PDA

View Full Version : Wilander about Rederer - Interesting find Funny!!!


tennis_bob
03-31-2009, 10:38 PM
This is from wikipedia:

Wilander created a minor controversy during the 2006 French Open when he criticized several top players, including Roger Federer and Kim Clijsters, as lacking the competitive edge to beat their toughest rivals. [COLOR="Yellow"]After Federer's 16, 61, 64, 76 loss to Nadal in the final, Wilander said that "Federer, today, unfortunately came out with no balls... you don't find too many champions in any sport in the world without heart or balls. He might have them, but against Nadal they shrink to a very small size and it's not once, it's every time."
In the aftermath of these comments, fans coined the neologism "Wilanders" as a humorous synonym for "balls", denoting a competitive spirit and tenacity to win.

tennis_bob
03-31-2009, 10:39 PM
Wilander about Federer - Interesting find Funny!!!

tudwell
03-31-2009, 10:52 PM
I like the typo better. It's like I'm in an episode of Scooby-Doo.

FEDEXP
03-31-2009, 11:27 PM
This is really old news and there have many threads about it. what Wilkipedia does not tell you is that Wilander was drunk at the time of the interview.

Leublu tennis
04-01-2009, 12:51 AM
It may be an old story but not all of us have heard it. Thanks for the post.

vtmike
04-01-2009, 05:10 AM
This is from wikipedia:

Wilander created a minor controversy during the 2006 French Open when he criticized several top players, including Roger Federer and Kim Clijsters, as lacking the competitive edge to beat their toughest rivals. [COLOR="Yellow"]After Federer's 1–6, 6–1, 6–4, 7–6 loss to Nadal in the final, Wilander said that "Federer, today, unfortunately came out with no balls... you don't find too many champions in any sport in the world without heart or balls. He might have them, but against Nadal they shrink to a very small size and it's not once, it's every time."
In the aftermath of these comments, fans coined the neologism "Wilanders" as a humorous synonym for "balls", denoting a competitive spirit and tenacity to win.

Maybe thats why Federer has 6 more Grand Slams than Wilander...Wilander should've tried shrinking his balls to win more grand slams! :mrgreen:

tennis_bob
04-01-2009, 05:56 AM
I find Wilander's comment to be more relevant after last French Open (down in three), Wimbledon, and Australian Open. Definitely Roger does have a mental block when playing Rafa, being unable to take advantage of so many break chances. Not sure about shrinking balls, but it is funny.

On the other hand, Roger has become sexually active as we all know, maybe there is some truth to it now, LOL...

MordredSJT
04-01-2009, 06:00 AM
I've actually seen the video of the interview...Wilander wasn't drunk, but it was a very long interview covering a lot of ground and he was drinking a beer at the time...

What I've never heard anyone mention in the threads and discussions surrounding this topic is that during the course of talking about Federer having no balls against Nadal (by which he basically meant that Fed didn't have the courage or fortitude to do what he had to do in order to win, against Nadal only)...Wilander admitted straight out that he played Wimbledon every time with no balls himself.

He said he served and volleyed at Wimbledon because everyone said that you had to serve and volley there to win. He never really believed in it himself, but he did it anyway. He didn't really commit to it mentally though...he played with no balls. The same way Federer played in 2006.

nikdom
04-01-2009, 07:51 AM
Where were all of you for the past 2 years? Hiding under a rock? This is OLDE

http://www.funnyforumpics.com/forums/Repost/1/Old-BTF.jpg

hoodjem
04-01-2009, 07:57 AM
Ruminating Roger was ruthlessly rejected, reduced, and ruined by a rialed-up, relentless Rafa.

bolo
04-01-2009, 07:58 AM
Drunk?, hard to tell, but imo he definitely had a few drinks. Still coherent though.

Imo wilander is a big federer fan (although always impressed by nadal, even in 2005), was probably a little disappointed after that result, especially after federer took that 1st set so easily.

tennis_hand
04-01-2009, 08:41 AM
well, somehow his comments are true.

fed played the same games against everyone. he wins most, but can't win against Nadal. and Fed doesn't do anything about it and still plays the same way and still lose to Nadal. Wilander is right.

bolo
04-01-2009, 09:05 AM
well, somehow his comments are true.

fed played the same games against everyone. he wins most, but can't win against Nadal. and Fed doesn't do anything about it and still plays the same way and still lose to Nadal. Wilander is right.

yes, wilander pegged it in 2006 when most people would have said it's too early to tell what's going to happen. Hoodjem's "ruminating" is a good word for what happens in their matches. But it all comes out of nadal's ability to impose his game on federer. It's no longer believable that federer is going to solve nadal on the fly.

Tennisplaya10
04-01-2009, 10:41 AM
wilander knows what hes talking about. he also predicted that nadals gonna win wimbledon before federer manages to win the french open.
john mcenroe on the other hand seems to know nothing about tennis. makes u wonder sometimes.. he talks utter nonsense.
he was so surprized when nadal won an indoors tournament on carpet even after doing well on grass and fast hard courts. he predicted that nadal couldnt win on carpet