Someday Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Surely Federer took a dive in this match to get Murray booted! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ade the Jambo Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 What a muck up - why don't they know who qualified at the end of the match!? It must be simple maths so why can they not use a simple spreadsheet to work out who would qualify based on the games won % before the match stats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ade the Jambo Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Great - these footballers who don't know one end of a tennis bat from another get tickets to this and the Federer match while genuine fans are subject to the fleecers and the touts. And yes this is a stitch up. (watching Sky filling in with Tevez interviewed and on Wednesday half the Spurs squad were not only in the stands but were interviewed beforehand and they barely knew who was playing - and the rules, well forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chrambo Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Embarrassing for Federer, bad time for tennis tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AWM Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Great - these footballers who don't know one end of a tennis bat from another get tickets to this and the Federer match while genuine fans are subject to the fleecers and the touts. And yes this is a stitch up. (watching Sky filling in with Tevez interviewed and on Wednesday half the Spurs squad were not only in the stands but were interviewed beforehand and they barely knew who was playing - and the rules, well forget it. Tickets have been available to the public all week. It was a bit suspect with Federer. Deek had to win the last set by at least 6-3 and at 4-3 down Federer plays one of the worst service games of his career. Though I'd rather Murray had gone through it was pretty funny. Bet Murray's annoying mother was going mental watching that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Don't think Federer chucked it but the chances of Del Potro winning 2 sets to 1 and by at least 6 games were very small and Murray is extremely unlucky. Having said that Del Potro, Federer and Murray have all been patchy in the group and none of them could have any great complaints about going out. Murray playing first proved to be a major disadvantage today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest King Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Murray along with his love of Hibernian, and his annoying mother can choke on it as far as im concerned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted November 26, 2009 Share Posted November 26, 2009 Unfortunately, the format of the event often throws up scenarios like this one. In 1999, Andre Agassi thrashed Pete Sampras 6-2 6-2 in the round robin stage. When they met again in the final at the end of that week, Sampras won 6-1 7-5 6-4. Does that mean Sampras chucked the round robin match? No - but he was probably conserving energy for the one that really mattered. In crunch situations, Sampras would play like no-one else: I'm not sure if even he knew how he did it, but he did. It's very unlucky for Murray - but with three players finishing on won 2, lost 1, someone had to take the fall, and it proved to be him. Remember too that Del Potro came from two sets to one down to beat Federer and win the US Open; it's not like Fed lost to a diddy! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Murray was really unlucky with the way that match turned out. Although he didn't take his chances against Verdasco and should have won easier. He also chucked away a couple of games in the first set against Del Potro and fell to bits in the second and third sets against Federer. He's got to be gutted about it but it's the type of thing that'll hopefully fire him up even more for the start of next year because he's not played well since he lost at the US Open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dik Mar Van Nostrilboy Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 would like to see him through but im not going to lose sleep over the matter, p/s why does murray speak like hes american and annoyingly sign the camera lens after the games, welt! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignoranus Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Murray must be gutted, but he knew there was a chance of this happening if he didnt beat Verdasco in straight sets! A harsh but valuable lesson learnt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaka Demus & pliers Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 would like to see him through but im not going to lose sleep over the matter, p/s why does murray speak like hes american and annoyingly sign the camera lens after the games, welt! The organisers/tv company asked him to sign the camera lens after his first game. I'm assuming they asked him to do it after his other games too. The accent and general drone is annoying though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboy81 Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 How many glorious failures has Murray had now? He's definately Scottish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Thor Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 would like to see him through but im not going to lose sleep over the matter, p/s why does murray speak like hes american and annoyingly sign the camera lens after the games, welt! The American accent thing does my nut right in. 'Sheena Easton syndrome'. They're all at it though, I saw Gerard Butler interviewed on TV and he west coast alright, LA west coast. That **** on the radio Forth on a Sunday morning is another one. Ross King. Wan King more like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 If MUrray was good enough he'd be in the semi finals, simples! Also, why the hell would Federer be scared of Murray when he virtually owns him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboy81 Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 If MUrray was good enough he'd be in the semi finals, simples! Also, why the hell would Federer be scared of Murray when he virtually owns him? He doesn't own him. Murray beats him all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everybody loves Baz Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 If MUrray was good enough he'd be in the semi finals, simples! Also, why the hell would Federer be scared of Murray when he virtually owns him? Not sure of the head to head stats Johnny boy but i think they mentioned yesterday during commentary it was only something like 6-4 in favour of Federer?? Hardly owning him? Anyway good enough for that Hibernian welt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redjambo Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 How many glorious failures has Murray had now? He's definately Scottish. Indeed. His technique is brilliant but I have to say that I'm not impressed with his psychology. In fact unless everything goes A1 for him during a run at a Grand Slam event, I don't think he has the mental ability to win one. Not only does he over-relax when he's doing well, but his head goes down when he's not (he usually gives it a short sustained hopeful burst but if that doesn't work then he just effectively gives up). He also seems to have a fear of "really going for it" when he needs to, content instead to play defensively and not take chances, even when the situation calls for some risk-taking. If only Steve Peters (the psychiatrist who works with some members of the the UK cycling squad among others - http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/may/08/4 - could work with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigwull22 Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 He doesn't own him. Murray beats him all the time. Except when it matters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 Except when it matters Beat me to it bigwull, if it's a grand slam event then Federer owns him, he wins when it counts and Murray hasn't got it in him the hobo choker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignoranus Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 I think Murray leads the Head to Head 6-4 against Federer. However as has been pointed out, Federer owns him in the slams! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergio Garcia Posted November 27, 2009 Share Posted November 27, 2009 He doesn't own him. Murray beats him all the time. Who wins when it matters, Fed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.