Monte Carlo Rolex Masters 2017, Monaco, ATP Masters 1000

[mightyjeditribble]

^ Cheers but don't think I was wrong in saying there was nothing visibly in any way wrong with him against Soderling.

I was really referring to what kicked everything off (and is relevant to the thread), namely the Monte-Carlo incident.

I think Nadal was quite right in his post-match press conference:

I can give a ball, and I did a lot of times in my career, if the ball is in my side.

The proof that I believe on what David thinks when I see that David marks the ball, I went to pick up the towel, preparing for the next game. You can check on the TV.

When the umpire goes down and says the ball is good, what I can say? No, the ball is out. That's why there is an umpire there. If the ball is on my side, I see the ball is in, I give the ball to the other side. There is realistic, no?

He knows that I didn't make anything wrong. I know probably that he was right.

But I cannot say anything from the other part of the court.

I think he is right, and also has a point where he says:

I understand that situation didn't help him. But we cannot be hypocrites and say in a tennis match that a point of 3-2 change everything. In tennis there is a lot of points, no? Is not in football that one decision in some minute make the difference. In tennis, we play so many points.

It's true that you never know what's going on. If that's 4-2, I don't know if the ball was good or was out. I really don't care because I know I didn't make anything wrong. I was hundred percent correct.

Sure, he could have conceded the point, and would have been lauded for his great sportsmanship. But if replays had shown the ball to be in, he might have been called a mug for giving away such an important point, when there was no reason to get involved! It's not his job to get involved in the line calling at the other end of the court, particularly when he isn't 100% sure. He doesn't deserve being attacked for the fact that the referee made a shocking mistake.

Source:
http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=129333

 

[mightyjeditribble]

With regards to RG, I do think it is disrespectful to Söderling to say that Rafa only lost because of his knees.

But it is also silly to claim with certainty that his knees did not affect him, when he had been having knee problems for some time before, and particularly when Nadal did say it had worsened before RG when he withdrew from Wimbledon:

Nadal said his knees had worsened during the Madrid Masters event in May when he was beaten by Federer in the final, just before the French Open.

(https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2009/jun/19/rafael-nadal-injury-andy-murray-wimbledon)

But Robin came out, played lights-out tennis, and did the unthinkable. Who is to say he could not have done it against 2008 Nadal? And, furthermore, when the style that saw Nadal become such an unstoppable force on clay for so long also was the course for his knee problems, can it really be used as an excuse?

So IMO both Carol (who made the original reference to Rafa's injury) and Front are wrong on this front.

But, in any case, enough of all this silliness. Nadal's 10th Monte-Carlo title is an incredible achievement, and this Fed fan at least can appreciate that. I said before the tournament that he is the favourite for RG going into the clay-court season, and nothing that has happened has changed that fact so far.

 

[Front242]

Ah ok, thought you were referring to RG 2009. My main point was he clearly knew it was out as any top player does when they hit a ball 6 inches wide of the line. Mourier made an awful mess and should be banned for a few matches. Nadal, well he probably feels a bit guilty and imo he should but it is what it is and he was likely going to win anyway. Also, Goffin shouldn't have allowed it get to him quite as much as it did. While I can understand the repurcussions causing a poorer 2nd set, he shouldn't have gone off the rails so much as to lose it 6-1.

 

[Carol]

^ Cheers but don't think I was wrong in saying there was nothing visibly in any way wrong with him against Soderling.

I was really referring to what kicked everything off (and is relevant to the thread), namely the Monte-Carlo incident.

I think Nadal was quite right in his post-match press conference:

I can give a ball, and I did a lot of times in my career, if the ball is in my side.

The proof that I believe on what David thinks when I see that David marks the ball, I went to pick up the towel, preparing for the next game. You can check on the TV.

When the umpire goes down and says the ball is good, what I can say? No, the ball is out. That's why there is an umpire there. If the ball is on my side, I see the ball is in, I give the ball to the other side. There is realistic, no?

He knows that I didn't make anything wrong. I know probably that he was right.

But I cannot say anything from the other part of the court.

I think he is right, and also has a point where he says:

I understand that situation didn't help him. But we cannot be hypocrites and say in a tennis match that a point of 3-2 change everything. In tennis there is a lot of points, no? Is not in football that one decision in some minute make the difference. In tennis, we play so many points.

It's true that you never know what's going on. If that's 4-2, I don't know if the ball was good or was out. I really don't care because I know I didn't make anything wrong. I was hundred percent correct.

Sure, he could have conceded the point, and would have been lauded for his great sportsmanship. But if replays had shown the ball to be in, he might have been called a mug for giving away such an important point, when there was no reason to get involved! It's not his job to get involved in the line calling at the other end of the court, particularly when he isn't 100% sure. He doesn't deserve being attacked for the fact that the referee made a shocking mistake.

Source:
http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=129333

It's no even worth to make any comment about it. It was VERY clear that was the chair umpire decision and Rafa didn't have to do anything about it, anyway they repeated the point

 

[the AntiPusher]

^ Cheers but don't think I was wrong in saying there was nothing visibly in any way wrong with him against Soderling.

I was really referring to what kicked everything off (and is relevant to the thread), namely the Monte-Carlo incident.

I think Nadal was quite right in his post-match press conference:

I can give a ball, and I did a lot of times in my career, if the ball is in my side.

The proof that I believe on what David thinks when I see that David marks the ball, I went to pick up the towel, preparing for the next game. You can check on the TV.

When the umpire goes down and says the ball is good, what I can say? No, the ball is out. That's why there is an umpire there. If the ball is on my side, I see the ball is in, I give the ball to the other side. There is realistic, no?

He knows that I didn't make anything wrong. I know probably that he was right.

But I cannot say anything from the other part of the court.

I think he is right, and also has a point where he says:

I understand that situation didn't help him. But we cannot be hypocrites and say in a tennis match that a point of 3-2 change everything. In tennis there is a lot of points, no? Is not in football that one decision in some minute make the difference. In tennis, we play so many points.

It's true that you never know what's going on. If that's 4-2, I don't know if the ball was good or was out. I really don't care because I know I didn't make anything wrong. I was hundred percent correct.

Sure, he could have conceded the point, and would have been lauded for his great sportsmanship. But if replays had shown the ball to be in, he might have been called a mug for giving away such an important point, when there was no reason to get involved! It's not his job to get involved in the line calling at the other end of the court, particularly when he isn't 100% sure. He doesn't deserve being attacked for the fact that the referee made a shocking mistake.

Source:
http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=129333

Nuff Said! clap

 

[mightyjeditribble]

Ah ok, thought you were referring to RG 2009. My main point was he clearly knew it was out as any top player does when they hit a ball 6 inches wide of the line. Mourier made an awful mess and should be banned for a few matches. Nadal, well he probably feels a bit guilty and imo he should but it is what it is and he was likely going to win anyway. Also, Goffin shouldn't have allowed it get to him quite as much as it did. While I can understand the repurcussions causing a poorer 2nd set, he shouldn't have gone off the rails so much as to lose it 6-1.

I think that's reasonable - though I would hold that there is a difference between "knowing" and "knowing", if you know what I mean.

I am sure that, in the moment when Mourier came down to look at the mark, Rafa would have thought that maybe the ball had somehow ended up closer than it seemed. Players aren't always best at judging where the ball landed, even on their own side of the net ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8yfHuYm_kM

:laydownlaughing

Anyway, looking back he might think "yes, I probably knew the ball was really out in truth" and even feel a bit bad, as you say - because Rafa seems to be a genuinely nice guy. But he shouldn't feel bad, IMO, because the umpire's mistake just put everyone in a difficult situation.

And, having said that, everyone makes mistakes once in a while, so maybe we should give Mourier a break too.

Nothing can ever be as bad as this (pre-Hawk Eye) ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4mGqwA7cCM
(Williams v Capriati, US Open 2004)

 

[10isfan]

I think umps should never overrule if there is Hawkeye (which should be used for big matches even on clay), allowing players to challenge. I've seen umps look foolish after over ruling incorrectly.

 

[Carol]

congrats to Manacor's bull and Carol, his devoted fan !!

Thanks Isabelle!

 

[rafanoy1992]

By winning Monte Carlo, Nadal has now won at least 1 title in 14 consecutive seasons which puts him in 2nd place tied with Lendl. If he wins a title next year and one title in 2019, he will surpass Federer as number 1 with 16 consecutive seasons with winning at least 1 title.

 

[Fiero425]

By winning Monte Carlo, Nadal has now won at least 1 title in 14 consecutive seasons which puts him in 2nd place tied with Lendl. If he wins a title next year and one title in 2019, he will surpass Federer as number 1 with 16 consecutive seasons with winning at least 1 title.

If still ambulatory; call me when he gets to Martina Navratilova territory (20 yrs) :angel: :dodgy: :clap :ras: - Nole Blog -

 

[Kieran]

That's a remarkable record! :clap

I'm not seeing much celebration of Rafa in this thread. what with all the alt-facts and begrudgery, but in an age of wonders and smashed records, this is one that is remarkable both for Rafa's own achievement, but also Lendl's, which has stood for so long. Lendl was a great champ, and a very consistent fellow!

 

[mightyjeditribble]

That's a remarkable record! :clap

I'm not seeing much celebration of Rafa in this thread. what with all the alt-facts and begrudgery, but in an age of wonders and smashed records, this is one that is remarkable both for Rafa's own achievement, but also Lendl's, which has stood for so long. Lendl was a great champ, and a very consistent fellow!

I think there's been (rightly) a fair amount of celebration of Rafa's amazing achievements in this thread, from fans of other players. I'm sure you will reciprocate the next time that Federer fans have something to celebrate!

(You didn't expect Front or DarthFed to join in, did you?)

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[Kieran]

That's a remarkable record! :clap

I'm not seeing much celebration of Rafa in this thread. what with all the alt-facts and begrudgery, but in an age of wonders and smashed records, this is one that is remarkable both for Rafa's own achievement, but also Lendl's, which has stood for so long. Lendl was a great champ, and a very consistent fellow!

I think there's been (rightly) a fair amount of celebration of Rafa's amazing achievements in this thread, from fans of other players. I'm sure you will reciprocate the next time that Federer fans have something to celebrate!

(You didn't expect Front or DarthFed to join in, did you?)

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

There's been more stoopah haggling over Rafa the Corruptible being an utter cad, stealing sweets from children, whistling during church services and leering dimly at old ladies than there has been focus on his extraordinariness at this single event. Oh by the way, Darth and Front did join in, sucking bitter lemons and shouting boo-ha, which was, I suppose, their way of acknowledging Rafa's achievements. I take it back, so! :laydownlaughing

 

[mrzz]

And get your missus to feed the baby - that's wimmins work... :snicker

I know you think this is funny, but - said in jest or not - I find this really inappropriate.

Attitudes like this have held us back for centuries, and they still do despite all progress. And I don't only mean holding women back in their own careers by expecting them to shoulder the childrearing on their own, but also holding men back from forming the bonds with their children that they might otherwise have had.

I say this as a man who has done, and continues to do, a fair amount of baby feeding, nappy changing, etc. And i wouldn't want it any other way.

Front, however wrong you may be about Nadal, I salute you on this!

(Sorry to be OT, but the thread had already gone off the rails ...)

Here we go OT again. Sorry, but this is ideological patrol, and/or political propaganda. Kieran said it in jest -- and by knowing him as a poster we all know he does not want to use this to lock women in their houses. It is known to biological sciences that women and men have different reactions regarding their own children. I do agree that it is a social advance to have parents sharing their responsibilities -- I took care of my daughter practically by myself until she was 5 -- but couples are allowed to chose differently, people are allowed to think differently (unless we are under a dictatorship). There are people that honestly think that women would do better by staying home and taking care of children. I may disagree (not completely, though), but it is surely not inappropriate that they voice their opinion. Kieran made a comment in (probably in) jest -- to go OT to reprehend him on this is a bit too much IMO -- even if I am sure you did it covered with good intentions.

Let´s agree on one thing: congratulate Front on taking care of the baby and fight with an whole army of Nadal fans at the same time. That´s the second biggest accomplishment of the last few days (Nadal´s is the first, but not by much).

 

[Kieran]

I take no offence by the Tribble's post, I actually agree with a lot of it, and of course I was jesting, and I'm sure brother Front knows that, since we have a much better relationship than our TF spats suggest. I see the point MJT is making, but I'd also suggest that if we can't joke about things such as the changing roles in society, and especially the differences between males and females, and any contentions between them, then we're not winning any battles at all. In fact, we're barely fighting them.

Or we're only fighting them, but not progressing.

I congratulated Front privately on his new addition to the family and the image of him feeding the brat is a sweet one, and a moment in his day I'm sure he looks forward to...

 

[mrzz]

^I guessed you would not be offended -- that seems to be a hard thing to do, in fact -- and I surely know that you need no "defense", specially from a poster which is quite civil and rational. The case in point, as your own response shows, is different.

 

[Kieran]

^I guessed you would not be offended -- that seems to be a hard thing to do, in fact -- and I surely know that you need no "defense", specially from a poster which is quite civil and rational. The case in point, as your own response shows, is different.

I rarely take personal offence on forums, because generally in Fedal wars there's the large absurdity of it all to be factored in. But I appreciate your post on my behalf...

 

[mightyjeditribble]

There are people that honestly think that women would do better by staying home and taking care of children. I may disagree (not completely, though), but it is surely not inappropriate that they voice their opinion.

There are people that honestly think that black and white people would do better by not having children with each other.

Ilie Nastase may be one of them. Yet none of us think that it is appropriate for him to voice that opinion.

Before you say it, I'm not equating the two, and certainly not comparing Kieran to Nastase!!!!

I'm just pointing out the fallacy in the argument. People can make different choices, that is very true and indeed the point. But they have no business telling half of the population what they should and shouldn't do.

Look, i come here to talk about tennis not to argue about other things. But I will speak out when something crosses a line, because I would feel complicit if I did not. It is surely not inappropriate that I voice that opinion.

I hope it was clear from my original message that my intention was not to criticize Kieran personally, just to encourage him to consider the effect of a certain choice of words.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[mightyjeditribble]

I take no offence by the Tribble's post, I actually agree with a lot of it, and of course I was jesting, and I'm sure brother Front knows that, since we have a much better relationship than our TF spats suggest. I see the point MJT is making, but I'd also suggest that if we can't joke about things such as the changing roles in society, and especially the differences between males and females, and any contentions between them, then we're not winning any battles at all. In fact, we're barely fighting them.

Or we're only fighting them, but not progressing.

I congratulated Front privately on his new addition to the family and the image of him feeding the brat is a sweet one, and a moment in his day I'm sure he looks forward to...

Hi Kieran thanks for this, i think i agree with all of it!

I suppose as the parent of a young child (a boy), I am particularly sensitive to and dismayed by all the ways in which society still conspires to reinforce gender roles and stereotypes. I find it frustrating and think we need to be careful with our words in that respect.

Maybe your joke didn't come across as well in writing as it was intended!

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[the AntiPusher]

That's a remarkable record! :clap

I'm not seeing much celebration of Rafa in this thread. what with all the alt-facts and begrudgery, but in an age of wonders and smashed records, this is one that is remarkable both for Rafa's own achievement, but also Lendl's, which has stood for so long. Lendl was a great champ, and a very consistent fellow!

I think there's been (rightly) a fair amount of celebration of Rafa's amazing achievements in this thread, from fans of other players. I'm sure you will reciprocate the next time that Federer fans have something to celebrate!

(You didn't expect Front or DarthFed to join in, did you?)

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

By winning those 3 titles this year Roger has solidified his position as the GOAT.(for now).Even Nadal fans has to concede that point. Rafa's plight has become 3 times harder..especially on the hardcourts. Way too much pressure on him to recapture RG although it's no way on God's green Earth Roger is gonna waste his time playing that tournament when he could spend his time more wisely preparing Wimbledon. Speaking of SW19, I doubt Roger will loose a set the first week because his weapons are too finely tuned to be bothered by anyone unless he runs into an Isner type of server. Only Krygrios can really trouble him by the fourth round. Only Murray and Djoker can stay close with Roger in a semifinal or finals. IMO