Murray Outlasts Federer in 5, vs Djokovic in Aussie Open Final
by Staff | January 25th, 2013, 8:16 am
  • 116 Comments

Youth trumped experience on Friday night in Melbourne when Andy Murray outlasted a tiring Roger Federer 6-4, 6-7(5), 6-3, 6-7(2), 6-2 to advance to the Australian Open final against world No. 1 Novak Djokovic.

The Murray serve proved the difference as the Brit dropped 21 aces on the Swiss with no double faults, advancing to his third Aussie Open final in four years.

In the final set a slowing Federer could not stop an increasing flow of unforced errors as Murray jumped out to a 3-0 lead before closing it out 6-2. In the fourth set Federer had broken to force the tiebreak, and ran through Murray 7-2 to force a fifth and deciding set.

Murray improved to 11-9 career against the Swiss.

The final will be a rematch of the 2012 US Open, where Murray triumphed.

 


Also Check Out:
Djokovic Outlasts Murray in 5 in Australian Open Semifinal
Federer Outlasts Del Potro in French Open Cliffhanger, History Awaits?
Federer Stomps Tsonga, Teases Murray Entering Australian Open Final
Sharapova Outlasts Scrambling Halep for 2nd French Open Crown
Tennis-X Funk/Trunk: Serena’s Trunk has Trophy Junk

Don't miss any tennis action, stay connected with Tennis-X

Get Tennis-X news FREE in your inbox every day

116 Comments for Murray Outlasts Federer in 5, vs Djokovic in Aussie Open Final

nadalista Says:

Hmmm……..Fed hasn’t won a Slam off grass in 3 years…….

Grass court specialist?? Wink, wink; nod, nod….


van orten Says:

better having 17 slams than none


Brando Says:

Guess who has now reached 3 GS finals in a row?…..:-)


van orten Says:

great dynamics if murray wins. he would be holding 2 last slams and then at RG i doubt he will be the main contender for the win ..on sand he has to make the next step..there is djoker , fed , ferrer !!! and last but of course not least nadallll …tough competition for andyyy -..but ok now focus on winning on sunday .


van orten Says:

great dynamics if murray wins. he would be holding 2 last slams and then at RG i doubt he will be the main contender for the win ..on sand he has to make the next step..there is djoker , fed , ferrer !!! and last but of course not least nadallll …tough competition for andyyy -..but ok now focus on winning on sunday .


queen Says:

Hate that f^ckin Djokovic! I wish him all the worst for the final.I hope he trips over his own skinny legs!!


Borizzz Says:

great grit and determinatio in the faith set,


Margot Says:

4got to thank Sean….again…;)


Lou_tennisfan Says:

Murray played well and was impressive. But the way Federer fought, it was just unbelievable. No wonder, there can be no one like him. At age of 31, the spirit, the desire, the fitness – everything is there.

Hats off to the champion really. I can only say it was a privilege to watch Federer play the way he played today. Federer might have lost the Semi Final match today against Andy Murray but won the hearts of millions of viewers around the world.

Failure can never overtake Federer because the determination to succeed is stronger and it will be foolish to underestimate the heart of a champion.

Thank You Roger Federer – A Letter to the Champion. http://tinyurl.com/aasnk6a


nadalista Says:

Poor GOAT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJatAb1IWAs

Ah well, could’a been worse………could’a been facing Novak on Sunday, no Djoke!!


the DA Says:

You call that a write-up?

@ nadalista – oh THAT was the controversial moment. Good to see Roger isn’t impervious to dropping the F-bomb. hehe


Michael Says:

At the outset, my congratulations to Andy and his fans for their man’s third straight Australian Open final. Regarding the match, Roger was outplayed by Murray from the back of the court. Somehow Roger couldn’t get into groove and his first serves let him down terribly. If Roger has to have any chance against the likes of Murray and Novak, he has to have a good serving day. But that was not to be today. Surprisingly, Murray had a good first serve percentage than normal and he was dictating play from the back of the court stretching Roger hither and dither. Despite these, it was grit and determination of Roger which extended the match to five sets and he finally caved down in the fifth. But no regrets. Roger has proved a point to his detractors that he is not yet finished and is still a threat in majors. I think his best opportunity will come in Wimbledon.


Steve 27 Says:

Well done Murray! You played absolutely magnificent today. You should have won in 4 sets but its doesn’t matter now. But i think Djokovic would make history winning his third AO in a row. Btw, Federer has no chance in RG, his last two chances are on Wimbledon and the Us Open this year. After 31, the chance of winning a major is practically zero even you named Federer. We have to expect until sunday who will make history: Novak o Andy winning his second major in a row after winning his first.


jane Says:

Why did Fed say that? What was he supposed to stop? I didn’t see the context…

Congrats to Andy and fans on this thread too!


nadalista Says:

Interesting stats:

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliability-Zone/Reliability-5th-Set-Record-Career-List.aspx

Current big “4″, 5-set career record with ALL PLAYERS included:

Nadal 6th
Djokovic 7th
Murray 14th (after today)
Federer 94th


Tz Says:

Disappointed. So much disappointed. You were playing poorly fed :(

well congrats to murray. And then ADVANCED CONGRATS to novak and his fans (including ME). Should be a straight set victory for the defending champ. Could be a demolition too


skeezer Says:

nadalista,

“Grass court specialist?? Wink, wink; nod, nod….”
Nah, just THE Slam(17) specialist…wink wink.
Life must be rough for you Rafa fans. Guess its hard to swallow how tennis can be still so very entertainin without Rafa.

——

First off, congrats to Andy and his fans. Played awesome.

The match. It was basically serve vs serve that made the difference. Andy serverd superb 21 aces, thats 21 points winning without hitting a groundstoke and winning the point. Feds serving % was in the 50s, and it showed. Fed needed to serve well, but he didn’t. Fed although wonderfully valiant, was pretty much losing on all stat counts. Imo he was clearly gassed in the 5th. Escuses. None. Andy outplayed the Maestro!

Little concerned with Andy havin a chance against Novak in the final. Andy willingly expressed his tightness in the TBs and that he was thinking about getting in the final. He cannot have those thoughts when it gets tense in the final.


MMT Says:

Jane and nadalist: that clip was a little misleading in that the smirk on Murray’s face came after Federer shouted at him – but Federer DID shout at him.

What happened was during the point Federer backhand that was close to the baseline and Murray hesitated EVER so slightly, probably on the presumption that it would be called out, but it was called good. On the very next shot, Federer hit a crappy approach shot which Murray easily responded with a solid forehand pass up the line.

That’s when Federer shouted at Murray something like “…you f—ing stop!”, as in, you stopped in the middle of the point and that put me off. In all likelihood he was looking for an excuse to lay into Murray because he was playing so well, because the truth is that Federer ALSO assumed the shot would be called out, otherwise Murray’s hesitation wouldn’t have mattered, and at the end of the day, his approach shot was crap.

I don’t know why both of them were so cagey about saying what he said in the press conferences. In a friendly match, the gentlemenly thing for Murray to do would be to offer to replay the point. But there’s NO excuse for Federer in this case – they are not calling their own lines, so he has to assume every shot he’s hit has gone in until he HEARS a call.

My guess is that he was making so many errors, because Murray was playing so well, that he assumed it was out and deep down was really kicking himself, but lashed out at Murray instead.


nadalista Says:

@jane, at 5-6 in the 4th set Fed rushed the net expecting to volley a return from Muzza when Muzza passed him dtl instead…….Fed swore in frustration, Muzza gave him a “back-at-ya” look.


nadalista Says:

@MMT, thanks………you got it just about right. I think both are right not to make a fuss about it publicly, this is a matter between 2 pros. I bet worse goes on in the locker room and I frankly, do not want to know…….


the DA Says:

That wasn’t the only F-bomb according to ESPN. Their mics picked up a few from Roger tonight. Very rare. I guess it shows how frustrated he was feeling. Kind of ironic.


nadalista Says:

Oh come, come, @skeezer……

You miss Rafa too, No?


skeezer Says:

Fed rarely gets frustrated. If it was due to Andys play (which imo it was), kudos to Andy. As was said earlier, Fed is not impervious to cursing or anger.


MMT Says:

@the DA: To clarify, I believe that was the only F-bomb from Federer that was directed at Murray! I’m surprised neither of them got audible obscenity warnings, because I definitely heard some salty language and I had the volume way down.

Having said that, I just (unintentionally, I swear) broke a racquet after lashing out in frustration the other morning so I cut these guys some slack ;-)


skeezer Says:

nadalista,

Well I wanted too, don’t miss a lot of his ways, but to be seriously honest did miss him here at AO ;)


nadalista Says:

@skeezer, I bet to differ, Fed DOES get frustrated easily, especially when he is losing.

French Open when he yelled at spectators;
Shanghai when he wanted play to stop because of a few specks of rain.

I could go on and on…..

The reason it appears he does not get frustrated that much is because it is not often he has found himself in a losing position in his stellar career….


the DA Says:

@MMT – oh I also believe that was the only one directed at Andy. But I saw tweets from people saying they heard a couple more just uttered out of frustration.

I like the way both players refused to be drawn on the incident in their post-match pressers and moved on. That’s professionalism.


Ben Pronin Says:

Strange and unfortunate. After barely even seeing a break point against his serve and obviously not losing serve at all, it really let him down these past 2 matches. Not many aces, low first serve percentage, and more double faults than usual.

But man what a fighter. We’ve been told for years that no one grinds like Nadal, and now Djokovic is the warrior of the ATP and so on. But Federer, this guy, the most accomplished player in history, and you wouldn’t even know it watching this match. Pat McEnroe mentioned during the match that this legend doesn’t rest on his laurels at all and it’s unbelievably true. Murray has 1 slam and is clearly desperate to establish himself as a great player in history and he definitely has a lot of work to do. So it makes all the sense in the world for him to fight and fight. But what does Federer have left to accomplish? Particularly in Australia where, records-wise, he’s the greatest Australian Open champion in the Open Era. And yet he fights and fights like he’s gunning for his first title or something. It’s remarkable.

As for the cursing? Awesome. Enough of the feel-good [let's suck up to everyone everywhere] era.


MMT Says:

Now that I think of it, I now understand why Federer didn’t say anything about it in the presser…because he was clearly in the wrong! Murray really did him a favor by not addressing it, but I wouldn’t have had any problem with either of them explaining what happened. Murray has delved into that sort of thing in the past, but maybe here, he just decided to do Federer a favor and leave it alone.


jane Says:

^ And also Andy himself has been know to utter a curse word or two, so why would he bother elaborating on this incident. It could open a can of worms for journalists. Besides which, most players swear, it’s just that some do so in a language perhaps not familiar to a particular audience, and some do so more visibly than others. It’s not such a big deal to let emotions out; there’s a lot going on out there in a slam semifinal. Lots to deal with in a 4 or 5 setter.


skeezer Says:

Nice post Ben. Couldn’t have said it better.


jane Says:

I guess what was different about this incident is that it appears Fed swore not to himself but directly AT his opponent, Andy.

Anyhow thanks for the clip and explanations MMT and nadalista.


MMT Says:

Exactly Jane – it’s one thing to curse at yourself, but to lay into your opponent when you screw up is not sporting, in my opinion.

Shame on Fed.


Giles Says:

And here’s me thinking Fed is a saint!! #SaltyLanguageIndeed


nadalista Says:

“As for the cursing? Awesome. Enough of the feel-good [let's suck up to everyone everywhere] era.”

Hope you carry this attitude into reviews of ALL Rafa’s matches………….


Ben Pronin Says:

Because Nadal doesn’t praise every player from 1-10000 as being an incredible player against whom the only chance of winning will be to play his absolute best?


skeezer Says:

^hahaha lmao


Giles Says:

Hey skeezer. Sorry for your bloke today (NOT)!!


skeezer Says:

No prob Giles ;). Murray played well and deserved to win. Hope the final is good! Thouroghly enjoyed Feds run this tourney, all fun matches to watch.


the DA Says:

Here is that sublime lob which made shot of the day:

http://youtu.be/P-ms5k27DOY

Can’t wait until someone uploads the full highlights of this match on YouTube.


Giles Says:

skeezer. But I will say this, your man is still playing terrific tennis!


trufan Says:

No surprise today. A 31 year old playing his second back to back 5 setter against a 25 year old who is fresh – what do you expect? Credit to Federer to take it that far.

Regardless, Djokovic is taking this title, especially now. Nobody fights like he does, not even Nadal – no wonder Djoke is 18-6 in 5 set matches…..

Federer has lost way too many 5-setters to Nadal and Djoke which spoils his 5-set record – against others he has a remarkable record. But Djoke and Nadal are the biggest fighters in the game – perhaps next only to Borg (though he was so quiet).


Ben Pronin Says:

So much is made about Federer’s so-so 5 set record. Does any remember that Federer went 194 matches between losing in straight sets. At all. He either lost in 3 sets in best of 3, or 4 or 5 in best of 5. Never in straights for 194 matches. I also think Murray was the one who broke that streak in 2006. But nonetheless, think about that.

It’s not that Federer doesn’t fight, it’s that he’s so damn good at fighting and stealing sets and matches against an opponent who’s superior on the day. This was maybe the best match Murray’s ever played against Federer because he thoroughly outclassed him in every department, and yet it went 5. Even down 0-3, I’m sure a lot of people were waiting or expecting a come back from Federer, even a win.

If Federer wasn’t such a fighter, his 5 set record might have actually looked better, with much less 5 setters played. I’m not saying every 5 setter he’s ever lost is because he stretched it that far. He’s definitely blown it on some occasions, just as he’s blown other non-5 set matches.


Dan Says:

Congratulations Andy! You are very good, but I’m afraid that is not enough for Novak Djokovic.


Steve 27 Says:

Particularly in Australia where, records-wise, he’s the greatest Australian Open champion in the Open Era

Djokovic will be greatest in Australia after Roy Emerson: no doubt about that.

In Open era
AO: Djokovic ( He will the first male to win three times in a row and is very possible he can win another)
RG Nadal
Wimbledon Federer
Us Open Sampras


trufan Says:

US Open Sampras? You kidding me? Federer has more finals, more semis, same number of titles, more match wins than Sampras, without any of the “benefits” Sampras got by playing in his home country slam (including favorable scheduling).

Federer won 5 in a row, Sampras didn’t. I don’t see by which metric you put USO in Sampras’s camp.

I would put Connors ahead of Sampras at the USO, especially given his longevity.

So far, in the open era, Wimbledon, USO and AUS belong to Fed, French to NAdal. As for how far Djokovic will go? Yes, he does have a shot at getting the AUS honors eventually, but that will have to wait till he gets his 5th title – remember, Fed has 10 consecutive semis at the AUS.


Ben Pronin Says:

Ditto what trufan said.


Steve 27 Says:

Well, Federer has won 5 times in a row, but I count Sampras 5 titles(tied with Connors and Federer) but he has more finals than those 2 and eventually the percenteage of the Swiss would be less than Sampras. But is deabatble of course. Btw, if Federer has 10 sf in a row in Australia, Connors has the impressive record of 12 sf in a row in the Us Open. So, Connors can be the goat of the Us Open in the open era. Remembered the master in this slam is the pervert Tilden with 7 title and 3 more finals.


Brando Says:

IMHO: AO : fed (4 wins, 5 finals, 10 SF in a row) FO: rafa Wimby: fed (7 titles, 8 finals, 5 in row wins) USO : fed (5 wins, 6 finals, 8 SF in a row). That’s the benchmark: to enter into the conversation one has to either: A- Match it. B- Surpass it. Until then, fans need to RESPECT the record holder at each slam!


Kimberly Says:

Great match, to be honest what impressed me most about Federer was his fight. Tennis-wise I thought Murray totally outplayed him but he found a way to make it competitive. I think Murray is absolutely in a with a shot in the next match although he is the underdog.


Kimberly Says:

btw, condtions totally favored Murray, so same match on a different court could have been different resut. But Murray was clearly the better player today on this surface and time.


trufan Says:

Fed has won more matches at the French than Nadal!! and has 5 consecutive semis at the French (which Nadal doesn’t).

Just kidding – Nadal’s French record is FAR superior to Fed. Though Fed’s french record is a bit understated – yes, he does have only 1 title – but he has 5 finals (I believe other than Borg, Lendl, Wilander, Nadal and Fed – nobody else has 5+ french finals). That’s great company. Fed routinely beat the likes of Moya, Costa, Ferrero, then Almagro, Ferrer, etc. ON CLAY. He just happened to play alongside such a great lefty – Yes, I think Fed would have had a better record against Borg on clay, just because Borg wasn’t a lefty.


Steve 27 Says:

Murray is the goat of Shangai master 1000, untuil now, of course.


Dan Says:

The only problem for Djokovic are injuries. Luckily, he has not such problems now. He is only 25 now, and will dominate at least 4 next seasons. Minimum 2 GS per season, and he will be one of the greatest players ever. Andy is good, but he isn’t that class.


trufan Says:

Murray isn’t even near GOAT of anything yet. He narrowly avoided the ignominy of being the player with the most slam finals without any wins.

Right now Ferrer seems to have the record (or close to it) of maximum semis without a final. Or did Henman have more? Both these players really gutted it out for a decade, but just didn’t have the goods to beat the very top guys, so never reached any slam finals. but they made SO MANY semis and quarters.

Fed seems to be bent on extending his slam semi record – he’s up to 33 (2 ahead of Connors), and even in QF, he is upto 39 (just 2 behind Connors). And nobody can last as long as Connors did!

ITs actualyl pretty amazing, if you think about it. Players like Ferrer and Henman can’t reach a single slam final, and Fed has 24!


Steve 27 Says:

Is a joke, trufan.


nadalista Says:

“So much is made about Federer’s so-so 5 set record. Does any remember that Federer went 194 matches between losing in straight sets.”

Yes, we all remember his phenomenal winning records, just as we all acknowledge his abysmal 5-sets records.

Numbers don’t lie. To paraphrase Rafa, just accept…….


Dan Says:

Djokovic also hasn’t got many fans worldwide. Why? The answer is simple. Federer is Swiss, rich nation, Alps, clocks, famous banks etc. Nadal is good-looking handsome “toreador”, long hair, muscules, from the country everyone heard for. Andy Murray is from GB. That is sufficient, although he doesn’t like England ant favoud Scotland. And Djokovic? Neither of that. He was growing in the land bombed by NATO. But Serbia is amazing land… Let us see some interesting facts. Nikola Tesla, the man who introduced the AC (instead of Edison’s DC) was a Serb. You can’t living without electrical energy, can’t you? Serbs defeated much stronger Ottomans army in 1389.. they defeated much stronger Austro-Hungarian army in WWI (firs victory for the Aliens) Serbs have got HEART. Because of that Novak is No. 1!


skeezer Says:

^ you should talk…lets see what any other players records are after playing over 1000 matches. IF they can play that many. The big number doesn’t lie no matter how many ways it tries to get shut down.

17.


rogerafa Says:

“Numbers don’t lie.”

So long as you remain consistent with your stand and not only when it suits your agenda.


Ben Pronin Says:

I don’t see how a positive winning percentage in 5 sets is abysmal. Maybe brush up on the vocab a little.


Huh Says:

nadalista

how about just accepting that federer is the court master n TENNIS EMPEROR! n swearin is not so bad a thing after all. but m sure fed’s good enough a human n is not proud about his swearing. so cut fed some slack. and fed does have a good 5 set record. numbers don’t lie! ;)


Huh Says:

better to not giv up till the end n lose in 5 sets n hav a fed-like record than gettin @$$ handed in 3 or 4 set drubbings, being unable to extend an in-form man to 5 sets n hav a superficially good-lookin 5 set record, lol ;)


Huh Says:

btw in a best of 5 set match, fed is the only one who has com back from 2 sets down to beat the supposed king of 5 sets in 2005 miami final. howzzat???


Huh Says:

Fed is AO GOAT,USO GOAT n WIMBY GOAT(with PETE sharin the GOAT honours at WIMBY so far imho). not goin to RG! ;)


Huh Says:

no matter what others think, pete on grass n at wimby particularly was just UNREAL!


Skorocel Says:

Ben Pronin: “It’s not that Federer doesn’t fight, it’s that he’s so damn good at fighting and stealing sets and matches against an opponent who’s superior on the day.”

Really? Then why didn’t he do that on yesterday? What a fighter, what a warrior, blah blah blah – and yet when the 5th set comes, this supposed fighter and warrior manages to win as many as 2 games… AO & USO 2009 final anyone?

—–

“This was maybe the best match Murray’s ever played against Federer because he thoroughly outclassed him in every department, and yet it went 5.”

And yet he LOST it. And nah, it wasn’t the best match Murray’s ever played against Federer. That OG final or Shanghai 2008 RR match were even better – yet Fed again LOST them. In China, he saved something like 7 MPs (in a match which was perhaps the best which these two have thus far played, IMO), but what’s the use of it when you still leave the court as the loser?! I don’t get it Ben…

—–

“If Federer wasn’t such a fighter, his 5 set record might have actually looked better, with much less 5 setters played.”

I’d say, if Federer WAS such a fighter, his 5 set record might have actually looked better. Ben, if you have followed this sport more closely (which I know you have), you should’ve known that there aren’t that many better ways to judge a player’s fighting spirit than to see him play in a 5-set match. Yesterday, Roger had all the chances to make a great (and WINNING) comeback against a player who has not only a positive H2H against him (out of 20 matches played, no less), but who’s qualitatively on a different level than the Haases, Tipsarevics and even JMDPs of this world (who, as you may know, Fed beat in 5 sets in slams). But he once again failed…

You object when someone mentions Fed’s so-so record in 5-set matches, but believe or not, it DOES say something about his supposed “fighting spirit”. It really does. And it’s not only this stat. I’ll maybe repeat myself, but anyway, here’s the question: Since 2004, when Federer began his reign of terror on the circuit, how many matches has he won after saving a matchpoint? If I recall it correctly, as “many” as 4 (Dubai 2004 Ferrero, Halle 2006 Rochus, Shanghai 2006 RR Roddick and Madrid 2011 Lopez). That’s 4 matches in 9 years. And don’t tell me he hadn’t any chances to win some! Since 2007, when his losses tally began to increase, he’s lost something like 10 matches per year, which makes it rouhgly 50 or 60 matches in which he HAD to save a matchpoint in order to win them. Yet, the only time he succeeded was against Lopez in Madrid 2011…

Now compare that to the likes of Djokovic who, alone vs. Fed, has managed to save 4 MPs and WIN the match – and this in a GRANDSLAM SEMIFINAL, not Halle or Dubai, or, not to even mention, Nadal, who I think alone in 2010 (or was it 2009?) won something like 4 or 5 matches after saving a MP (out of which one was against a guy named Nalbandian, who, in their previous two matches, wiped the floor with Nadal), and you get it why the Serb values the Spaniard (whose game may look pretty ordinary when compared to Fed, but which is pretty damn effective) higher than the Swiss…


nadalista Says:

“I don’t see how a positive winning percentage in 5 sets is abysmal. Maybe brush up on the vocab a little.”

@Be Pronin,

Thanks for accepting you lost the argument.

Sorry, did not realise you took Federer’s loss this badly.

Teaching me English grammar does not change the facts: Federer lost, and he is terrible at 5-set matches compared to the other top 4.

Numbers don’t lie…….just accept.

Now, I will take more English lessons.


nadalista Says:

……and oh, that was some fight Fed put into the 5th set yesterday.


Margot Says:

A brilliant article nadalista. Cheers.
It seems to me Fed can still produce brilliant passages of play, as in the two tie breaks one of his backhands where he passed Andy at the net was just WOW! But he finds this kind of play impossible to sustain over 5 sets.
Therefore matches which once he would’ve won easily, take longer and longer eg against JMDP at the Olympics. Therefore, being older, he is obviously more tired come the next round.
It’s chicken and egg.
Also the other top players have taken the physicality of the game to new astonishing heights.


Huh Says:

you guys definitely deserve an award in “best humor” category for saying that fed isnt a fighter like nadal or djoker, LOL! sure, why not? i guess fed should go back n lose to safin in 3 0r 4 sets in AO 05, to nadal rome 06, wim 08, AO 09, to delpo in USO 09, to djoker in USO 10 n 11 n to muzz in AO 13, to hewitt in davis cup etc, LOL! that way it’d show fed hasnt lost 5 setters, LOL! n btw how bad of fed that he has hardly lost a best of 5 setters to a non-slammer, unlike the guys of the self-styled “players’ fighting quality” judges!

n btw we’re talking of fed’s fighting quality to which all the other fighters like rafa/nole/muzz/jmdp n past n present legends n peers testify! doesnt matter what u think! n what hav u done yourselves in your lives anyway to judge fed? you’re only as world famous as i am! ;)
but you know who’s fed, dont u? u couldnt hav sounded more ludicruous n hypocritical than that!

even if fed’s chips’re down, he DOES FIGHT! may be u dunno that he can only fight to the best of his ability, the result’s not in his hands! nobody can except to win all the time only if he/she fights! n btw, i’d be pleased to present here that during his peak from 2004-07, he’s lost just 2 five setters to the mercurial safin n unreal nadal. even when his decline started, he fought tooth n nail with others n hav won his fair share of 5 setters. n its worth notin that during 2003-11, he’s not lost a 5 setter to a non-slammer other tsonga at wimby! fed’s still not a fighter, eh? ;)

n i’d love to see your fighting highness tennis stars at the age of 30 plus to keep fighting till the last point in a 5 setter against the future up n coming or already slam holders, IF THEY CAN, that is! then may be we can talk! just coz u cant even push guys, when u r not at your best, to 5 setter or 4 setter n get thrashed in 3/4 sets, you dont becom a better fighter! u r a better fighter only when against all odds(like age, less than top form, inspired rival etc) n after havin accomplished all that u could’ve, you still dont let the other guy win without pushin him to the limits!

ALL HAIL ROGER FEDERER: THE KING OF TENNIS FIGHTERS!

or may be fed should start playin 2 handed BH n a physical tennis n keep sweatin lik crazy or tak off his shirt lik a maniac n do stuff lik that when playin, for u guys to judge him as a better fighter! ;)


Huh Says:

actually fed has no business extendin other guys to 5 sets, but he does, only coz he always wants to win n is prepared to fight for it as much as he can. this despit havin broken n made all significant tennis records imaginable! but thats not enough for u still, i guess! u want more, no? hey, i think fed’ll giv ya that! ;) his time’s not up yet! :D


Huh Says:

n it’s becom a fashion here for some to cling to a straw of boris becker that u r not a good fighter unless u hav a superficially super-impressive 5 set record! not even display of years of hard work n mental strength accompanied with inhuman focus n unmatched accomplishments r enough to make a player a great fighter just coz a few people dont think so! sounds about right to some i guess.


Lolatyou Says:

Lol at all of you for criticizing a player cursing the other. You are hypocrites. Now onto tennis…


madmax Says:

Considering ESPN are supposed to have “heard” what was said, I think it’s a pity that people (including you this time Jane), fail to remember the endless times Murray has sworn not only on the BBC (who invariably do NOT apologise for his behaviour, being pro murray), ESPN, Eurosport, and whoever else just puts up with the “blue boy” on the court. As for the biased reporting, if you look, most of the papers that have reported this, ummm…scottish daily, scottish national, guardian, are all staunch supporters of the scot. Hardly surprising that in their reporting history they fail to mention the endless “F bombs” that he has dropped in slams, masters and over the years. That goes for Novak too. As for Roger, he isn’t perfect, but when he gets his feathers ruffled, all hell breaks loose. Shows how difficult it must be to be Fed. So people like Nadalista (are you missing Rafa THAT badly, that you have to bad mouth?), and MMT, look at your own favourites and report their on court behaviour, rather than picking up on one moment of a fantastic tennis match. I pity you.

And for the murray fans, this isn’t a federer fan who hasn’t congratulated Andy on his game. What a match! What a changed player with the appointment of Lendl (it would seem), though Andy always had that in him, it was just a matter of time! But to compare Murray’s behaviour on court, which is dreadful the majority of the time, to Federer’s just shows a complete disregard for the absolutely fabulous manners and court etiquette of federer over the years.

ESPN: “It’s pretty much impossible to know what he did say,” Patrick McEnroe said on ESPN. “He just pointed across the net.”

Whatever it was, it worked, temporarily.

Murray went on to win the match in five sets to advance to Sunday’s final against Novak Djokovic.

Both men downplayed the incident after the match.

“We just looked at each other one time,” Federer told reporters. “That’s OK, I think, in a three-and-a-half-hour match. We were just checking each other out for bit.”

Murray wouldn’t comment on what Federer said.

“Not relevant,” he said.

That’s predictable and acceptable. It was a heat of the moment incident, caused by the frustration of Federer being three points from defeat. It’s fun to discuss, but there’s no need for either player to linger.

What was it that Tommy Haas said recently about Murray and his on court behaviour? Can you remind me Jane? Margot? MMT? Nadalista? Seems to have gone quiet when you have to admit that actually in terms of manners, he has a lot to live up to.


madmax Says:

For the first time all tournament, Murray dropped a set. (Actually, last time I watched the match, it was two)…But, in outlasting Federer in a five-set classic, Murray recorded one of the true signature wins of his career.

Classy Federer:

“Maybe there’s just a little bit more belief, or he’s a bit more calm overall,” Federer said. “It seems like he has more peace when he plays out there, and in the process he has better results.”

Federer’s future. What do we make of Federer at this point? The career undertakers will be out in full force. (“He hasn’t won a Slam off grass in three years!”) For all the talk of his slippage, his losing battle in the fight against time, don’t attribute this result to age (31, by the way). Federer was outplayed and played some loose points when it mattered most, but it wasn’t because of fatigue or bald tires.

Federer’s serve wasn’t the weapon it usually is, precluding him from winning cheap points. He played too cautiously on Murray’s service games. He tried a few ill-advised drop shots. The conditions — downright chilly and windy at times — favored the player from Scotland. But, disappointing a result as this was, it doesn’t owe to age. He just lost to an exceptional player who played exceptionally well.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/tennis/news/20130125/andy-murray-roger-federer-australian-open/#ixzz2J4iwE8lh


Margot Says:

@ Madmax
On another thread I said Andy was right to leave this on court, but as you’ve brought up Andy’s swearing, all I’ll say is, he doesn’t direct it at other players, merely at himself. There’s a difference.
BTW Castle and Lloyd endlessly apologise for Andy’s swearing, even when the mikes don’t pick it up.
Thus drawing attention to it, of course.


skeezer Says:

Wow potshots @ Fed comes out in a split second for seconds of imperfection of an a GOAT that is incomparable to others. I thought this topic was done. Now posters are coming saying well its because my fav got ragged on. How stupid ridiculous.


Giles Says:

skeezer. I guess it hurts, people having a GO AT the GOAT!! Lol


MMT Says:

Madmax – nobody’s talking about Murray, because Murray chastises himself. If he is caught swearing he should be warned and fined. But Federer cursed at his opponent – that’s a line one doesn’t cross because it now begins to involve one’s opponent which is not sporting.

If you want to berate and curse yourself, as long as it’s not loud enough for everyone to hear, that’s your own problem. But did Murray shout a curse at Federer? I don’t believe he did. What would become of the game of tennis if every match everyone decided they were going to let their opponent have it and curse at them? Dare I say the sport might be very different than it is.

That’s why I commented on Federer’s offense. It has nothing to do with Murray berating himself – that’s his business as long as it’s not audible, and if it is it should be addressed. But it’s not sporting to curse at one’s opponent. You can try to distract from that question all you want by bringing up “behavior” in general. By this standard, any player who “behaves” better than Murray in general would be excused for almost any offense under the guise of “Murray’s worse”. This is not a coherent argument.


madmax Says:

Well actually Margot, we are being a little bit careful with the truth because of course it suits.

Yes, correct. Andy IS growing up and about time. His on court antics, more than blue, more than bluer than blue, are frequently recorded and ignored I would add, and sorry Margot, they are directed at anyone who can hear them, in the heat of the moment and at the opponent, so let’s not be too biased here.

Andy is the worst in terms of his on court blue language. Directed mostly at the tennis ball coming his way which he has missed, and to anyone who can hear him around the world. Even his gran complained. Remember that interview? She told him he had to stop with the swearing.

You only have to watch the repeats.

Count on one hand how many times federer has lost his cool. Two fingers I would say. Andy? Looking at the youtube links (far too many to post here), I am already up to 104. That was my afternoon, having a laugh at the hypocrisy of it all – especially from the murray fans.

It’s all well and good to hate federer because he is the best player ever to walk on a court, but to support the opponent and not to recognise his appalling behaviour over the years leaves a lot to be desired.

Fairness goes out of the window.

Andy was brilliant yesterday – absolutely deserved to win, but to even suggest that he is in Federer’s league in terms of manners, well, I am just laughing here.

And fight he did. Federer was a fighter, having played 6 more years than Andy on the tour, having won many more slams than he can dream of, and having more than 1050 matches in his legs, more than half of Andy’s, he did exceptionally well yesterday. Very proud of Roger. He can hold his head high.

As for Andrew castle apologising for AM’s behaviour, very few times do the BBC do this Margot. I watch the same TV as you do, and they adore him, and so cut him the slack that actually, he shouldn’t be given.

God, I wish people wouuld stick to the match – including me – it’s just so unfair when people just rake up crap about Federer because it suits their nasty side.


jane Says:

madmax, did you see my post? Clearly I didn’t forget; I brought it up.

“And also Andy himself has been know to utter a curse word or two, so why would he bother elaborating on this incident. It could open a can of worms for journalists. Besides which, most players swear, it’s just that some do so in a language perhaps not familiar to a particular audience, and some do so more visibly than others. It’s not such a big deal to let emotions out; there’s a lot going on out there in a slam semifinal. Lots to deal with in a 4 or 5 setter.”

I was saying MOST swear. This situation was slightly different because Fed swore at Andy. But in the end the players weren’t too concerned.


madmax Says:

Excuse me MMT? Since when have you been known to be the bearer of truth where federer is concerned?

That’s why I commented on Federer’s offense. It has nothing to do with Murray berating himself – that’s his business as long as it’s not audible, and if it is it should be addressed. But it’s not sporting to curse at one’s opponent. You can try to distract from that question all you want by bringing up “behavior” in general. By this standard, any player who “behaves” better than Murray in general would be excused for almost any offense under the guise of “Murray’s worse”. This is not a coherent argument.

January 26th, 2013 at 11:53 am

It’s not a coherent argument because you say so?

Not by my reckoning.

The tennis yesterday, for me anyway, was superb. I thought that Murray played the best set of tennis against federer I have seen. And obviously he has developed some muscles in those legs. Incidentally, I wished that Federer would have won, I said that at the start of the match, but I had a sneaky feeling that it wouldnt be his day. Don’t know why, just a hunch. I was very proud though that he fought back, in the tie breaker, nail biting though it was. And I hoped that he could summon up enough strength in the fifth set in order to win, but Murray was too good in that set.

I followed the BBC online commentary, don’t know who said it, but it was something along the lines of “Federer is tough to play against and hard to beat when the chips are down”, that was when Fed won the 4th set. And right they were.

Andy had other ideas though in the fifth set. And if you had read Fed’s interview (which obviously you haven’t), you would see who utterly classy he was in defeat, the incredibly gracious words he spoke towards Andy. I loved him more for that, because it’s people like you who pick up on the dregs of a game and run with it.

Tomorrow is a new day and a new match. As Novak is my number 2, obviously would like him to win, but I have a sneaky feeling that this is Murray’s time and let’s face it, after playing fed 3 times in slam finals, losing all, and now beating him in a SF, I just feel he has come a long way and could lift the trophy tomorrow.


madmax Says:

“It has nothing to do with Murray berating himself – that’s his business as long as it’s not audible”.

MMT, Murray is ALWAYS audible. What’s your point?


jane Says:

Never heard “blue language” before – must be a British idiom. Does it come from blue film, or? Just curious. It’s got a nice ring to it, ironically.


madmax Says:

What I would like to concentrate on is some of the fairer aspects of reporting:

“Federer, not as deflated as might have been expected after losing to Murray, went with the wide consensus that Djokovic will be the favourite. He gave Murray some due, despite their on-court friction.

“I think he’s always played me pretty well over the years,” he said. “He’s obviously got a winning record against me [11-9 overall, and improved to 1-3 in slams]. The match-up’s maybe a good one for him, I’m not sure. I don’t mind playing against him. But it’s normal that with time and with age you learn, you become more experienced, become physically better. He’s put himself in that situation time and time again.

“So, with the win at the Olympics and the US Open, maybe there’s just a little bit more belief or he’s a bit more calm overall. You want to be excited but you don’t want to go overly crazy on each and every point. It seems like he has more peace when he plays out there and in the process he has better results.”

What peace there was evaporated when Murray was serving for the match for the first time, at 6-5 in the fourth set, but, once he pulled away in the fifth set, there was not a lot Federer did that troubled him unduly.

That was the most encouraging aspect of his semi‑final win, coming through yet another fightback by the best player of modern times.

Jane, blue language, when someone “swears like a trooper”. Used quite a lot by Murray, but hopefully the “new Murray” will learn.


alison Says:

Personally i didnt see the point of posting on the Fed/Murray on court incident but changed my mind so here goes,both are great players ones the greatest ever in fact,neither are perfect both are very passionate about the game,therefore sometimes they get carried away in the heat of the moment,and just like the rest of us say things they shouldnt,IMO its a storm in a teacup,and kudos to Andy and Roger who in their press interviews both decided they were not going to give the media a story,which showed pure class from both players,good luck to Andy in the final tomorrow,i hope he can get the title and grab GS no2,and good luck to Roger for the rest of the season,my two cents.


skeezer Says:

MMT apparently has never seen matches in the 70s/80s lol


Sidney Says:

I was hoping for a Fed-Djoker final. It was not to be.

Andy has improved a lot in grand slam play. Congrats to him on finally winning a slam match against Fed. Even before 2012, he’s always been a tough matchup for Roger.

The Djoker-Muzza final should be a barn burner. Andy is in great shape, both physically and now mentally as well. Nole is, well, Nole.

I can’t wait…

They are very close in skills, stamina, and power. I don’t want to see luck (or bad luck) deciding this match. I hope not.

May the better, not luckier, player tomorrow win!


Margot Says:

@ madmax
Why do you have to attack Andy in order to defend Roger?
As MMT says, there is only one issue here.
Very wisely and diplomatically Andy left the whole business on court, where it belongs.


skeezer Says:

“Very wisely and diplomatically Andy left the whole business on court, where it belongs.”

That is why it is a non issue, right?


madmax Says:

Margot? Actually, why don’t YOU acknowledge (for a change) that Andy is the worst when it comes to blue language, you never acknowledge that. And please don’t start by doing that now, it’s hypocritical.

Jane,

jane Says:
I guess what was different about this incident is that it appears Fed swore not to himself but directly AT his opponent, Andy.

Anyhow thanks for the clip and explanations MMT and nadalista.

January 25th, 2013 at 10:50 am

Actually Jane, go to the youtubes, plenty of them out there where Andy has said “F***g *Ba****d…you telling me that these words were uttered at the tennis ball, or the opponent?

Oh, yeah, I forgot. He doesn’t swear at his opponent.


madmax Says:

Actually Margot, I am not attacking Andy. So let’s just state the facts. Just acknowledge that he is the worst on court, (got a lot better) but still the old “f” bombs are used, pretty much most matches he plays. I think I have been pretty fair (more than can be said for some, including you). All well and good to play the angel Margot, but we know that if anyone defends anyone, it’s you with AM.

Great match today. Enjoyed it. Andy will get revenge for next time. Am sure about that. Seems he will relish this opportunity and this rivalry is really developing into THE rivalry right now.

Good stuff.


MMT Says:

madmax – It’s not a coherent argument because if you accept that Federer’s misdeeds should be disregarded just because Murray behaves (in general) worse than the particular offense in question, then ANY offense commited (particularly those committed while playing Murray) will be excused, no matter the offense. But the standards shouldn’t vary based on the record of who you’re playing – that would make it a double standard.

That’s why it’s not a coherent argument.


MMT Says:

madmax – again, you’re trying to distract from Federer’s inexcusable offense. In tennis you don’t shout curses at your opponent. Maybe in football or basketball or hockey, or some other sports. But not tennis. Anyone who plays or watches tennis knows this because it is such a rare offense.

This is the reason why both players attempted to deflect attention away from the incident – neither wanted it to reflect poorly on Federer. Just like you, I might add. But your obsession with Murray’s behavior is merely a subterfuge to evade where the focus belongs, and that is on Federer’s offense. Nobody’s saying he’s out of control and should be taken out back and flogged. I’m merely pointing out that Federer shouting a curse at Murray was unsporting.

But just in case you actually want to know what I meant by “audible”, that is a relative term in the judgment of the umpire, but if it’s loud enough for people in the stadium, who normally wouldn’t hear what he’s saying, to hear him saying it, that makes it audible, and there’s a code of conduct that can and should be applied to address it.


MMT Says:

skeezer please – I’ve been watching tennis since 1980, and I can tell you that while certain playes in the 1980′s behaved very badly on a regular basis, it was still not common place for players to be shouting curses at one another. And even if it was (WHICH IT WASN’T) it would have been a new phenomenon that (thankfully) did not persist.


MMT Says:

madmax – now it seems your argument (if one can call it that) has mutated to, “I’m sure Andy Murray does the same.” But that would only be relevant IF Murray did it in the same match and Federer’s was a reaction (latent or otherwise) to Murray’s action.

If that’s the case, show us the clip and I’ll stand corrected.

Otherwise, this is a Murray-centric version of the argument that shouting a curse at one’s opponent is commonplace, which it isn’t. It isn’t because this is an unwritten code of conduct in tennis that Federer has clearly violated.

Surprise, Federer is not perfect.


grisham Says:

Prepare, Attack, Destroy ;-0


steve-o Says:

Murray stops play as if waiting for a linesman’s call to come, and then when none is forthcoming, continues play. Federer gets annoyed at this and says something angry to Murray.

Yeah, he’s the bad guy in this for giving spontaneous vent to his irritation at something Murray wasn’t supposed to be doing.

Murray doesn’t want to get into it either, not just for the sake of Federer’s dignity but also his own. His expression wasn’t one of surprise–he knew, deep down, what he was doing, and the sour snarl on his face said BUSTED. And he sure as hell stopped doing it after Federer called him out on it.

People are so fucking desperate to crucify Federer that they will jump on the smallest thing and harp on it to the nth degree. “When you can whip any man in the world, you never know peace,” said Muhammad Ali. And so too with Roger Federer.

Nadal shoulder-checks a guy on a changeover, Djokovic routinely goes over the time limit on serves, Murray malingers and moans, and all we hear are excuses, excuses, whining, whining about how they’re misunderstood little boys and how we should take pity on them, how they’ve being victimized, how we’re so meeeeeean for pointing this out.

World-famous multimillionaires acting like little victims, complaining about how it’s too haaaaaard to play on blue clay and how they’re not going to come back unless the tour changes it back.

Federer shows a flash of anger in response to some sketchy, passive-aggressive thing his opponent is doing–genuine emotion in the heat of the moment, mind you, not gamesmanship–and people jump down his throat.

News flash: he’s a human being. I know his detractors think of him as some kind of plaster saint who never shows emotion and always remains impassive and floats above it all. What a silly notion.

He doesn’t act out of malice or dishonesty, and he doesn’t hold grudges, and he’s genuine, without subterfuge. As William Blake said, Federer does not nurse unacted desires. When he gets angry, he expresses it, and it’s done with.

That’s why I admire him.


volley Says:

^delusional diatribe.


volley Says:

^ delusional diatribe


Alok Says:

@steve-o “People are so fucking desperate to crucify Federer that they will jump on the smallest thing and harp on it to the nth degree. “When you can whip any man in the world, you never know peace,” said Muhammad Ali. And so too with Roger Federer.”

There’s something that goes deeper and more than meets the eye, e.g., hypocrisy to the nth degree, and very subtle brabble.

It all began with Fed beating the two precious little darling boys, who could not win a GS because of the Swiss guy, who beats them and takes away their lolly-pops. And for a while Rafa too was hated, because the darling little fellas always ended up in his side or Fed’s side of the draw, thus making it impossible for the others to progress due to these two stalwars that cornered everything in the GS, resulting in a deep hatred for Fedal matches.

It’s amazing how some can list the amount of times the precious duo have fallen in Fed’s or Nadal’s side of the draw down to the last detail and moan and groan over it, repeating it as their mantra.

Now that Fed has relinquished his stronghold on the GS titles,and Nadal is sidelined by injury, and out of the picture, things have somewhat changed, due to very little competition. Now there’s nothing else left to do, but moan over the schedules and the roof being opened or closed. So now, Fed’s behavior is being questioned, and compared, and he is now under a microscope. Any which way to take him down. Sonner or later we’re gonna take him down. And they do that very subtly time after time, sometimes, depending on the support very openly.


Alok Says:

Things do have a way of coming back to haunt.

Fed’s criticized for not fighting in his SF match, just a couple of days ago, which I’m sure the opposition was very thankful. However, what can we say of the final? did we see any fighting spirit in the last set? Oh, but that’s OK, there is a very good explanation, blisters.

It was an extremely boring pong, pong match IMO.

The argument here is that the use of bad language is not directed at the opponent in an audible fashion, but how do we know if those grumblings in a foreign language and the English mutterings is not done with the opponent in mind or aimed at the opponent? We don’t, however they do use it at their boxes, that’s a certainty, and it’s just as guilty as saying it to their opponents’ faces. Whichever way you look at it, it’s cursing.

@Madmax, isn’t there something like a blue movie in the UK? I think blue language and blue movies are pretty much the same, even in Asia we know about such stuff.


volley Says:

^ secret decoder ring to decipher last two posts.


volley Says:

^ secret decoder ring needed to decipher last two posts.


Brazil Federer Fan Says:

I think what Fed did was wrong – shout at the opponent. I hope he doesn’t repeat it.

Having said that, if Murray has no problem, I don’t get why others are trying to make it an issue?

It is between the 2 of them.


volley Says:

^ it’s only the sycophants who are making it an issue or trying to rationalise his behaviour.


MMT Says:

steve-o – there is absolutely nothing wrong with what Murray did on that point. He thought a call would come and he hesitated, there is nothing wrong with that. It’s not a good idea for HIM, because in most cases he would lose the point as a result of his hesitation, but there’s no affront to Federer – that’s ridiculous. Federer’s problem is that he ALSO hesitated, but that’s Federer’s problem, not Murray’s.

They both hesitated, but Murray won the point. Would we even be discussing it if Federer had won the point? No way. We’d be saying how stupid it was for Murray to hesitate and move on.

But his hand doesn’t go up, he doesn’t look at the linesman, he doesn’t gesticulate in ANY discernible way…he just hesitates. Just like Federer.

As a matter of fact, if Federer hadn’t shouted and cursed at him, I probably wouldn’t have noticed EITHER of their hesitations. I only double checked it because of Federer’s reaction and wanted to see what it was all about. It was only then that I noticed either of them hesitating.

And for the record; in all the comments I’ve ever made on this blog, I don’t think anyone can genuinely accuse me of going out of my way to denigrate Federer. To the contrary most of my comments about him are glowing. I just call ‘em like I see ‘em, and in this ONE case he’s got it all wrong, in my opinion.


MMT Says:

And just to further dispel the suggestion that a player hesitating in the middle of a point is such an affront that it merits shouting a curse at him, take a look at his clip of Monfils vs Simon, where at 45 seconds in Monfils hesitates slightly on a ball he thought would be called out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rLDm254jtZA#t=42s

Does Simon stop playing? Does he even hesitate? Is he unduly ruffled? Does he shout a curse across the net at Monfils for this “terrible” thing he’s done?

Come on guys…


steve-o Says:

It’s not a huge deal what Murray did. But one can see why it would be misinterpreted. Federer misunderstood and thought Murray had done something to stop the point, or faked stopping the point, and THEN resumed play. He was shocked and outraged because that’s not sportsmanlike. He reacted instinctively.

Maybe Murray did fake it, maybe he didn’t and it was an honest mistake. We don’t know, because a) Murray certainly didn’t do it again and b) he ain’t telling. If he did fake it and was called out, that would certainly give a coherent explanation for why he responded by sneering at Federer AND why he was so coy about it when asked afterward.

If someone yells at you for doing something and you’re innocent, you usually act surprised and maybe a little hurt rather than make a sour snarly face like Murray did–although I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, as you seem unwilling to do for Federer.

If you’re saying it was Federer’s responsibility to be fully on top of every single thing Murray said or signaled to the officials, that’s ridiculous. Sometimes there’s miscommunication during a high-intensity match. Players have walked to the wrong side to serve or forgotten the score, or worse. Federer is a great player but even he might lose track of these things.

People talk like he cursed without provocation or tried to do something malicious. It’s not an optimal response, but it’s not unreasonable for him to think or react as he did. If you feel someone is blatantly cheating at an important juncture of the match, you might react the same way.

Could he have misunderstood? Certainly. Could he have handled it better? Perhaps. But he didn’t react in a totally unreasonable way.

Would we even be discussing it if Federer had won the point?

You’re really busting my balls here! No matter what happened, OF COURSE people would be discussing the cursing and making up all sorts of reasons why Federer is a horrible person, for the reasons I mentioned before. Even you do it:

In all likelihood he was looking for an excuse to lay into Murray because he was playing so well, because the truth is that Federer ALSO assumed the shot would be called out, otherwise Murray’s hesitation wouldn’t have mattered, and at the end of the day, his approach shot was crap…

My guess is that he was making so many errors, because Murray was playing so well, that he assumed it was out and deep down was really kicking himself, but lashed out at Murray instead.

Here you read minds, ascribe motives, and construct an extremely unflattering interpretation out of thin air. Par for the course, when it comes to Federer.


the DA Says:

steve-o – “Here you read minds, ascribe motives, and construct an extremely unflattering interpretation out of thin air. Par for the course, when it comes to Federer.”

That’s exactly what you did to murray and have done on several previous occasions. Astonishing lack of self-awareness.

For the record, ESPN replayed the incident several times and each of the commentators (Cahill, McEnroe & Fowler) were perplexed by the outburst. The replay also showed that Murray was stunned at first (as in did you really just drop the f-bomb?) then gave a wry face. It was obviously a split second hesitation as Murray thought it might be out. To assume it was intentionally faked is beyond laughable. Rewatch the whole incident including the disputed shot, not the short YouTube clip, you’ll feel sheepish about it.

“he didn’t react in a totally unreasonable way”

Sorry but swearing at another player, particularly when you are the current holder of the Edberg Sportsmanship Award, isn’t reasonable at all. You should really just accept it was a momentary lapse and let it go.


MMT Says:

steve-o: you suffer from the same myopia – your “gracious” forgiveness of Murray presumes there is a need for him to be forgiven – there is not. All that analysis of Murray and his intent is totally irrelevant.

And there is nothing for Federer to interpret because what Murray does is irrelevant; either the ball was called out or it wasn’t – end of story. Just look at the example of how Simon handled it with Monfils.

And if Federer had won the point, he wouldn’t have lashed out at Murray, so we wouldn’t be discussing it – why on earth would he lash out at Murray if he had won the point? That doesn’t even make sense!

And nobody is saying Federer is a horrible person(for pete’s sake), just that he was over the line in this one instance. A single criticism of a single act on a single point in one match of Federer’s constitutes saying he’s horrible? I can assure you that it merely means he’s fallible – there is a difference.

And yes, I’m speculating as to why he lashed out because typically he doesn’t do that. But my speculation is restricted to the motivation behind the act, which is irrelevant to whether the act itself was unsporting – which it was.


Huh Says:

MMT

the fed-muzz incident isnt somthing to which a briliant poster lik u, who’s almost always been fair too, should devot mor than 10-15 minutes. u had to giv your opinion n u gav it, bein entitld to it. howevr, acceptanc of it will always vary from person to person. tryin to convinc each othr here is futile, which u, as a very very old poster, must b knowin.

Top story: Li Na Officially Retires From Tennis
Most Recent story: 18-Year-Old Ash Barty Has Taken An Indefinite Leave From Tennis
  • Recent Comments
Rankings
ATP - Sep 15 WTA - Sep 15
1 Novak Djokovic1 Serena Williams
2 Rafael Nadal2 Simona Halep
3 Roger Federer3 Petra Kvitova
4 Stan Wawrinka4 Maria Sharapova
5 David Ferrer5 Agnieszka Radwanska
6 Milos Raonic6 Na Li
7 Tomas Berdych7 Eugenie Bouchard
8 Kei Nishikori8 Angelique Kerber
9 Marin Cilic9 Caroline Wozniacki
10 Grigor Dimitrov10 Ana Ivanovic
More: Tennis T-Shirts | Tennis Shop | Live Tennis Scores | Headlines

Copyright © 2003-2014 Tennis-X.com. All rights reserved.
This website is an independently operated source of news and information and is not affiliated with any professional organizations.