Jump to content

murray


footymadme

Recommended Posts

There is literally nothing between the top players now.. Fed in his prime was the best ever but he's no longer in his prime, amazing though how now in his 30s he's still pushing hard for majors.. Djoko and Murray are so far above the rest (5th ranked and below) and Nadal will come back as strong as ever IMO...

Any of the 4 can still win majors.. There is nothing between them so whoever gets the rub of the green and has the stronger serve on the day wins..

As good as the top 4 are tennis the sport has become abit like the PL... Going into every major you know that only 1 of 4 guys will win it.. And it doesn't help when the other guys in the top 10 gets knocked out by lower ranked players..

Who will win the final? Whoever has the stronger serve on the day.. I'll be amazed if it doesn't go to 5 sets

Tennis will be on the decline big time when Fed and Nadal go.. It will be so boring watching either Murray or Djoko win everything.. It will be like the SPL then

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 186
  • Created
  • Last Reply

There is literally nothing between the top players now.. Fed in his prime was the best ever but he's no longer in his prime, amazing though how now in his 30s he's still pushing hard for majors.. Djoko and Murray are so far above the rest (5th ranked and below) and Nadal will come back as strong as ever IMO...

Any of the 4 can still win majors.. There is nothing between them so whoever gets the rub of the green and has the stronger serve on the day wins..

As good as the top 4 are tennis the sport has become abit like the PL... Going into every major you know that only 1 of 4 guys will win it.. And it doesn't help when the other guys in the top 10 gets knocked out by lower ranked players..

Who will win the final? Whoever has the stronger serve on the day.. I'll be amazed if it doesn't go to 5 sets

Tennis will be on the decline big time when Fed and Nadal go.. It will be so boring watching either Murray or Djoko win everything.. It will be like the SPL then

With you to the last line. Two teams in Scotland still ? 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about it being boring, Bris. For years, Federer won everything apart from Paris - and Nadal won that, what - 7 times in 8 years or something? THAT was arguably boring (if watching the greatest player of all time could possibly be described that way) - then along came Djokovic to make it three carving the prizes up. Murray was always the poor relation of the four, better than everyone else by a mile, just as capable as Federer, Nadal and Djokovic physically and with arguably the most complete game of the lot, but with a mental frailty that let him down badly. Bringing Lendl into his entourage changed everything.

It's up to the rest to make that transition - to train harder and longer, to become fitter, faster, stronger, better. The big four have no advantage over the others other than being better, so a comparison with any football league is a false dichotomy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know about you guys but I don't mind watching amazing players if they bring both quality and flair to the game.. Federer was just awesome to watch, as was Nadal at times..

Murray is a great champion but in my opinion he just isn't enjoyable to watch.. He's probably the best defensive tennis player I've ever seen and he rarely comes into the net or takes risk shots.. So many of his points are won through forcing others into errors rather than hitting outright winners..

He reminds me of a Chelsea in football, winning comfortably against weaker players without flair and just grinding it against the big boys.. I can say the same about Djoko but he's not that bad..

IMo Federer and Nadal bring more to the game than just trophies, during those 4 years or so when they were in their prime they were just a joy to watch.. That final at Wimbledon was just epic for the quality of tennis.. Compare that to the Djoko-Murray final at the US, it was called epic, but only because both are amazing defensively which resulted in long rallies.. Not often did I ever say 'Wow that was a sublime shot' like I do with the other two..

It's just a personal opinion I have about tennis.. Murray has turned into a worldclass player no doubt, but I don't find his or Djokos style of play particularly attractive in comparison to other greats like Fed, Nadal, Agassi, Bjorn.. I even found Sampras quite robotic too..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re Borg - he was a revolutionary player, the first almost exclusive baseliner who put the most incredible amount of topspin on every single shot. No-one before him played anything like the way he did. He was an attritional player who took no risks, but what made him great to watch was the contrast in styles between him and the likes of Connors and McEnroe. Wooden racquet too.

Sampras was a serve-and-volley machine, so I totally agree with your description of him being robotic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dominated the set and lost.

Looks like he blew it to me.

How can a set which goes with serve and is settled on a tie-breaker be 'dominated' by any one player?

Djokovic won more points in the second set than Murray did, even without the tie-breaker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can a set which goes with serve and is settled on a tie-breaker be 'dominated' by any one player?

Djokovic won more points in the second set than Murray did, even without the tie-breaker.

Murray was leading and playing better. He fecked it up and djokovic capitalised and Murray never recovered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...