Front242 said:
^ Get over the likes, it's the same with Nadal fans in every thread. You don't have to look too far. I only said Safin was a better all court player than Murray if you noticed above because the match would be over before he'd dig himself into a massive rut like Murray whose overly defensive game cripples him. The few times Murray actually plays aggressively he can be much more effective against the field but it doesn't come naturally at all to him and he soon reverts back to being a pusher of the highest order. Maybe you could rank him right up there as one of the best all court pushers but that's not much of a compliment I'm afraid.
[As a Murray fan, I'm going to wade in here.]
You may not like Murray's style of game, but you shoudln't le that affect your judgemetn of a pleyr's worth. jsut caouse you happent o like someone's style of play more, doesn't mean they are a better player. you need to be more objective.andy has won as many Grand Slams as Safin, and his overall record at slams and masters events is far superior to safin's. so just cause you don't happen to like his play, you should be able to see, objevtively, that he is a more succesful player than safin.
and whereas marat only had one great player to deal wtih, fed, andy has had three. and he's still been more successful than safinh. so there.
(and by the wya, i realyl liked safn's play. i jsut think it's possible to like lits of different styles of players!)
It baffles me how some tennis fans can have such a low opinion of Andy Murray, a player who is one of the greatest returners of all time, one of the great movers of all time, who has exquisite touch (second only to Roger among current players in this regard), a player who has so many different shots, a player who has a great ability to vary the pace, spin and angles of the ball, a player who changes his tactics based upon playing coniditons, weather, opponent (if you're fond of the subtleties of the game rather than just ball bashing and winners, this aspect of his game is fascinating to watch), and a player with some of the most spectacualr defensive skills ever seen.
Some of the things he does so well are more subtle pleasures - it's not all about pounding winners. His ability to place the ball in awkward positions for opponents, his preternatural anticipation of, for example, smashes. His returning is amazing to see - the way he steps in on the second serve and controls it - no other player has the hands to do that. not even novak. Murray's BH is a thing of beauty. if all of that is him being a 'pusher', well, then i love pushers!
O.K., my favourite things to watch in tennis are great returning and great defending, and he's an all-time great in these areas, so I particularly like to watch him, but I'm surprised that some fans here - who call themsleves tennis fans - can't appreciate a player who is so good in so many ways, and an all-time great in certain areas, even if he's not their favourite style of player. I try to appreciate all styles of play, not just one.
The funny thing is that wherever Murray plays he gets lots of crowd support and is very popular - understandably, because of all the reasons I mentioned above. But for some reason he seems far less popular on tennis forums. I can only conlude that tennis forums do not accurately reflect the views of tennis fans in general. [(same goes for nadal. if i bvisited tennis forums to get an idea of players' popularity, i'd conclide that nadal was reviled and hated. yet he's fanstaticvally popular wherever he plays. [do players on tennis forums not go to tennis matches? are they two separate groups of fan or something?)] ]
[i know you like first strike teenis, but you shoudln't le that affect your judgemetn of apleyr's worth.]
[and whereas marat only had one great player to deal wtih, fed, andy has had three. and he's still been more successful than safinh. so there.
(and by the wya, i realyl liked safn's play. i jsut think it's possible to like lits of different styles of players!)]
