djf Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Thats the draw now made. Murray starts against world 76 Robert Kendrick, who he grannied in 3 sets last time out on grass. Nadal is in his half of the draw - if he plays after getting beaten by Hewitt in a practice yesterday - and will start against Arnaud Clement. Roddick is also in that half of the draw. In the bottom half, five-time champion Roger Federer will open against Yen-Hsun Lu and fourth seed Novak Djokovic takes on France's Julien Benneteau. For the two people in the UK who care about womans tennis Laura Robson is going to get hammered off Hantchunova in the first round. Looking through the draw you would really fancy Murray to make the final in a pretty comfortable fashion if Nadal drops out and if he doesn't he's clearly not going to be firing on all cylinders. Looks like Fed is the man to beat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Gosling Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 If Nadal isn't fit, I'd expect Murray to make the final, and I think the support for him in the final would probably see him cross the finish line over R-Fed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Merse Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 If Nadal isn't fit, I'd expect Murray to make the final, and I think the support for him in the final would probably see him cross the finish line over R-Fed. Heres hoping. If only to shut 3 braincells up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jed The Jedi Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Say What Again Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Whatever happened to Jelena Dokić? She had great paps. Not too shabby from behind either Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I think that with a couple of good signings they could do well in the Blue Square Premier this season, and consolidate their position. I don't expect them to be in the shake up for promotion, but stranger things have happened. For me, the key player in the following season will be Sam Hatton. If he can continue to score goals from midfield, it will really take the pressure off Kedwell, Moore and Main up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeepers Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 The big guy with the tie and sunglasses seems to like her. Good luck to Murray aswell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Thats the draw now made. Murray starts against world 76 Robert Kendrick, who he grannied in 3 sets last time out on grass. Nadal is in his half of the draw - if he plays after getting beaten by Hewitt in a practice yesterday - and will start against Arnaud Clement. Roddick is also in that half of the draw. In the bottom half, five-time champion Roger Federer will open against Yen-Hsun Lu and fourth seed Novak Djokovic takes on France's Julien Benneteau. For the two people in the UK who care about womans tennis Laura Robson is going to get hammered off Hantchunova in the first round. Looking through the draw you would really fancy Murray to make the final in a pretty comfortable fashion if Nadal drops out and if he doesn't he's clearly not going to be firing on all cylinders. Looks like Fed is the man to beat. While Murray should make the final given the doubts over Nadal's fitness, he's hardly a cert to: his draw gets tougher step by step, and is full of banana skins: Kendrick Gulbis Dent Safin Gonzalez or Blake Roddick or Nadal Roddick still has a claim to being the world's third best grass court player, and has been showing signs of life lately, doing well in Paris. He's dangerous. Even if he can play, Nadal's draw is the worst of all the top four, and I can't see him negotiating it given fitness problems which many have suspected would be bound to hit him at some point. Federer's route is very straightforward, meanwhile: he won't be tested at all until the quarters, and is a prohibitive favourite for the event I'd say. Other than Nadal in the greatest tennis match ever played, no-one's beaten him on grass since 2002, and he's made a ridiculous twenty Grand Slam semi-finals in a row. Murray has reached just one, total. And I disagree completely with Peanut's analysis: the final will be so full of debenture holders, Pims drinkers and Hooray Henrys in general that I don't think the atmosphere will be intimidating, and should be water off a duck's back to Federer. Murray's not ready to beat him on grass yet; but if he reaches the final, he'll remain on course to break his duck in New York, where I honestly think he will as things stand. PS. Laura Robson will probably get tonked by Hantuchova, I agree. But in four or five years, she'll be a real contender. Indeed, it's perfectly possible she'll win Wimbledon before Murray does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 What's the general feeling then? Do we want Nadal to pull out or would it be better as a spectacle if he was in? From a selfish point of view I want him to pull out as it would be absolutely brilliant to see one of our own have a real fighting chance of winning it. Murray has the beating of Federer and I really think he has a brilliant chance if Rafa is out and he doesn't bottle it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I think that with a couple of good signings they could do well in the Blue Square Premier this season, and consolidate their position. I don't expect them to be in the shake up for promotion, but stranger things have happened. For me, the key player in the following season will be Sam Hatton. If he can continue to score goals from midfield, it will really take the pressure off Kedwell, Moore and Main up front. My thoughts exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Murray has no chance of winning Wimbledon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djf Posted June 19, 2009 Author Share Posted June 19, 2009 Murray has no chance of winning Wimbledon Not even a tiny little? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Murray has no chance of winning Wimbledon Exactly. The Number 3 seed (who could become No.2 seed if Nadal pulls out) has no chance at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 What's the general feeling then? Do we want Nadal to pull out or would it be better as a spectacle if he was in? From a selfish point of view I want him to pull out as it would be absolutely brilliant to see one of our own have a real fighting chance of winning it. Murray has the beating of Federer and I really think he has a brilliant chance if Rafa is out and he doesn't bottle it. Not on grass, he doesn't. Murray's at his best on fast, hard surfaces. He has a better chance of beating Fed in the US or Australia than at Wimbledon. If Nadal isn't fit, no-one in the draw has the beating of Federer. Meanwhile, Murray has met Federer at the business end of a Grand Slam once, and got blown off the court; and hasn't even been good enough to meet him in another Slam before or since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 My thoughts exactly! I'm looking forward to the Luton 2009 thread next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Not even a tiny little? When I said no chance, that's what I was getting at Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 What's the general feeling then? Do we want Nadal to pull out or would it be better as a spectacle if he was in? From a selfish point of view I want him to pull out as it would be absolutely brilliant to see one of our own have a real fighting chance of winning it. Murray has the beating of Federer and I really think he has a brilliant chance if Rafa is out and he doesn't bottle it. If Nadal pulls out, it'll make Murray's half of the draw tougher as Del Potro would be moved into Nadal's slot. If Nadal turns up, with the doubts about his fitness, it's fairly likely that he won't go far into the tournament. I agree with Shaun, though. Federer must be red hot favourite to take the tournament. If the bookies have Murray anywhere near him, it's a tribute to the hype of the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Not on grass, he doesn't. Murray's at his best on fast, hard surfaces. He has a better chance of beating Fed in the US or Australia than at Wimbledon. If Nadal isn't fit, no-one in the draw has the beating of Federer. Meanwhile, Murray has met Federer at the business end of a Grand Slam once, and got blown off the court; and hasn't even been good enough to meet him in another Slam before or since. I'd agree that Murray best chance for a Grand Slam is at the US or Australin Open. However, if they were to meet on grass I think Murray would have a great chance of beating Federer. He is a far better player than he was at this time last year and seem to have had Federer's number recently (won the last 4 since the US Open). They have never met on grass so it would be a very intriguing match. If Andy can serve as well as he did at Queens he can beat anyone on grass, including Federer IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'd agree that Murray best chance for a Grand Slam is at the US or Australin Open. However, if they were to meet on grass I think Murray would have a great chance of beating Federer. He is a far better player than he was at this time last year and seem to have had Federer's number recently (won the last 4 since the US Open). They have never met on grass so it would be a very intriguing match. If Andy can serve as well as he did at Queens he can beat anyone on grass, including Federer IMO. Fed at his peak wins hands down on grass. But theres no way he's at his best anymore, Im not suggesting he's past it, but he's not going to be as formidable as he once was. So Im optimistic that Murray has a decent shot at winning it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'd agree that Murray best chance for a Grand Slam is at the US or Australin Open. However, if they were to meet on grass I think Murray would have a great chance of beating Federer. He is a far better player than he was at this time last year and seem to have had Federer's number recently (won the last 4 since the US Open). They have never met on grass so it would be a very intriguing match. If Andy can serve as well as he did at Queens he can beat anyone on grass, including Federer IMO. That's an insult to Federer's insanely good record. Murray's miles better than a year ago, I agree - so why hasn't he shown it in Grand Slams? He's now so strong and consistent that everyone except the Big Two have to play out of their skin to beat him - but Verdasco did so in Australia, and Gonzalez did so in Paris. Do we honestly think the same would've applied to Federer? It doesn't, as his record of twenty Slam semis on the bounce shows. Murray played great at Queens, and has made superb progress. His mental approach, never being afraid to change coaches, learn more and so on makes him highly likely to win a major in my view; but not yet. In Grand Slams, he remains unproven. At Queens, he didn't play anyone who could or should beat him; at Wimbledon, he will unless something strange happens to Federer. Federer's now a different player to before Paris: now it's Nadal and Djokovic who have all the question marks over them, while Roger sails on towards creating tennis history. It's a great position for Murray to be in. He's not the favourite, and will have nothing to lose if he faces Federer in the final - but the question is whether he can get there in the first place, and it's very premature to anoint him as a likely winner given a Grand Slam CV which features very little. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Say What Again Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Federer must be red hot favourite to take the tournament. If the bookies have Murray anywhere near him, it's a tribute to the hype of the media. Federer is money on, with a best price of 10/11. Murray is 3/1. William Hills are offering a pathetic 6/5 on a Federer v Murray final. Pish poor odds IMO, barely over even money for both of them to reach the final. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Federer is money on, with a best price of 10/11. Murray is 3/1. William Hills are offering a pathetic 6/5 on a Federer v Murray final. Pish poor odds IMO, barely over even money for both of them to reach the final. Those are very poor odds, I agree. For a Federer-Murray final, I think it should be more like 5/2 or 3/1 to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 If Nadal pulls out, it'll make Murray's half of the draw tougher as Del Potro would be moved into Nadal's slot. If Nadal turns up, with the doubts about his fitness, it's fairly likely that he won't go far into the tournament. I agree with Shaun, though. Federer must be red hot favourite to take the tournament. If the bookies have Murray anywhere near him, it's a tribute to the hype of the media. It wouldn't. The draw at the moments sees No.1 seed playing No.3 seed in one semi final, with the No.2 seed playing the No.4 seed. If Nadal pulled out the seeding would change to the following:- 1. Federer 2. Murray 3. Djokovic 4. Del Potro Meaning that Murray would play Del Potro in the semis, which is far easier than having to play Nadal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 That's an insult to Federer's insanely good record. Murray's miles better than a year ago, I agree - so why hasn't he shown it in Grand Slams? He's now so strong and consistent that everyone except the Big Two have to play out of their skin to beat him - but Verdasco did so in Australia, and Gonzalez did so in Paris. Do we honestly think the same would've applied to Federer? It doesn't, as his record of twenty Slam semis on the bounce shows. Murray played great at Queens, and has made superb progress. His mental approach, never being afraid to change coaches, learn more and so on makes him highly likely to win a major in my view; but not yet. In Grand Slams, he remains unproven. At Queens, he didn't play anyone who could or should beat him; at Wimbledon, he will unless something strange happens to Federer. Federer's now a different player to before Paris: now it's Nadal and Djokovic who have all the question marks over them, while Roger sails on towards creating tennis history. It's a great position for Murray to be in. He's not the favourite, and will have nothing to lose if he faces Federer in the final - but the question is whether he can get there in the first place, and it's very premature to anoint him as a likely winner given a Grand Slam CV which features very little. It is not an insult to Federer at all. He is the favourite for the title and rightly so, but recently he has been mentally fragile when coming up against the other players in the Top 4. They all have great records against him recently and they are no longer afraid to take him on. Added to that, that he is not the player he was, despite recently winning the French Open. Verdasco beat Murray because he played out of his skin, not because Murray played badly. Gonzalez was the favourite to beat Murray (in my eyes) as he's an excellent clay court player, something Murray is not. Getting to the Quarters at Rolland Garros was a great achievement for Andy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Not on grass, he doesn't. Murray's at his best on fast, hard surfaces. He has a better chance of beating Fed in the US or Australia than at Wimbledon. If Nadal isn't fit, no-one in the draw has the beating of Federer. Meanwhile, Murray has met Federer at the business end of a Grand Slam once, and got blown off the court; and hasn't even been good enough to meet him in another Slam before or since. What's the head to head like on grass? I was just meaning in general but I think Murray is making good progress on grass. This may sound daft but I wasn't that impressed by Fed in France, he certainly isn't the player he once was and is rapidly going downhill while Murray is reaching his peak. I get the feeling you'd be spewing if Murray won it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Gosling Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I like Roddick. I want him to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 What's the head to head like on grass? I was just meaning in general but I think Murray is making good progress on grass. This may sound daft but I wasn't that impressed by Fed in France, he certainly isn't the player he once was and is rapidly going downhill while Murray is reaching his peak. I get the feeling you'd be spewing if Murray won it. Not at all! I've been very consistent in Murray's case, laughing at the hype about him, insisting he wouldn't win the Aussie Open which he was hotly tipped for (he didn't), and continually pinpointing this year's US Open. I've actually been pinpointing this year's US Open since he first emerged in 2005, and will allow myself a moment to be impressed with my work if that's where it happens: let's face it, it doesn't happen very often in my case... My take on Murray is this. His progress is excellent, his mental approach very impressive. With Federer in the early autumn of his career, huge doubts over Nadal's longevity given the way he plays the game and Djokovic flailing around and in decline since his own breakthrough in Australia last year, Murray has it in him to be number one at some point, and win more than one Slam. Two probably, three possibly is my guess. But he doesn't have the game to dominate the opposition over a long period, so could well be a number one very like Lleyton Hewitt was: as an interregnum between two all-conquering eras. Hewitt won the US Open first, then Wimbledon ten months later; that could be exactly what Murray does. Murray's never met Federer on grass. The grasscourt season is so short that it only encompasses two events: Murray usually plays Queen's, and Federer usually plays Halle. Which only leaves Wimbledon. So far, Murray hasn't been good enough to advance deep enough into the tournament to play Federer - and there is a world of difference between playing Roger in a non-Slam event over three sets, and a Grand Slam at the end of two gruelling weeks over five sets. When Federer monstered Murray at the US Open last year, the idea that it was because he was a better player than Murray (which as arguably the greatest who ever lived, he certainly is), barely occurred to anyone. Which is absolutely ridiculous. And Wimbledon is like his back garden: keep off the grass signs are everywhere, and with no Nadal to stop him, Federer should dominate pretty much everyone over the next fortnight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 It is not an insult to Federer at all. He is the favourite for the title and rightly so, but recently he has been mentally fragile when coming up against the other players in the Top 4. They all have great records against him recently and they are no longer afraid to take him on. Added to that, that he is not the player he was, despite recently winning the French Open. Verdasco beat Murray because he played out of his skin, not because Murray played badly. Gonzalez was the favourite to beat Murray (in my eyes) as he's an excellent clay court player, something Murray is not. Getting to the Quarters at Rolland Garros was a great achievement for Andy. Getting to the quarters at Roland Garros was a decent achievement for Andy, but hardly a great one. And while Federer may have been mentally fragile against other Big Four players in non-Grand Slam events, he's also won two of the last three majors! Some record for a guy supposedly in decline. He's hardly likely to remain "mentally fragile" after finally getting the Parisian monkey off his back either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I like Roddick. I want him to win. I don't like Roddick. He's one-dimensional, has a serve and little else, doesn't know how to volley, and is frequently an absolute ****** on the court, though not off it, where his press conferences are invariably very funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan Gosling Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I don't like Roddick. He's one-dimensional, has a serve and little else, doesn't know how to volley, and is frequently an absolute ****** on the court, though not off it, where his press conferences are invariably very funny. You'd love him if he was English. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I P Knightley Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 It wouldn't. The draw at the moments sees No.1 seed playing No.3 seed in one semi final, with the No.2 seed playing the No.4 seed. If Nadal pulled out the seeding would change to the following:- 1. Federer 2. Murray 3. Djokovic 4. Del Potro Meaning that Murray would play Del Potro in the semis, which is far easier than having to play Nadal. Not as I read it on the BBC Sport website: The rules state that if seeds 1-4 withdraw before the order of play is released on Sunday, the fifth seed - in this case Juan Martin del Potro - takes their place in the draw, and number 17 - David Ferrer - replaces number five. So JMDP would be in the slot of seed 1 while Murray, Djoko and Fed would stay in the quarters they're drawn in today. Nadal remaining in the draw but being out-of-sorts is a better prospect for Murray (or anyone, really) than being faced with the 6 foot 5, heavy serving Argentinean, don't you think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 You'd love him if he was English. He couldn't be English. If Andre Agassi or Shane Warne had been born and brought up in England, they'd never have got anywhere in sports dominated by a posh, out-of-touch establishment. It's unlikely enough that England will produce another world class male tennis player this side of me reaching retirement age; even more so that that player is an obnoxious jerk on court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboy81 Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I only ever watch tennis at wimbledon so not up to speed on current form but be all accounts Murrays one of the favourites so good luck to him. I think its great to have a genuine world class player in a sport apart from snooker! Must be quite depressing for Henman now looking back on his career and realising how pish he was. Anyone know if B Becker is back as a pundit this year? B Becker = ledge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Not as I read it on the BBC Sport website: So JMDP would be in the slot of seed 1 while Murray, Djoko and Fed would stay in the quarters they're drawn in today. Nadal remaining in the draw but being out-of-sorts is a better prospect for Murray (or anyone, really) than being faced with the 6 foot 5, heavy serving Argentinean, don't you think? Ok. It looks like I read that wrong. Of course Nadal remaining in the draw would be better for Murray, as there is a great chance Nadal would lose before then or be completely knackered if he did somehow manage to make it to the semi finals. I'm sure Andy Murray would beat Del Potro on grass though. He is a decent mover for someone his size but Murray would make him run and run. Murray serve is just as big as Del Potros, infact their serving stats are frightening similar this year. The only difference is that Andy's return stats are much, much better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I only ever watch tennis at wimbledon so not up to speed on current form but be all accounts Murrays one of the favourites so good luck to him. I think its great to have a genuine world class player in a sport apart from snooker! Must be quite depressing for Henman now looking back on his career and realising how pish he was. Anyone know if B Becker is back as a pundit this year? B Becker = ledge! I'm sure Boris'll be doing what he usually does. Boris on Lleyton Hewitt in 2002: "Look at those spots on his face!" As for Henman - he doesn't have any regrets. He knows he overachieved, unlike muppets in the media or broader public who don't understand the slightest thing about the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Ok. It looks like I read that wrong. Of course Nadal remaining in the draw would be better for Murray, as there is a great chance Nadal would lose before then or be completely knackered if he did somehow manage to make it to the semi finals. I'm sure Andy Murray would beat Del Potro on grass though. He is a decent mover for someone his size but Murray would make him run and run. Murray serve is just as big as Del Potros, infact their serving stats are frightening similar this year. The only difference is that Andy's return stats are much, much better. Completely agree. After his exit at the French, a few on here suggested Murray would end up in the Henman role of always being the bridesmaid at Grand Slams, but that's daft. If anything, given a game which is very consistent but lacks a certain something, I think that could well end up being true of Del Potro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 I'm sure Boris'll be doing what he usually does. Boris on Lleyton Hewitt in 2002: "Look at those spots on his face!" As for Henman - he doesn't have any regrets. He knows he overachieved, unlike muppets in the media or broader public who don't understand the slightest thing about the sport. Are you calling Jamboy81 a muppet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Say What Again Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Must be quite depressing for Henman now looking back on his career and realising how pish he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Are you calling Jamboy81 a muppet? I wouldn't dream of calling him something that the entire membership of JKB didn't already think. And of course, they all think he's wonderful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Completely agree. After his exit at the French, a few on here suggested Murray would end up in the Henman role of always being the bridesmaid at Grand Slams, but that's daft. If anything, given a game which is very consistent but lacks a certain something, I think that could well end up being true of Del Potro. I totally agree. Del Potro is good but not brillant at any shot in particular. His forehand can be massive at times but also ridiculously bad at others. , Andy plays very clever against Del Potro when playing on faster courts. Plays plenty of backhand slice shots, keep the ball low and Del Potro struggles to get down to them. Even when he does get them back he is usually way out of position and Murrat takes advantage time and time again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3inaBednar Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Well I hope Murray goes out in the first round as a result of being pish and a hobo. I'll be supporting Roddick this year, seems a decent bloke and has the nickname 'A-rod' which is much nicer than 'dour scottish ****'. For those supporting Murray remember this quote - "Jamie said: "When we went to watch Hibs my favourite player was Michael O'Neill, but the guy we both loved to watch had to be Russell Latapy, a magical player and a real entertainer. "Andy's favourite player, though, was another tricky wee midfielder, MICKEY WEIR." YES, MICKEY WEIR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Well I hope Murray goes out in the first round as a result of being pish and a hobo. I'll be supporting Roddick this year, seems a decent bloke and has the nickname 'A-rod' which is much nicer than 'dour scottish ****'. For those supporting Murray remember this quote - "Jamie said: "When we went to watch Hibs my favourite player was Michael O'Neill, but the guy we both loved to watch had to be Russell Latapy, a magical player and a real entertainer. "Andy's favourite player, though, was another tricky wee midfielder, MICKEY WEIR." YES, MICKEY WEIR! Is Wimbledon a big cup please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Sexington Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Well I hope Murray goes out in the first round as a result of being pish and a hobo. I'll be supporting Roddick this year, seems a decent bloke and has the nickname 'A-rod' which is much nicer than 'dour scottish ****'. For those supporting Murray remember this quote - "Jamie said: "When we went to watch Hibs my favourite player was Michael O'Neill, but the guy we both loved to watch had to be Russell Latapy, a magical player and a real entertainer. "Andy's favourite player, though, was another tricky wee midfielder, MICKEY WEIR." YES, MICKEY WEIR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3inaBednar Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 Is Wimbledon a big cup please? BIG CUPS in tennis are Wimbledon and The USA open, the French doesn't count , the OZ open is equivalent to a CIS Cup win. Time will tell, 4 in a row, 104 to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 BIG CUPS in tennis are Wimbledon and The USA open, the French doesn't count , the OZ open is equivalent to a CIS Cup win. Time will tell, 4 in a row, 104 to go. What a lunatic. There's four big Cups in tennis: Wimbledon is the most prestigious, the Aussie Open the least prestigious. But they're all bloody worthwhile. You wanna tell the legend that is Guillermo Vilas that he never won a big Cup? Or Pete Sampras that the big Cup he never won and fought heroically for in 1996 wasn't worth him bothering with? Or Roger Federer that the feeling of immense fulfilment he had after finally winning the French Open meant nothing, because it "doesn't count"? There's two kinds of tennis players: those who've won a Grand Slam, and those who haven't. The end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eldar Hadzimehmedovic Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 BIG CUPS in tennis are Wimbledon and The USA open, the French doesn't count , the OZ open is equivalent to a CIS Cup win. Time will tell, 4 in a row, 104 to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Sexington Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 BIG CUPS in tennis are Wimbledon and The USA open, the French doesn't count , the OZ open is equivalent to a CIS Cup win. Time will tell, 4 in a row, 104 to go. You're as smart as you are funny.* *That's not a compliment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 You're as smart as you are funny.* *That's not a compliment. By way of reminder, 3inaBednar thinks those who have kids should pay more tax. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3inaBednar Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 By way of reminder, 3inaBednar thinks those who have kids should pay more tax. correct, i'm glad you like my politics:10900: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted June 19, 2009 Share Posted June 19, 2009 BIG CUPS in tennis are Wimbledon and The USA open, the French doesn't count , the OZ open is equivalent to a CIS Cup win. Time will tell, 4 in a row, 104 to go. Ok, thanks. Very informative. Few more questions. What is your opinion on Hobo Murrays Queens win, impressive? Can you predict the 4 semi-finalists at Wimbledon please? Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.