Nadal but he deifintely has 2 more tougher matches coming on his way if he has to lift this trophy and it aint gonna be easy, mate 8)

Tenez wrote:Well - Whatever you want to look at it, that first set was key and Nadal knew that. Exactly like in that FO final v Federer. Again he took a MTO and that is a disgrace. Once again, Nadal's injury completely heal the longer and harder he runs.

He gets the win but certainly not the respect.

Don't worry, you'll get over it.

Before anymore is said about the MTO I will state the facts and then you can debate.

- Nadal called for the trainer and an MTO. Now whether the timing was 'tactical' can be debated. Just the timing. The injury appeared to have struck in the 10th game.

- Del Potro challenged the call for the MTO before the tiebreaker as it is not in the rules to receive an MTO before a tiebreaker. The chair umpire made the decision to allow it. Not Nadal.

- The match referee live on TV, confirmed that Nadal was to leave the court and receive a shot of lidocaine. No healthy human being in their right mind would accept that treatment if not required.

- Furthermore, reports have confirmed Nadal will be having an MRI Scan.

SO, if you have proof the injury is fake, disclose. Otherwise it will be deemed an allegation.

Please remember the difference between opinion and allegation as I will lock this thread if more 'unproven' allegations are made.

Please feel free to debate.

Thanks

Sounds like someone has been eating too many lemons around here...

nah LK he agravated the injury (which apparently he was feeling early on) when he hit a winner in game 12 (incidently that winner brought up set point, so it was some tactic to then lose the game and THEN upset Del Potro's rhythm...)

You can't just lock every thread when someone alludes to Nadal and the 'seriousness' of his injury.

It's always going to happen.

In my opinion, Nadal made more of that injury than there actually was. Even in the tie break he only limped at the end of points he lost.

This isn't an allegation, it's an opinion based on what I saw.

Legendkiller, don't bother lol. Not even a tactical injury. Why would he alledge to injury after a shot which gave him set point? To boost his opponents morale that he is injured? Don't waste time on Tenez, let him cry it off tonight.

djlovesyou wrote:You can't just lock every thread when someone alludes to Nadal and the 'seriousness' of his injury.

It's always going to happen.

In my opinion, Nadal made more of that injury than there actually was. Even in the tie break he only limped at the end of points he lost.

This isn't an allegation, it's an opinion based on what I saw.

I will lock threads if people are making allegations without proof.

Opinions as I stated I have no problem with.

Are you worried about the possible threat of legal action?

Well heard of slander?

If for example this forum on any sports section made an allegation with no proof, and the sportsperson's representative saw it. Then yes a legal issue can arise.

As someone who has a destroyed knee that on xray looks like a mash of bone i can say for certain that strong painkillers can remove the worst of the pain, allbeit not restore the function. I heard some suggestion alluding to a bone splint of something similar, but i think the most likely thing is he may have simply pulled the tissue from his heel bone slightly. This is certainly something that might cause the sharp pain i heard him mention. If so painkillers/the cream would help and as its pain rather than function, bar a little internal bleeding he should be OK to go into other matches with the painkillers already in action.

The taping was also interesting - i heard them mention something that sounded at if they were going to build the tape up on one side of the foot to help take weight away from the affected area - if this worked well then its also a future option.

I was obviously massive concern to him by the look on his face - it reminded me of when he pulled out vs. Murray at AO.

Tom_____ wrote:As someone who has a destroyed knee that on xray looks like a mash of bone i can say for certain that strong painkillers can remove the worst of the pain, allbeit restore the function. I heard some suggestion alluding to a bone splint of something similar, but i think the most likely thing is he may have simply pulled the tissue from his heel bone slightly. This is certainly something that might cause the sharp pain i heard him mention. If so painkillers/the cream would help and as its pain rather than function, bar a little internal bleeding he should be OK to go into other matches with the painkillers already in action.

The taping was also interesting - i heard them mention something that sounded at if they were going to build the tap up on one side of the foot to help take weight away from the affected area - if this worked well then its also a future option.

I was obviously massive concern to him by the look on his face - it reminded me of when he pulled out vs. Murray at AO.

Thank you for an example of an injury personally suffered and the effects painkillers can have on the limb in question.

Given that Nadal didn't even sue L'Equipe when they stated as fact that he was a client of Dr Fuentes and he was the Puerto list, I doubt he'll be too worried about this.

And for it to be slander, it has to be proven that the comments cause the complainant 'real damage'. Most of the time there is absolutely no way to prove that any comments online cause real damage.

djlovesyou wrote:You can't just lock every thread when someone alludes to Nadal and the 'seriousness' of his injury.

It's always going to happen.

In my opinion, Nadal made more of that injury than there actually was. Even in the tie break he only limped at the end of points he lost.

This isn't an allegation, it's an opinion based on what I saw.

Exactly... I can only suspect that LK is under heavy pressure from the rafa smiley club.

Did you also notice that I managed to put the words Nadal, Fuentes and Puerto in the same sentence, and the post stayed up for more than a minute now.

Now that's a new record. This place is slightly different to 606.

"In my opinion, Nadal made more of that injury than there actually was. Even in the tie break he only limped at the end of points he lost"

have you ever had an adrenaline burst? Its remarkable how little people seem to understand there own bodies. Naturally you will always literally feel an injury more when you feel disappointment and when high on adrenaline from winning a point, or scoring a goal, say, its amazing how your body disconnects pain momentarily. At the end of the day Nadal got the worst of the start of the TB before he got going and so i can't see how anyone really believes it was a move to put Del P out of stride, when in fairness NAdal had most of the momentum throughout the first set - that same momentum that NAdal himself lost at the start of the TB. Now i understand Del P being annoyed, its always tough in that scenario, but its also pro tennis and after a short while i don't think he cared.

I would bet massively that Nadal is feeling it now.

djlovesyou wrote:Given that Nadal didn't even sue L'Equipe when they stated as fact that he was a client of Dr Fuentes and he was the Puerto list, I doubt he'll be too worried about this.

And for it to be slander, it has to be proven that the comments cause the complainant 'real damage'. Most of the time there is absolutely no way to prove that any comments online cause real damage.

Paula Radcliffe didn't sue L'Equipe when they flat out accused her of using EPO. I don't think she was doping either. Do you?

Says more about the grubby standards of L'Equipe than it does about Rafa or Paula IMO.

So will this injury affect Nadal in his forthcoming matches?

wow wrote:So will this injury affect Nadal in his forthcoming matches?

By the sound of things only if he isn't winning

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/13937280.stm

just saw this on bbc and Nadal is worried about the injury which can be a good news for his opponents. Fish could be a surprise winner this year

djlovesyou wrote:Given that Nadal didn't even sue L'Equipe when they stated as fact that he was a client of Dr Fuentes and he was the Puerto list, I doubt he'll be too worried about this.

And for it to be slander, it has to be proven that the comments cause the complainant 'real damage'. Most of the time there is absolutely no way to prove that any comments online cause real damage.

Whether he chose not to sue is not the point.

The point is that slander and libel is illegal.

So I am saying with caution to posters on how they word their statements.

legendkillar wrote:

djlovesyou wrote:Given that Nadal didn't even sue L'Equipe when they stated as fact that he was a client of Dr Fuentes and he was the Puerto list, I doubt he'll be too worried about this.

And for it to be slander, it has to be proven that the comments cause the complainant 'real damage'. Most of the time there is absolutely no way to prove that any comments online cause real damage.

Whether he chose not to sue is not the point.

The point is that slander and libel is illegal.

So I am saying with caution to posters on how they word their statements.

Lk, I beg you, please do not lock the thread. Delete Tenez's posts rather ban him if you wish to but please do not lock this thread.

I am not locking this thread.

I am saying I will if more 'unproven' allegations are made.

Just can people be careful with what they type.

icecold wrote:
Paula Radcliffe didn't sue L'Equipe when they flat out accused her of using EPO. I don't think she was doping either. Do you?

Says more about the grubby standards of L'Equipe than it does about Rafa or Paula IMO.

Big difference there though. L'Equipe stated as a fact that Nadal was a client of Fuentes and was on the Puerto list. The Radcliffe thing was just some bloke saying he didn't trust her performances because they were so fast.

Good of you to bring your favourite athlete into a thread about Nadal. Strange that it doesn't matter whether we're talking about Flo-Jo, Nadal or Ken Barlow, you always seem to be able to involve Paula Radcliffe somehow.

djlovesyou wrote:

icecold wrote:
Paula Radcliffe didn't sue L'Equipe when they flat out accused her of using EPO. I don't think she was doping either. Do you?

Says more about the grubby standards of L'Equipe than it does about Rafa or Paula IMO.

Big difference there though. L'Equipe stated as a fact that Nadal was a client of Fuentes and was on the Puerto list. The Radcliffe thing was just some bloke saying he didn't trust her performances because they were so fast.

Good of you to bring your favourite athlete into a thread about Nadal. Strange that it doesn't matter whether we're talking about Flo-Jo, Nadal or Ken Barlow, you always seem to be able to involve Paula Radcliffe somehow.

No difference in terms of the law. L'Equipe and Radcliffe herself was in no doubt that she had been publicly called a doper and a cheat by the bissgest sports weekly magazine in France and one of the biggest in Europe, as this extract for her own website proves:

One of those who publicly questioned me was Stéfan L’Hermitte, a sports writer with L’Equipe. He wrote that you couldn’t trust my performances and insinuated that I doped. I am quite fluent in French, but to be certain that I had fully understood the article, I asked two French friends to read it through. For them the meaning was clear: the writer did not believe I was clean.

http://www.paularadcliffe.com/book/21.php

Delpo was very sweet at the end - giving nadal a big pad on the back and I thought he was waiting for Nadal to walk back together (can't confirm this because BBC just ended their stream). Delpo must have done that because Nadal didn't question Delop's injury time out which happened in the middle of the game and also when Nadal was serving.

Huge differences in terms of law icecold.

They said that Nadal was on a list (a physical list of names). If he's not on that list, sueing would be very simple. The list goes to court and they see Tom, Dick and Harry but no Rafa, Rafa wins the case and damages.

Making an opinion that they don't quite trust that a woman can run a marathon that fast without drugs is impossible to litigate. It was written in a way that never actually accuses anyone of anything. For a good reason.

djlovesyou wrote:Huge differences in terms of law icecold.

They said that Nadal was on a list (a physical list of names). If he's not on that list, sueing would be very simple. The list goes to court and they see Tom, Dick and Harry but no Rafa, Rafa wins the case and damages.

Making an opinion that they don't quite trust that a woman can run a marathon that fast without drugs is impossible to litigate. It was written in a way that never actually accuses anyone of anything. For a good reason.

Exactly.

Del Potro gave a great account of himself in that match. Whilst Nadal was seemingly the "better" player throughout that first set, Del Potro nearly bagged it. Took the 2nd set heartily.

For his part, Nadal, as always never gives up; goes to show my feelings on the thread before about "What separates the Top 4 from the rest?" It's mental. Nadal could have become very weary of working hard on alot of points, only to have serve after serve thunder past him. He did get a little annoyed but never stopped waiting for "his chance."

Del Potro can win Wimbledon, based on what we saw today - historically, Wimbledon has always been the major at which, a player serving massively can blow someone off the court, even though their "game" as a whole, might not be as solid or accomplished, as the defeated opponent (Karlovic df Hewitt 1st round 2003 is the most recent of such matches).

I would expect Nadal to make mince-meat out of Fish, I don't see Fish serving as big or, much as did Del Potrp, and Nadal just has too much. Fish says he won't go out there believing that he can't win, but I think that is more about cultivating a healthy positive mentality, rather than really thinking he has a great chance to win that. Nadal's inury not withstanding, he just has too much for him.


(2) Djokovic vs (158) Tomic - T will have to serve out of his mind and win tiebreakers to do anything in that match.

(1) Nadal v (10) Fish - see above

(3) Federer v (12) Tsonga - has the potential to be a good match if Tsonga serves well, but I think Federer has enough, and especially in the "clutch" moments; may lose a set but I think Federer will run away with the fourth if T manages to get a set at all.

(4) Murray v (44) Lopez - again aside from a blazing service display, consistently through best of 5 sets, can't see Murray having too much trouble here.

We're possibly "looking" at the 13th time in the Open Era, to have Top 4 seeds into the semifinals; the 3rd time at Wimbledon.

Sampras won both of those scenarios at Wimbledon, once at (1), once as (2).

(3) has only done so once, Wilander at 1988 Australian Open, though Federer's looking very good to add to that statistic.

So we have a day's reprieve before the quarterfinals, enjoy the Ladies 1/4's and see how it's going to pan out with the men in the next round.

Sharapova, Kvitova and Azarenka in 2 straight sets.
Bartoli in 3 sets.

yloponom68 wrote:Del Potro gave a great account of himself in that match. Whilst Nadal was seemingly the "better" player throughout that first set, Del Potro nearly bagged it. Took the 2nd set heartily.

For his part, Nadal, as always never gives up; goes to show my feelings on the thread before about "What separates the Top 4 from the rest?" It's mental. Nadal could have become very weary of working hard on alot of points, only to have serve after serve thunder past him. He did get a little annoyed but never stopped waiting for "his chance."

Del Potro can win Wimbledon, based on what we saw today - historically, Wimbledon has always been the major at which, a player serving massively can blow someone off the court, even though their "game" as a whole, might not be as solid or accomplished, as the defeated opponent (Karlovic df Hewitt 1st round 2003 is the most recent of such matches).

I would expect Nadal to make mince-meat out of Fish, I don't see Fish serving as big or, much as did Del Potrp, and Nadal just has too much. Fish says he won't go out there believing that he can't win, but I think that is more about cultivating a healthy positive mentality, rather than really thinking he has a great chance to win that. Nadal's inury not withstanding, he just has too much for him.

oops, sorry didn't see that. Nadal is probably out, now.

It was a great match to watch today and just as I posted yesterday, Delpo did take a set off Nadal, which no one thus far @ Wimbledon has managed and for a 22 year old, there was real star quality about his performance. If he'd played the tie breakers better, it would have been a str8 sets victory for Delpo instead of a 4 set loss.

As for Nadal's injury, it would be a shame if he's become injured, because it would mean yet again, he won't have defended successfully any grand slam outside RG. However, Nadal & injuries? Who would have thought it.....

I think we been lucky today, some great matches on both the men's and women's side of the draw, while Wednesday's matches don't look nearly as exciting as today's, I'm hoping we might see a good Tomic/Djoko match and a good Fed/Tsonga match too.

sportslover wrote:

wow wrote:So will this injury affect Nadal in his forthcoming matches?

By the sound of things only if he isn't winning

Ive come to expect that sort of comment from many posters (mostly from 606) but I didnt count you as one of them SL.. shows you how wrong you can be.. Not your normal style.

Haddie-nuff wrote:

sportslover wrote:

wow wrote:So will this injury affect Nadal in his forthcoming matches?

By the sound of things only if he isn't winning

Ive come to expect that sort of comment from many posters (mostly from 606) but I didnt count you as one of them SL.. shows you how wrong you can be.. Not your normal style.

A generalisation of most of the comments about his injury and not my personal opinion hence the " "

Unlike Tenez and some other posters I dont gloat on the misfortune of certain players as it isn't my style, which you well know!

Left yourself open to misinterpretation there then SL.. I know its not your style thus I was disappointed to read it. If I read it that way (and I know you)... best have said nothing at all. Easy to get in with the wrong crowd here !!! Things have been said on this thread and another that I have been hauled over the coals for... LegendKiller is the only moderator that is consistent in his moderating..He does the best he can.

Personally speaking I hope that Rafa hasn't any serious injury and will be able to meet Andy in the semi's providing both get there!

A rerun of last year with a different result would do nicely!

Yes I hope he has done little or no damage SL (He has already pulled out of the DC against uSA) That fact alone (before last night) pointed to the obvious... all is not well. Rafa is one of the most patriotic players you will ever find.. for him not to play the DC must be very difficult for him .. he has decided to return to Mallorca and have more treatment on his knees. It is inevitable, and something that has been talked about for the last 2/3 yrs with Rafa, that his body will not hold up to the stress he puts on it. 25yrs old is still young in tennis terms but I think Rafa will not have the career span of most players. If this injury is significant and something other than his knees... he has serious problems methinks. I hope that he gets to play Andy...however I hope also that the result remains status quo

sportslover wrote:
Unlike Tenez and some other posters I dont gloat on the misfortune of certain players as it isn't my style, which you well know!

And where and when did I gloat on the misfortune of others?

The misfortunes were on Delpotro yesterday who was left to cool down before a TB while the so-called injured player became stronger as teh match went on!

Don't make it up SL!

From the smiley brigade

legendkillar wrote:

Tenez wrote:Well - Whatever you want to look at it, that first set was key and Nadal knew that. Exactly like in that FO final v Federer. Again he took a MTO and that is a disgrace. Once again, Nadal's injury completely heal the longer and harder he runs.

He gets the win but certainly not the respect.

The chair umpire was well within his rights to deny the MTO if he wanted as it wasn't called at the end of the set ot change of ends. But he didn't. So any criticism of the MTO being recieved should be directed to him and not the player.

I must remember to blame the referees when players dive at football next season.

Personally I wasn't bothered about the MTO but your statement that breaches of rules are not the responsibility of the sportsmen is absurd.

legendkillar wrote:Well heard of slander?

If for example this forum on any sports section made an allegation with no proof, and the sportsperson's representative saw it. Then yes a legal issue can arise.

I don't know about the rest of the forum, but I have. Slander is spoken, you're safe on here.

Tenez, what about Delpo's time out in the middle of the game. Was Nadal not left to cool down in the middle of a game? Why are you not having histrionics over that?

If Delpo is as good an actor as has been suggested on here (the warm embrace at the end was an act according to some people on here last night), then who is to say that he wasn't acting at the fall.

Yes, a ridiculous statement, but no more ridiculous than other statements being made.

And before I get jumped on, no, I do not believe either player was faking, and I believe they should both be applauded for providing such a great match for us when they were both obviously hindered by injuries.

Im beginning to feel more and more at home here.. just like 606 you can be sure when you have a honey pot.. then in come the "B"s

Haddie-nuff wrote:Im beginning to feel more and more at home here.. just like 606 you can be sure when you have a honey pot.. then in come the "B"s

And your point is?

"B"s?

cats_r_cool wrote:Tenez, what about Delpo's time out in the middle of the game. Was Nadal not left to cool down in the middle of a game? Why are you not having histrionics over that?

If Delpo is as good an actor as has been suggested on here (the warm embrace at the end was an act according to some people on here last night), then who is to say that he wasn't acting at the fall.

Yes, a ridiculous statement, but no more ridiculous than other statements being made.

And before I get jumped on, no, I do not believe either player was faking, and I believe they should both be applauded for providing such a great match for us when they were both obviously hindered by injuries.

100% with you cats_r_cool
I think Delpo and Nadal both needed the MTO. The difference was this - Delpo questioned the umpire and Nadal didn't. Nadal should have questioned the umpire because it happened in the middle of the game but he didn't because I think he respected the situation and probably understands better then other players due to his own injury. I don't think the warm embrace was an act by Delpo - I think he genuinely appreciated Nadal's efforts to beat him.

If Nadal can't play the quarter final, is it going to be regarded that he is still undefeated at Wimbledon since 2007?

I already disagree with the statement that because he wasn't able to defend the title in 2009, he remained undefeated as injury is part of the game and players have to compete with it as well as other players. If he had been forced to retire during the first round he would have gone down as defeated.

Don't get me wrong, to win Wimbledon twice in three years as he did is a great achievement whether you can't play in between the victories or lose if you do, but I disagree with the perception that is given of being him undefeated. When people look back at the record books, the winner's name will be all they see, not who was or wasn't absent.