shaun.lawson Posted September 5, 2010 Author Share Posted September 5, 2010 Hate to point out the obvious but Hibs did win silverware more recently but anyway, Its kind of a futile argument, as both clubs are alsorans when it comes to winning trophies. Not wanting to add fuel to the fire as far as Hearts fans having an over-inflated opinion of themselves are concerned, but.....aren't the Red Sox one of the most successful teams in Baseball? I have limited knowledge of American sport but that seems a very generous comparison on the face of it, Who would Rangers and Celtic be? Most of the Red Sox' triumphs came very early on. They then endured an excruciating drought, including many horrendous near misses, the nadir arriving - just as it did for us - in 1986. The Sox have won seven World Series titles - which still leaves them comfortably behind the NY Yankees (cough, spit) and St Louis Cardinals. Of course, the Sox are much more successful in baseball than Hearts are in football. But historically, the Sox are MLB's third force; just like Hearts are in Scotland. Incidentally, there is another club in between the top two and the Sox on the honours column. But just like Aberdeen, the Athletics (recently of Oakland) are nowhere near the force they once were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dobmisterdobster Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J---aiyznGQ Play him off keyboard cat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 There we go then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Morgan Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 Not wanting to turn this into a football discussion just found it an odd thing to say as Hearts are probably the worst offenders from snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Murray's links to them must be tenuous at best anyway, however I personally couldn't give a toss what team he supports, and thats all i'll say on the matter! The comeback's on! Mon the Muzza! Yeah tbh as I said before I'm not one for making Hibs jokes about Murray as I like him but it just seemed appropriate at the time and I wasn't mentioning Hibs because he supports them, just in general really. I'm not bothered which team he supports either, I don't think he is much of a Hibs fan anyway, probably a bigger fan of Barca! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 That's it now, for me. He's not going to win one - and I think he's accepted it as much as anyone, given what he's just said in his post-match press conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magicTs Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 Hibs will win the Scottish Cup before Murray wins a major and we will probably all be long gone by the time that happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted September 5, 2010 Author Share Posted September 5, 2010 That's it now, for me. He's not going to win one - and I think he's accepted it as much as anyone, given what he's just said in his post-match press conference. Which was...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 Choker strikes again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted September 5, 2010 Share Posted September 5, 2010 Which was...? It was just classic loser patter Shaun. Whereas previously he's always said things like "I believe I'm good enough to win one", tonight he was saying (paraphrased slightly) "I might win one, I might not - but if I'm trying my hardest, what else can I do?" He was also looking back to the game against Berdych and saying that was maybe his big chance (again, slightly paraphrased). His whole demeanour just screamed that he'd accepted his fate as never getting there, I thought. He's on just now as well as I type this, saying that this defeat "didn't hurt as much" as previous slam losses. He's chucked it. Greg Rusedski said something pretty interesting as well. He recommended that Murray use his sponsorship ties to sit down with Andre Agassi and the other legends on the same brands as him to get some advice - I find it ludicrous that he might not have attempted to do this already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted September 6, 2010 Author Share Posted September 6, 2010 It was just classic loser patter Shaun. Whereas previously he's always said things like "I believe I'm good enough to win one", tonight he was saying (paraphrased slightly) "I might win one, I might not - but if I'm trying my hardest, what else can I do?" He was also looking back to the game against Berdych and saying that was maybe his big chance (again, slightly paraphrased). His whole demeanour just screamed that he'd accepted his fate as never getting there, I thought. He's on just now as well as I type this, saying that this defeat "didn't hurt as much" as previous slam losses. He's chucked it. Greg Rusedski said something pretty interesting as well. He recommended that Murray use his sponsorship ties to sit down with Andre Agassi and the other legends on the same brands as him to get some advice - I find it ludicrous that he might not have attempted to do this already? I find it ludicrous that he hasn't sorted out a full time coach. Naturally enough, given Alex Corretja was the best player of his generation not to win a Grand Slam, he's taken Murray so far, but no further; Murray desperately needs a change. Someone with completely new ideas. It's easy for us to assume coaches make little difference with great players. But Brad Gilbert's impact on Andre Agassi was colossal; Tim Gullikson and Paul Annacone did a fantastic job with Pete Sampras too. Beyond that - well, remember the Australian Open final? I think Murray went into that match convinced he would win, and was promptly shocked by the extent of the gap which remained between him and Federer: a gap he doesn't have the weapons to bridge. So naturally, his form fell apart in the months afterwards: for the first time ever, he must've now doubted whether he'd win a Slam. "Djokovic has won one. So has Del Potro. Why haven't I?" Henman had a moment like Murray did in Australia too; after losing to Sampras in the 1999 Wimbledon semis. Because in any tennis player's career comes a point where their ability to improve stops, and they're quickly swept away by another wave of hardened young guns. Personally, I still think Murray's more likely than not to win one - but only just. If we get to the end of 2011 and he still hasn't, he'll be comfortably on the wrong side of that equation. In the last two years, he's lost to Wawrinka, Berdych, Cilic, Roddick, Gonzalez and Verdasco at Grand Slams - several of them heavily - as well as Federer and Nadal. If he was just losing to the two all time greats, then fine; but put simply, he's been way too easy to beat in the sport's most prestigious events. Tournaments on which he knows his whole career stands or falls. If there really wasn't anything wrong with his fitness or health against Wawrinka - if he really did give his all, and was just beaten by a better man - he's in big, big trouble. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darren Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 Murray needs to sort himself out and go into the Australian Open all guns blazing or it's over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Burgundy Posted September 6, 2010 Share Posted September 6, 2010 Don't really give a damn that he claims to have links to the vermin but find him odious and delighted he has failed again. In another year or so he'll be talking in an American accent a la Sheena Easton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted September 11, 2010 Author Share Posted September 11, 2010 Absolutely sensational semi-final now reaching its climax. It's two sets all between Federer and Djokovic; Djoko saved two match points a few moments ago at 4-5; and has now broken Fed, and will serve for a shock victory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted September 11, 2010 Author Share Posted September 11, 2010 Djokovic wins the match of the year - and one of the greatest matches in years - 5-7 6-1 5-7 6-2 7-5, and will play Nadal for the title. Federer v Nadal will now probably never happen in New York; tonight, Djokovic announced his return to the top of the sport. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Morgan Posted September 11, 2010 Share Posted September 11, 2010 What an incredible match that was. I Kinda wanted Federer to win at the start even though I dislike him, just to see another Federer vs Nadal match as those are always very close and they bring the best out in eachother. As the match progressed though, Djokovic won me over and I ended up wanting him to win as he showed so much spirit and determination to win that even though he looked absolutely shattered. Best performance I've seen from Djokovic and I wish him all the best for tomorrow although I think Nadal will win in 4 sets. It will be too much physically for Djokovic after that marathon tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavsy Van Gaverson Posted September 12, 2010 Share Posted September 12, 2010 Something has been wrong in Djokovic's game for quite a while now. He just hasnt progressed at all in the last 18 months. I know nothing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.