A Super Sunday Of Sport.

I definitely get why Federer takes most of the plaudits, he's like a great attacking side in football while both Nadal and Djoko (to different degrees) are more workman like

Very glad to see Federer lose. Particularly for the sake of the bitter disappointment of his graceless fans. Cheering unforced errors and booing Djokovic when he politely queries something at 11-11 in the fifth set? Those strawberries and cream must have tasted bitter last night.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 29 minutes ago
Very glad to see Federer lose. Particularly for the sake of the bitter disappointment of his graceless fans. Cheering unforced errors and booing Djokovic when he politely queries something at 11-11 in the fifth set? Those strawberries and cream must have tasted bitter last night.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Totally agree.

In fact, I watched the highlights of Murray beating Novak for his Wimbledon slam and the crowd were appalling.

comment by Red Russian (U4715)
posted 39 minutes ago

Very glad to see Federer lose. Particularly for the sake of the bitter disappointment of his graceless fans. Cheering unforced errors and booing Djokovic when he politely queries something at 11-11 in the fifth set? Those strawberries and cream must have tasted bitter last night.

=========================================
this!!!!!!!

comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 8 hours, 24 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 2 minutes ago
I think Wimbledon, BBC, etc should pay more attention to the runner up in these post-match adorations.
I would much rather have heard Federer's analysis of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nobody cares about runners up Ted, you should know that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you knew anything about the game you would not be spouting such rubbish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ted, what is knowing about the game got to do with paying attention to runners up. Does anybody care that Liverpool were runners up, Tottenham were runners up, New Zealand were runners up, Federer was a runner up. Sport is about winners mate, and you know it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tennis is a different game from football, Sandy.
You obviously don't play it!
Here are some facts .......
Federer won all of his service games with ease, and yet ......
he lost all 3 tie-breaks 5-7, 4-7 3-7 ... how did that happen? what was he trying to do in the tie breaks?
I would like to hear his explanation of that.
He had 2 match points and squandered both ... what was he trying there?
Also, at 37 he was playing as well in set 5 as in set 1, in fact better! What are his training methods?
In the post match interview he said he hoped his performance would show other players that tennis life was not over at 37.... Djokovic said "he was one of those other players"!
Another player from "our era" that I remember well who played into his forties was Jaroslav Drobny....
https://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/inductees/jaroslav-drobny
I was at Wimbledon and watched that match with Kenny Rosewall (aged 19)!

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 4 hours, 20 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 8 hours, 24 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by sandy (U20567)
posted 28 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 6 hours, 2 minutes ago
I think Wimbledon, BBC, etc should pay more attention to the runner up in these post-match adorations.
I would much rather have heard Federer's analysis of the game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Nobody cares about runners up Ted, you should know that.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If you knew anything about the game you would not be spouting such rubbish.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Ted, what is knowing about the game got to do with paying attention to runners up. Does anybody care that Liverpool were runners up, Tottenham were runners up, New Zealand were runners up, Federer was a runner up. Sport is about winners mate, and you know it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tennis is a different game from football, Sandy.
You obviously don't play it!
Here are some facts .......
Federer won all of his service games with ease, and yet ......
he lost all 3 tie-breaks 5-7, 4-7 3-7 ... how did that happen? what was he trying to do in the tie breaks?
I would like to hear his explanation of that.
He had 2 match points and squandered both ... what was he trying there?
Also, at 37 he was playing as well in set 5 as in set 1, in fact better! What are his training methods?
In the post match interview he said he hoped his performance would show other players that tennis life was not over at 37.... Djokovic said "he was one of those other players"!
Another player from "our era" that I remember well who played into his forties was Jaroslav Drobny....
https://www.tennisfame.com/hall-of-famers/inductees/jaroslav-drobny
I was at Wimbledon and watched that match with Kenny Rosewall (aged 19)!

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction: Federer won almost all his service games with ease. When he had the two match points, he was serving at 40-15 and 8-7 in the 5th set.
How he lost that game is something I'd like him to explain.

BTW Sandy, I'm not suggesting that the winner & Loser get equal time in post match TV, but that the loser gets some time to explain things.
Another stat.... Federer 94 winners, 61 unforced errors;
Djokovic 54 winners, 52 unforced errors.
That's why the crowd prefers to watch Federer - he's exciting. Novak is more of a brick wall.

comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
BTW Sandy, I'm not suggesting that the winner & Loser get equal time in post match TV, but that the loser gets some time to explain things.
Another stat.... Federer 94 winners, 61 unforced errors;
Djokovic 54 winners, 52 unforced errors.
That's why the crowd prefers to watch Federer - he's exciting. Novak is more of a brick wall.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The crowd prefers Federer because he’s been the darling of Wimbledon for years.

They associate with him because Wimbledon is essentially his playground now.

However, Djokovic has his number. That’s 3 final wins in what’s considered to be effectively home turf for Roger.

I can’t imagine someone dominating Rafa at Roland Garos in this way.

Federers game is easy on the eye but Novak is a winning machine. Djokvoic has won 33 of his last 34 major matches, and has captured four of the last five Grand Slam events.

comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
BTW Sandy, I'm not suggesting that the winner & Loser get equal time in post match TV, but that the loser gets some time to explain things.
Another stat.... Federer 94 winners, 61 unforced errors;
Djokovic 54 winners, 52 unforced errors.
That's why the crowd prefers to watch Federer - he's exciting. Novak is more of a brick wall.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The crowd prefers Federer because he’s been the darling of Wimbledon for years.

They associate with him because Wimbledon is essentially his playground now.

However, Djokovic has his number. That’s 3 final wins in what’s considered to be effectively home turf for Roger.

I can’t imagine someone dominating Rafa at Roland Garos in this way.

Federers game is easy on the eye but Novak is a winning machine. Djokvoic has won 33 of his last 34 major matches, and has captured four of the last five Grand Slam events.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasn't been a lot in it between Djok and Fed to be fair. 2 of those wins went to 5 sets and I actually thought this was the best Fed had played against Djok in all of those 3 matches and should have won the match when he had the chance. It's just that Djok is a slightly more clutch player, being that bit more mentally strong at the big moments.

Nadal at Roland Garos is just a different animal on that surface to even Fed on grass. Only 2 losses at the French, and I could be wrong but only once has he been taken to 5 sets in all those years playing on it. You won't get many other sportsmen in any sport as dominant at something.

comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 1 hour, 28 minutes ago
comment by Metro.⚽️ (U6770)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by JustCallMeTed (U21528)
posted 1 hour, 11 minutes ago
BTW Sandy, I'm not suggesting that the winner & Loser get equal time in post match TV, but that the loser gets some time to explain things.
Another stat.... Federer 94 winners, 61 unforced errors;
Djokovic 54 winners, 52 unforced errors.
That's why the crowd prefers to watch Federer - he's exciting. Novak is more of a brick wall.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The crowd prefers Federer because he’s been the darling of Wimbledon for years.

They associate with him because Wimbledon is essentially his playground now.

However, Djokovic has his number. That’s 3 final wins in what’s considered to be effectively home turf for Roger.

I can’t imagine someone dominating Rafa at Roland Garos in this way.

Federers game is easy on the eye but Novak is a winning machine. Djokvoic has won 33 of his last 34 major matches, and has captured four of the last five Grand Slam events.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hasn't been a lot in it between Djok and Fed to be fair. 2 of those wins went to 5 sets and I actually thought this was the best Fed had played against Djok in all of those 3 matches and should have won the match when he had the chance. It's just that Djok is a slightly more clutch player, being that bit more mentally strong at the big moments.

Nadal at Roland Garos is just a different animal on that surface to even Fed on grass. Only 2 losses at the French, and I could be wrong but only once has he been taken to 5 sets in all those years playing on it. You won't get many other sportsmen in any sport as dominant at something.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agree