FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[McLaren Fan]

Well, thank God Murray lost. The British press were annoying the s*** out of me (as usual), and Murray is the most boring, obnoxious and overrated tennis player ever. The BBC had the cheek to say Murray should have won today's match. What an arrogant statement. Murray has no right to just win matches. And Roddick is an experienced professional who's achieved far more than Murray has. Roddick played a super match and got his tactics just right. Indeed, Murray was lucky to even have got a set.

The facts of the matter are: (i) Murray's second serve is pathetic, and improving it will take a lot of work; (ii) his forehand is very iffy, both in power and accuracy; (iii) his fitness is nowhere near as good as vaunted; and (iv) he's what is known as a "pusher" in tennis: being defensive is useful on some occasions and against some players, but it is also necessary to take a risk. The odds are Murray will win several grandslams, but he will have to improve, and he is certainly not the stuff of legend.

It's nice to see Roddick get to the final again; he definitely deserves it, and would already have won Wimbledon (and numerous other grandslams) had he not been unfortunate enough to come up against the mercurial Federer. I expect Roddick will have a plan for Sunday, and Federer will need to play well; but Federer is a poor match-up for Roddick, and the Swiss is simply a genius. And, as much as I love Federer, I'd not be too disappointed if Roddick did win, as a single grandslam is not really representative of his ability.

[cap-dude]

Notice something. When Tim Henman was playing, everyone refered to him as the Englands hope for winning Wimbledon. But now it's a Scottish Murray, all of a sudden, it's Britans hope for winning wimbledon. Blind patronism.

Personally, I was hoping Murray would go out in the first match. Just cause it'd be funny to see millions of british people, hyped to the brim of exploding. Then crushed, within a few hours.

Anyways, I'd quite like to see Roddick win. Just because the few moments I watched him play today, he played brilliantly. Seeing him fake a powerful shot, only to tap it over the net. That was pretty clever. But really, it looks like Federer will win. Just cause it's Federer.

[McLaren Fan]

Notice something. When Tim Henman was playing, everyone refered to him as the Englands hope for winning Wimbledon. But now it's a Scottish Murray, all of a sudden, it's Britans hope for winning wimbledon. Blind patronism.

Well, Inverdale called Murray "the Scot" after the match this evening.

[cap-dude]

Notice something. When Tim Henman was playing, everyone refered to him as the Englands hope for winning Wimbledon. But now it's a Scottish Murray, all of a sudden, it's Britans hope for winning wimbledon. Blind patronism.

Well, Inverdale called Murray "the Scot" after the match this evening.

I refer to the general press and media though. We all know what the media are like

[EwanM]

Notice something. When Tim Henman was playing, everyone refered to him as the Englands hope for winning Wimbledon. But now it's a Scottish Murray, all of a sudden, it's Britans hope for winning wimbledon. Blind patronism.

Well, Inverdale called Murray "the Scot" after the match this evening.

I refer to the general press and media though. We all know what the media are like

It is simple. He is the Scot when he loses, a Brit when he wins. Jackie Stewart said the very same thing when being interviewed at his autograph stand at Silverstone.

[EwanM]

I don't particularly like how Wimbledon takes over the BBC's schedules. Hopefully when the digital switch over is complete they will only use one time slot on one of their channels, with the rest of the matches ALL on the red button. That way more people would be satisfied. I like tennis, but i'm not a great fanatic.

[McLaren Fan]

Well, what else will the BBC put on? The Antiques Road Show or something stupid. I'd much rather see live sport, thanks.

[EwanM]

Well, what else will the BBC put on? The Antiques Road Show or something stupid. I'd much rather see live sport, thanks.

They can easily show live sport on one of their four stations and, if need be, use their red button feature.

[McLaren Fan]

Yes, but what else are they going to put on? It would maybe different if they had something worthwhile to be shown instead, but they don't.

[EwanM]

Yes, but what else are they going to put on? It would maybe different if they had something worthwhile to be shown instead, but they don't.

Yes alot of the BBC's content has gone rather downhill, but some of the programmes they do put on (which I don't watch) do pull audience ratings. Those who pay the license fee deserve choice I suppose. That is all i'm saying. I don't make a great point to watch much of the BBC's main channels, but to find both BBC1 and 2 with Wimbledon on for a few hours can be a bit much sometimes.

[McLaren Fan]

Wimbledon is a British tradition, so I can see why it gets plenty of coverage. And it's not like tennis is on all year round. Wimbledon gets its couple of weeks, and it's only in the last six months the BBC got the rights to show a couple of the better matches at the Australian and French Opens on the interactive service.

As a tennis fan, I don't feel there is enough of it on the BBC.

[EwanM]

Wimbledon is a British tradition, so I can see why it gets plenty of coverage. And it's not like tennis is on all year round. Wimbledon gets its couple of weeks, and it's only in the last six months the BBC got the rights to show a couple of the better matches at the Australian and French Opens on the interactive service.

As a tennis fan, I don't feel there is enough of it on the BBC.

Keep it on Eurosport

[Gaz]

Well, thank God Murray lost. The British press were annoying the s*** out of me (as usual), and Murray is the most boring, obnoxious and overrated tennis player ever. The BBC had the cheek to say Murray should have won today's match. What an arrogant statement. Murray has no right to just win matches. And Roddick is an experienced professional who's achieved far more than Murray has. Roddick played a super match and got his tactics just right. Indeed, Murray was lucky to even have got a set.

The facts of the matter are: (i) Murray's second serve is pathetic, and improving it will take a lot of work; (ii) his forehand is very iffy, both in power and accuracy; (iii) his fitness is nowhere near as good as vaunted; and (iv) he's what is known as a "pusher" in tennis: being defensive is useful on some occasions and against some players, but it is also necessary to take a risk. The odds are Murray will win several grandslams, but he will have to improve, and he is certainly not the stuff of legend.

It's nice to see Roddick get to the final again; he definitely deserves it, and would already have won Wimbledon (and numerous other grandslams) had he not been unfortunate enough to come up against the mercurial Federer. I expect Roddick will have a plan for Sunday, and Federer will need to play well; but Federer is a poor match-up for Roddick, and the Swiss is simply a genius. And, as much as I love Federer, I'd not be too disappointed if Roddick did win, as a single grandslam is not really representative of his ability.

Too Right.

Scottish Player looses at Wimbledon if that's the way you want to have it Murry you arrogant *censored*.

[irons_4_ever]

see the wiliams brothers did well

[h-tomek]

see the wiliams brothers did well

Harsh, but definitely good one.

And, as far as Murray is concerned, I wanted to see him in the final, cause Roddick just doesn't have game to beat Federer. Murray would have had better chance than Roddick. Yeah, Roddick is very good player, but I can't see him beating Federer in today's final.

It's a shame that Nadal isn't in Wimbledon this year, he would have beaten Roger once again, and I would have enjoyed it very much.

So, it isn't hard to guess, I want Roddick to take Wimbledon this year, maybe we'll see more tears from Federer.