PDA

View Full Version : Was Nalbandians shot in during tiebreak with roddick in 2003?


VivalaVida
02-22-2009, 03:56 PM
just saw the whole tiebreak in HD on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI. That shot that was called out giving rod 8-7 looked good to me. So unfortunate for David if it was in :( Was any confirmation given?

rubberduckies
02-22-2009, 04:18 PM
Yep.
If tennis were fair:
Slams for Roddick 0
Slams for Nalbandian 1

People who called that ball out should have received a lifetime ban from all ITF and ATP events. A ban for them and their whole families and any progeny they might produce.

GameSampras
02-22-2009, 04:19 PM
Heh... Roddick winning a slam. Its not every day u see that. LOL.

Who would have thought that would be Roddick's only slam for his career. God he lost the first 2 sets too. Nalbandian was a choker even back then


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQYcbptExsM&feature=related

LOL.. Listen to how the commentators are talking about Sampras "passing the torch to Roddick". LOL

More like the passing of a sparkler

ESP#1
02-22-2009, 04:43 PM
im just amazed how skinny nalby looks

Joseph L. Barrow
02-22-2009, 05:38 PM
just saw the whole tiebreak in HD on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI. That shot that was called out giving rod 8-7 looked good to me. So unfortunate for David if it was in :( Was any confirmation given?
No, it wasn't actually called out, but rather some audience member stupidly yelled "out," which confused Nalbandian and perhaps caused him to net the next shot. Notice the umpire warning the fans over the microphone not to say "out" after that point.

Yep.
If tennis were fair:
Slams for Roddick 0
Slams for Nalbandian 1
Having already said what I did above, however, these kinds of comments that get thrown around are pretty annoying. There is a certain anti-American/anti-Roddick faction around who seem to think they prophetically know what "would" have happened here; yes, Nalbandian was unlucky to have some fan screw him up in that point. However, it's by no means a certainty that he would have won that point anyway, nor that he would have won the next one if he had (especially since in real life, Roddick dominated that next point), nor that he would have won the final had both of those happened. It isn't as though Nalbandian was easily the superior player and Roddick won off lucky breaks; Roddick won 17 more points than Nalbandian did in the match, and even if we suppose Nalbandian was gipped out of two or three more than his opponent, that's still a subsantial differential in Roddick's favor. It's POSSIBLE Nalbandian could have won the match had he been slightly luckier, and POSSIBLE that he could have won the final (but keep in mind he has a history of disappointing in big matches at slams). As is, Roddick won that match and won the slam, with a bit of luck on his side, yes, but I don't see legitimate cause for the intense fixation on dragging down his accomplishment that some here have.

ESP#1
02-22-2009, 05:59 PM
Ima huge nalby fan, i think hes one of the most talented players ive ever seen, that being said he had his chances to win slams, i mean it does suck that some jerk called the ball out but this might have caused him not to win the match in the third set but not to lose the match

fluffy Beaver
02-22-2009, 06:11 PM
wow, amazing second kick from roddick at 8-7, look how far nalby had to get just to get it. That kick for killer forehand is all roddick needs, too bad he doesn't have it anymore :(

rubberduckies
02-22-2009, 06:30 PM
No, it wasn't actually called out, but rather some audience member stupidly yelled "out," which confused Nalbandian and perhaps caused him to net the next shot. Notice the umpire warning the fans over the microphone not to say "out" after that point.


Having already said what I did above, however, these kinds of comments that get thrown around are pretty annoying. There is a certain anti-American/anti-Roddick faction around who seem to think they prophetically know what "would" have happened here; yes, Nalbandian was unlucky to have some fan screw him up in that point. However, it's by no means a certainty that he would have won that point anyway, nor that he would have won the next one if he had (especially since in real life, Roddick dominated that next point), nor that he would have won the final had both of those happened. It isn't as though Nalbandian was easily the superior player and Roddick won off lucky breaks; Roddick won 17 more points than Nalbandian did in the match, and even if we suppose Nalbandian was gipped out of two or three more than his opponent, that's still a subsantial differential in Roddick's favor. It's POSSIBLE Nalbandian could have won the match had he been slightly luckier, and POSSIBLE that he could have won the final (but keep in mind he has a history of disappointing in big matches at slams). As is, Roddick won that match and won the slam, with a bit of luck on his side, yes, but I don't see legitimate cause for the intense fixation on dragging down his accomplishment that some here have.

Nalbandian would've won the final easily. Ferrero had absolutely nothing left in the final.
If Nalbandian were to have won those points, this match would've been over before his collapse in the fourth set that allowed Roddick to get that point spread. That's like saying if Nalby had converted his MATCH POINTS he would still have been 10 points behind Roddick in the total tally and thus would've lost the match.

If Roddick bore any semblance of a decent human being, he would've handed his trophy and winnings over to Nalbandian and pleaded with the ITF to have an asterisk put beside his name for the 2003 USO and to have the that asterisk lead to a 5-page single-spaced essay written by Roddick that explains why Nalbandian actually won the USO and why Nalbandian is superior to Roddick in every conceivable fashion and why Nalbandian is going to take Roddick's place in the honeymoon with Brooklyn Decker and why Roddick is looking forward to raising Nalbandian's kid.

VivalaVida
02-22-2009, 06:43 PM
Nalbandian would've won the final easily. Ferrero had absolutely nothing left in the final.
If Nalbandian were to have won those points, this match would've been over before his collapse in the fourth set that allowed Roddick to get that point spread. That's like saying if Nalby had converted his MATCH POINTS he would still have been 10 points behind Roddick in the total tally and thus would've lost the match.

If Roddick bore any semblance of a decent human being, he would've handed his trophy and winnings over to Nalbandian and pleaded with the ITF to have an asterisk put beside his name for the 2003 USO and to have the that asterisk lead to a 5-page single-spaced essay written by Roddick that explains why Nalbandian actually won the USO and why Nalbandian is superior to Roddick in every conceivable fashion and why Nalbandian is going to take Roddick's place in the honeymoon with Brooklyn Decker and why Roddick is looking forward to raising Nalbandian's kid.
I just started liking Roddick after you said this. this is a terrible post. Oh and like nalbandian would have been guaranteed the match 100 percent had the ball went in :rolleyes:. The second paragraph is...
http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/facepalm.jpg

egn
02-22-2009, 06:47 PM
Nalbandian would've won the final easily. Ferrero had absolutely nothing left in the final.
If Nalbandian were to have won those points, this match would've been over before his collapse in the fourth set that allowed Roddick to get that point spread. That's like saying if Nalby had converted his MATCH POINTS he would still have been 10 points behind Roddick in the total tally and thus would've lost the match.

If Roddick bore any semblance of a decent human being, he would've handed his trophy and winnings over to Nalbandian and pleaded with the ITF to have an asterisk put beside his name for the 2003 USO and to have the that asterisk lead to a 5-page single-spaced essay written by Roddick that explains why Nalbandian actually won the USO and why Nalbandian is superior to Roddick in every conceivable fashion and why Nalbandian is going to take Roddick's place in the honeymoon with Brooklyn Decker and why Roddick is looking forward to raising Nalbandian's kid.

This takes the case as some of the biggest dribble and Roddick hatred ever. I don't think Roddick has much talent but Nalbandian is not the first to get bad calls or have fan disturbance and he won't be the last to have it in a big match. This stuff dates back if I recall Nalbandian was still up two sets to one. If he had any nerves he could have come out and finished him off next set, I love the guy he was robbed but no point crying over it for years He still had two sets to play after that and failed.

RCizzle65
02-22-2009, 07:08 PM
If Roddick bore any semblance of a decent human being, he would've handed his trophy and winnings over to Nalbandian and pleaded with the ITF to have an asterisk put beside his name for the 2003 USO and to have the that asterisk lead to a 5-page single-spaced essay written by Roddick that explains why Nalbandian actually won the USO and why Nalbandian is superior to Roddick in every conceivable fashion and why Nalbandian is going to take Roddick's place in the honeymoon with Brooklyn Decker and why Roddick is looking forward to raising Nalbandian's kid.

Someone is quite bitter, I don't know why some people take sports wayyyyy too seriously like this poster here....what's done is done, I always imagine Federer winning 2008 Wimbledon coming back from his two sets to none deficit, but I'm not going to wish all this hatred on someone....

gj011
02-22-2009, 07:39 PM
Yep.
If tennis were fair:
Slams for Roddick 0
Slams for Nalbandian 1

People who called that ball out should have received a lifetime ban from all ITF and ATP events. A ban for them and their whole families and any progeny they might produce.

Exactly. Nalbandian should have one slam title and that loser Roddick 0. And those cheaters who were referees on that match should have been banned forever.

gj011
02-22-2009, 07:40 PM
Nalbandian would've won the final easily. Ferrero had absolutely nothing left in the final.
If Nalbandian were to have won those points, this match would've been over before his collapse in the fourth set that allowed Roddick to get that point spread. That's like saying if Nalby had converted his MATCH POINTS he would still have been 10 points behind Roddick in the total tally and thus would've lost the match.

If Roddick bore any semblance of a decent human being, he would've handed his trophy and winnings over to Nalbandian and pleaded with the ITF to have an asterisk put beside his name for the 2003 USO and to have the that asterisk lead to a 5-page single-spaced essay written by Roddick that explains why Nalbandian actually won the USO and why Nalbandian is superior to Roddick in every conceivable fashion and why Nalbandian is going to take Roddick's place in the honeymoon with Brooklyn Decker and why Roddick is looking forward to raising Nalbandian's kid.

Word. Excellent post.

woodrow1029
02-22-2009, 07:52 PM
Word. Excellent post.
Gj, this just shows that you consistently make as little sense as RubberDuckies.

breadstick
02-22-2009, 07:54 PM
Definitely looked in.

Youtube HD is a blessing for tennis vids. The ball is too fast to see in normal videos.

gj011
02-22-2009, 08:12 PM
Gj, this just shows that you consistently make as little sense as RubberDuckies.

OK that last sentence is a bit too much, but the rest is absolutely correct.

LanceStern
02-22-2009, 08:44 PM
That one bad call is the reason Nalbandian doesn't have US Open 2003 under his belt now.

No, scratch that, it's the reason Nalbandian is not NUMBER 1 in the world to this day.

AllCourt
02-22-2009, 09:23 PM
it was interference by the crowd.

the crowd influences alot of matches in tennis. probably not very many times in this manner, where they call a ball out that was in, but the line umpire correctly called the close ball in.

there was no "bad call" or such in the match. just unlucky circumstances. it happens. roddick, since the 2003 open, got to wimbledon finals in 04 and 05, and another open final is 06. i think its safe to say that even with his "one-dimensional" game, he is a true slam winner.

some people need to calm down with the roddick hatred. "hes nothing but a big serve". really? well if thats what can win you matches, then so be it.

Rhino
02-23-2009, 12:48 AM
wow, amazing second kick from roddick at 8-7, look how far nalby had to get just to get it. That kick for killer forehand is all roddick needs, too bad he doesn't have it anymore :(
That's the thing I noticed most too, that 2nd serve!

I still remember where I was when I last saw this tie-break (I was in a night club in Northern England, they were showing the match on tv screens).
Mmmm, I think just a bit of bad luck there for Nalby, he was hardly choking, he was gutsy and sharp.

Who knows how that point would've affected things. Nalbandian still had two sets left to take the match, shame he couldn't do it.

BreakPoint
02-23-2009, 01:06 AM
Yes, I saw that shot when it was live on TV and it was definitely in.

Underhand
02-23-2009, 03:40 AM
im just amazed how skinny nalby looks

After this unfair loss he started to abuse donuts.

zagor
02-23-2009, 04:39 AM
I just started liking Roddick after you said this. this is a terrible post. Oh and like nalbandian would have been guaranteed the match 100 percent had the ball went in :rolleyes:. The second paragraph is...
http://www.terminally-incoherent.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/facepalm.jpg

This takes the case as some of the biggest dribble and Roddick hatred ever. I don't think Roddick has much talent but Nalbandian is not the first to get bad calls or have fan disturbance and he won't be the last to have it in a big match. This stuff dates back if I recall Nalbandian was still up two sets to one. If he had any nerves he could have come out and finished him off next set, I love the guy he was robbed but no point crying over it for years He still had two sets to play after that and failed.

Lol,don't take the bait.From what I've seen 90% of Ducky's posts are just sarcastic baiting(or trolling if you wish)attempts,the guy only seems to posts seriously when he bashes Fed,otherwise don't take his posts that seriously.To me he seems to be clearly sarcastic,especially in the second part of his post(I mean Nalbo should go to honeymoon with Becker and Roddick should raise Nalbo's kid,hilarious).It's the same when he calls Gulbis the unbeatable Latvian legend or something to that effect.

Exactly. Nalbandian should have one slam title and that loser Roddick 0. And those cheaters who were referees on that match should have been banned forever.

Did you watch the clip? The referees aren't to blame,some jerk from the crowd yelled out,the linde judges have nothing to do with this incident from what I've seen.

lonestar
02-23-2009, 06:19 AM
The funny thing is, it's always the "fans" who are bringing up stuff like this. I've never heard Nalbandian moan over that one point after the match (correct me if I'm wrong), let alone after almost 6 years.
As someone else said, he was still 2 sets to 1 up and could have still finished the match in 4. Believe me, this stuff happens all the time, especially at Flushing Meadows.

I am not a Roddick fan by any stretch of imagination, but to say he only won a slam because some jerk in the crowd yelled in the tiebreak of the semifinal (not even the final!!!) is absolutely pathetic.

GameSampras
02-23-2009, 06:43 AM
Well.. yea Nalby was screwed over there in the tiebreak but there is no excuse to drop a 2 set leads like that to Freakin Roddick of all people. If it was Fed or Nadal I could see. But not RODDICK!!!:confused:

Nalby should have whooped on that boy in straight sets. He was always just a much better player. Its pretty sad that someone with Dave's talent didnt do more with his career

RoddickAce
02-23-2009, 06:51 AM
This takes the case as some of the biggest dribble and Roddick hatred ever. I don't think Roddick has much talent but Nalbandian is not the first to get bad calls or have fan disturbance and he won't be the last to have it in a big match. This stuff dates back if I recall Nalbandian was still up two sets to one. If he had any nerves he could have come out and finished him off next set, I love the guy he was robbed but no point crying over it for years He still had two sets to play after that and failed.

I think he was being sarcastic...

Cyan
02-23-2009, 07:04 AM
Well.. yea Nalby was screwed over there in the tiebreak but there is no excuse to drop a 2 set leads like that to Freakin Roddick of all people. If it was Fed or Nadal I could see. But not RODDICK!!!:confused:

Nalby should have whooped on that boy in straight sets. He was always just a much better player. Its pretty sad that someone with Dave's talent didnt do more with his career

True...................

madmanfool
02-23-2009, 07:10 AM
Roddick was serving huge. They showed a stat that said he had 27 aces and he hit a few more after that. That's almost 30 aces in 3 sets. To give you an idea, yesterday against Stepanek in 2 long sets he hit 8 aces. Not to mention he hit the ball much harder then he does now, but we all know that.

Thor
02-23-2009, 07:46 AM
Nalbandian was 2 sets to love up, 3:0 in the tiebreak, lost a point at 7:7 and people say THAT cost him the match AND the title(this was a SF mind you).

This is a funny thread

roddickfan90
02-23-2009, 07:51 AM
just saw the whole tiebreak in HD on youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7uqwh932kI. That shot that was called out giving rod 8-7 looked good to me. So unfortunate for David if it was in :( Was any confirmation given?

nalbandian deserved to loose, roddick has a better GS record regardless

Gugafan
02-23-2009, 08:44 AM
The umpire has to call a let considering the importance of the point. Often you see umpires intervene and call 'stop' when a ball is dropped by a ballboy during a rally.

woodrow1029
02-23-2009, 08:47 AM
The umpire has to call a let considering the importance of the point. Often you see umpires intervene and call 'stop' when a ball is dropped by a ballboy during a rally.
Even though the rules clearly state that out calls from spectators are not a reason to call a let, yet something like a ballkid dropping a ball during the point is?

callitout
02-23-2009, 09:20 AM
I agree and the dim lighting hurt Fed at Wimby...and Djoko's family cheering for him won him the AO '08.
This isnt junior tennis. You dont lose a 2 set lead with matchpoints b/c of 1 point in which a fan called out from the stands. Nalby is pretty strong mentally, less top physically. Im sure neither David nor any self respecting professional would say that this cost him the match.

vbranis
02-23-2009, 09:23 AM
Nalbandian should switch back to Sergio Tacchini, maybe they will make him look thinner. He looks like a lemon now in those yellow Yonex shirts.

Chadwixx
02-23-2009, 11:19 AM
Oh and like nalbandian would have been guaranteed the match 100 percent had the ball went in :rolleyes:.

Juan carlos had to play 4 straight days (rain delays affected everyone but roddick) and he had two broke (or cracked) ribs. Nalbandian winning was a pretty safe bet.

Still unsure why the chair didnt play a let.

mikeler
02-23-2009, 11:32 AM
More like the passing of a sparkler


Nice!.......

woodrow1029
02-23-2009, 11:40 AM
Juan carlos had to play 4 straight days (rain delays affected everyone but roddick) and he had two broke (or cracked) ribs. Nalbandian winning was a pretty safe bet.

Still unsure why the chair didnt play a let.
The chair didn't play a let because it's clearly stated in the rules that a spectator's out call is not a reason to call a let.

Chadwixx
02-23-2009, 12:01 PM
Its called a disruption of play.

woodrow1029
02-23-2009, 12:21 PM
Its called a disruption of play.
Ok. Here it is straight from the ATP rulebook. It is disruptive, but it doesn't get any clearer that it's not a let.

Spectator Noise
Case: During play an “out ”call is made by a spectator. The player
stops playing and claims hindrance.
Decision: The point stands as played.

Chadwixx
02-23-2009, 12:47 PM
Thanks. That rule definitely needs to be changed.

The us open doesnt punish rude fans (atmosphere) by throwing them out (pavel/agassi when they insulted his family mid serve). So whats stopping fans from yelling "out" all match long?

May have to sit front row and yell like crazy when fed has match pt against nadal :)

woodrow1029
02-23-2009, 12:51 PM
Thanks. That rule definitely needs to be changed.

The us open doesnt punish rude fans (atmosphere) by throwing them out (pavel/agassi when they insulted his family mid serve). So whats stopping fans from yelling "out" all match long?

May have to sit front row and yell like crazy when fed has match pt against nadal :)
I understand what you are saying, but the rule definitely does not need to be changed. This is such a common occurrence at tournaments, and sometimes difficult to determine if "OUT" or "AHHH" is called out, especially in a crowd of 23,000 people. You could be replaying points consistently.

This is much different than a ball coming on to the court, or a line umpire calling out incorrectly.

Joseph L. Barrow
02-24-2009, 08:53 AM
Nalbandian would've won the final easily. Ferrero had absolutely nothing left in the final.
It seems likely, but again, given Nalbandian's history of failure after failure when he had the chance to do something big, it isn't a certainty. One may think Ferrero had nothing left based on the severity of his loss, but this could be deceptive, since Roddick subsequently showed himself to generally own Ferrero anyway. I'm not trying to canonize a reality in which Ferrero pulls off the win, here, but far stranger things have happened.

If Nalbandian were to have won those points, this match would've been over before his collapse in the fourth set that allowed Roddick to get that point spread. That's like saying if Nalby had converted his MATCH POINTS he would still have been 10 points behind Roddick in the total tally and thus would've lost the match.
Obviously so; I was making mostly-separate arguments, the first being that Nalbandian, while unlucky, was far from guaranteed victory even if the luck factor had been neutral, and the second that Roddick ultimately outplayed Nalbandian on the whole, eg. the overall main factor in the result was Roddick winning a lot more points than Nalbandian, rather than somehow being gift-wrapped the match the way some portray it. Now, again, on the "If Nalbandian were to have won those points" discussion, I again emphasize, Nalbandian not being distracted by an annoying fan does not equal Nalbandian winning the point, rather it only means distraction doesn't cause his loss of a point he may or may not have gone on to win. Furthermore, if we grant that he does go on to win that point, this does not ensure him of victory either unless he wins the next point, this being against Roddick's serve- and we do know that in real life, Roddick dominated that point, though I grant that it may or may not have gone the same way in this scenario. Of course, then, if Roddick (after losing the 7-all point in this scenario) does win that point, he is not guaranteed of victory either, as this obviously still only breaks him even in the tiebreak. The point of all this is that there is absolutely no certainty about what "would" have happened had had the fan not yelled "out" during the tiebreak. What DID happen, though, is that, fully within the rules, Roddick won more points, more sets, more games, and the match.

It could further be pointed out that this interference effects BOTH guys, eg. Roddick no doubt also heard the fan yell, and he could have let himself become distracted and netted his shot or somesuch, but he didn't. There is a certain degree of luck in all sporting events, and Nalbandian is far from being the first or worst victim of misfortune this sport has ever seen. Even Roddick has had his unlucky matches, like the 2004 Wimbledon final, in which Roddck was on a roll up a break in the third at one set all, but a rain delay at an inopportune time stopped his momentum and Federer promptly turned it around afterwards, not to mention Federer achieved set point in one tight set off a very lucky net chord.

Chadwixx
02-24-2009, 09:25 AM
I understand what you are saying, but the rule definitely does not need to be changed. This is such a common occurrence at tournaments, and sometimes difficult to determine if "OUT" or "AHHH" is called out, especially in a crowd of 23,000 people. You could be replaying points consistently.

This is much different than a ball coming on to the court, or a line umpire calling out incorrectly.

They should make an exception for times when the idiot fan is seated right above the linesjudge. There is no way for the player to know who called it when they are that close.

Very few times have i seen someone stop play like nalbandian did.

FD3S
02-24-2009, 09:37 AM
Moose made a pretty good post on this from this thread:

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=215709&page=10

Chadwixx
02-24-2009, 10:20 AM
He imply's that nalbandian tried to make the shot and continued playing normally.

He stopped moving his feet and slapped a forhand (anyone in this forum could have made) out.

He also imply's "could have thrown Roddick off" when the point was over on the following shot. Its not like roddick hit another shot after the call.

Joseph L. Barrow
02-24-2009, 11:02 AM
He imply's that nalbandian tried to make the shot and continued playing normally.

He stopped moving his feet and slapped a forhand (anyone in this forum could have made) out..
No, Nalbandian is clearly still moving his feet when he nets the forehand. However, his stroke does look uncertain.

He also imply's "could have thrown Roddick off" when the point was over on the following shot. Its not like roddick hit another shot after the call.
The shot Roddick hit WAS after the yell, although admittedly he may have been committed enough to the stroke at that point that even a real out call wouldn't have effected him.

tangerine
08-30-2009, 03:26 PM
Roddick/Nalbandian USO SF 2003 is on ESPN Classic right now!

Great match. Andy's serving to save MP was brilliant. Totally deserved win for him. Nalbandian just doesn't have the goods to win a tough five set match. :cool:

ubermeyer
08-30-2009, 04:16 PM
No, it wasn't actually called out, but rather some audience member stupidly yelled "out," which confused Nalbandian and perhaps caused him to net the next shot. Notice the umpire warning the fans over the microphone not to say "out" after that point.

WTF? They didn't replay the point? That's ********.

clayman2000
08-30-2009, 04:54 PM
Look of it this way. If Nalbandian wins the USO 03, maybe then he has a lot more confidence, and beats Federer in the 04 AO. Then JCF maybe wins the AO, becomes no 2, Roddick stays no 1. Then maybe Federer doesnt gain that confidence and stays a streaky player. Maybe then Roddick wins Wimby 04, and doesnt get caught up with trying to beat Federer. Maybe then he goes farther in the USO 04 and 05. Maybe then Roddick, and Federer get in a dogfight for no 1 in 04 and 05, and then when Nadal emerges he runs the show.

Who knows

tangerine
08-30-2009, 04:58 PM
WTF? They didn't replay the point? That's ********.
Why should they replay the point? Nalbandian was the dumb one for stopping play. Roddick was still playing and wasn't affected by the fan's outburst at all.

GuillermoR
08-30-2009, 05:08 PM
Nalbandian, the most talented player to ever step on a tennis court.

Bhagi Katbamna
08-30-2009, 05:10 PM
Yes it was in and called in. The fan said "out" just a bit before or after Roddick hit it. Nalbandian netted an easy forehand because of the fan. But, he ended up losing set 4 and 5. That no one can blame on the fan.

woodrow1029
08-30-2009, 05:58 PM
WTF? They didn't replay the point? That's ********.
because that's the rule..

onyxrose81
08-30-2009, 07:38 PM
I hadn't watched the match for years and now that I have, I don't understand where the myth that Nalby's loss was because of that point came from. It happened just before Roddick hit so Andy should have been the most affected. He ignored it and put the ball back into play. That fan was an asshat but he certainly didn't cause Nalbandian to then stink up the joint the next two sets.

VivalaVida
08-30-2009, 07:42 PM
Why should they replay the point? Nalbandian was the dumb one for stopping play. Roddick was still playing and wasn't affected by the fan's outburst at all.

No need to take shots at Nalbandian, considering Roddick cries like a b himself when fans talk during game play.

grafselesfan
08-30-2009, 07:45 PM
Look of it this way. If Nalbandian wins the USO 03, maybe then he has a lot more confidence, and beats Federer in the 04 AO. Then JCF maybe wins the AO, becomes no 2, Roddick stays no 1. Then maybe Federer doesnt gain that confidence and stays a streaky player. Maybe then Roddick wins Wimby 04, and doesnt get caught up with trying to beat Federer. Maybe then he goes farther in the USO 04 and 05. Maybe then Roddick, and Federer get in a dogfight for no 1 in 04 and 05, and then when Nadal emerges he runs the show.

Who knows

Ferrero obtained an injury during the 04 AO semis and was destroyed by Federer after Federer had fairly tough matches with both Hewitt and Nalbandian. Other than his 03 U.S Open run Ferrero has never beaten any top hard court players in hard court slams or even hardly ever on hard courts in general. In short your hypothetical part of Ferrero winning the 04 AO even had Federer been taken out was never happening.