PDA

View Full Version : What if Federer played futbol instead?


FedFan_2009
06-25-2009, 02:39 PM
I think he'd be better then Beckham. Discuss! :twisted:

Blinkism
06-25-2009, 02:42 PM
Maybe, but he played as a kid and decided to play tennis instead.

I like to think he made that decision because he figured he wouldn't go as far in football as in tennis, so I don't think he'd be as good as Beckham.

Maybe as good as Frye or Magnin and the other Swiss players.

At best, probably a Ballack-style or Srna-style player. Fancy, but not the top of the top.

Tennis was a good choice!!!

malakas
06-25-2009, 02:51 PM
He would be much poorer and less successful.

4:57 Miler
06-25-2009, 02:58 PM
I'm sorry your comparing the greatest tennis player of all time to the most overrated footballer of the last decade. What did Beckham ever do exactly?
So he scored some freekicks once upon a time - news flash Mihalovic once scored a hatrick of freekicks in an entire game - people stopped talking about it after a week.
The British Press hyped Beckham to the max because he had the good looks and flashiness on the field to become a big star - whereas in actual fact all he ever was was a weak man's Andrea Pirlo.
This is what infuriates me about football - the press can decide who these apparent great footballers are (Ronaldinho - does loads of tricks then gets tackled - not a team player - Barca are amazing without him, Robinho - flashy player with no real ability at all,) - whereas if Beckham brought his apparent talent to the world of tennis he would be exiting at the early rounds of grand slams.

In regards to your actual question, I think a number of top tennis players would make great footballers but wouldn't you rather be a tennis player? I mean, your in charge of your own fate, it is a more varied game, more cultured tour and it doesn't matter how much the press hate you (ie.Andy Murray) they can't deny your talents.

gj011
06-25-2009, 03:00 PM
Federer could not be successful in any team sport.

Blue Drop
06-25-2009, 03:04 PM
Federer could not be successful in any team sport.


Coming from the one who plays oh so well with others ...

FlamEnemY
06-25-2009, 03:06 PM
He would be much poorer and less successful.

Somewhat ironic, ocnsidering most pro football players are richer than tennis players :)

I kinda agree with gj. Federer seems like the type who likes things to be done his own way. Not that it's a bad thing (14).

The-Fed-Express
06-25-2009, 03:13 PM
I'm sorry your comparing the greatest tennis player of all time to the most overrated footballer of the last decade. What did Beckham ever do exactly?
So he scored some freekicks once upon a time - news flash Mihalovic once scored a hatrick of freekicks in an entire game - people stopped talking about it after a week.
.
Hold on a minute. Just because Beckham became a superstar does not mean that he was once on of the best players in the world.

From the period 95' -02' Beckham was definitely one of the best players in the world. He was an integral part of United's treble win in 99' and their retaining of the Premier League in 99/00 and 00/01. And then 01/02 was probably his best season for United where he scored around 15 goals in all competitions from the wing and had countless assists. During these 7 years Beckham was undoubtedly one of the best players in the world but his move to Real Madrid signalled the beginning of his downfall.

Some free kicks? - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adYgHunQEl0

On topic: I haven't the slightest clue! Is there any clips of him playing football? I'm sure he still has the touch anyway!

ChanceEncounter
06-25-2009, 03:19 PM
This is what infuriates me about football - the press can decide who these apparent great footballers are (Ronaldinho - does loads of tricks then gets tackled - not a team player - Barca are amazing without him, Robinho - flashy player with no real ability at all,) - whereas if Beckham brought his apparent talent to the world of tennis he would be exiting at the early rounds of grand slams.

Don't like those Brazilian players?

pound cat
06-25-2009, 03:22 PM
Every time someone knocked him down, he'd be crying. Glad he chose tennis where crying from winners/losers is OK.

ChanceEncounter
06-25-2009, 03:24 PM
Every time someone knocked him down, he'd be crying. Glad he chose tennis where crying from winners/losers is OK.
How would that be different from futbol as it is now?

FedFan_2009
06-25-2009, 03:24 PM
Federer would go down as greater then Ronaldo.

4:57 Miler
06-25-2009, 03:27 PM
'From the period 95' -02' Beckham was definitely one of the best players in the world. He was an integral part of United's treble win in 99' and their retaining of the Premier League in 99/00 and 00/01. And then 01/02 was probably his best season for United where he scored around 15 goals in all competitions from the wing and had countless assists. During these 7 years Beckham was undoubtedly one of the best players in the world but his move to Real Madrid signalled the beginning of his downfall.'


Well I definitely don't agree. Roy Keane carried that team to the treble (and don't mention the final that Keane wasn't in where Man Utd had the luck of God on their side - I think Bayern Munich hit the post about a dozen times) - you can't count team success as an individual's attributes - look at the average Germany sides that Ballack has carried to major finals, look at the Argentina team that Maradonna carried to the World Cup - Beckham was a decent flashy player who got carried to major successes.

I'm not a hater - I think Beckham appears a very nice man in real life (obviously I don't him so I don't know for sure) but having watched him play football for years and when everyone used to rave about him I always used to think - what are people raving about exactly? Pirlo is the Beckham the British press wanted him to be.

If you look at the comparison of the amount of freekicks taken to the amount of freekicks actually scored Beckham would be way down on the list.

The fact that Beckham became a superstar is what led people to believe he was a great footballer - not the other way round,

EtePras
06-25-2009, 03:58 PM
People would call this the strongest era like they did before Federer dominated everyone.

kOaMaster
06-25-2009, 04:18 PM
who knows...he was good in football, of course, but not as impressive as in tennis. there are many great football players at the age of 12 coming out just "normal" guys.

tend to say that it was good for himself not to be in a team and playing on his own.

Jchurch
06-25-2009, 04:41 PM
I believe he said he chose tennis because he liked to do his own thing.

pricey_aus
06-25-2009, 05:02 PM
Wasn't Rafa ridiculously good at Football aswell? And Murray? Maybe they should make a ATP team.

SempreSami
06-25-2009, 05:18 PM
Well I definitely don't agree. Roy Keane carried that team to the treble (and don't mention the final that Keane wasn't in where Man Utd had the luck of God on their side - I think Bayern Munich hit the post about a dozen times) - you can't count team success as an individual's attributes - look at the average Germany sides that Ballack has carried to major finals, look at the Argentina team that Maradonna carried to the World Cup - Beckham was a decent flashy player who got carried to major successes.

I'm not a hater - I think Beckham appears a very nice man in real life (obviously I don't him so I don't know for sure) but having watched him play football for years and when everyone used to rave about him I always used to think - what are people raving about exactly? Pirlo is the Beckham the British press wanted him to be.

If you look at the comparison of the amount of freekicks taken to the amount of freekicks actually scored Beckham would be way down on the list.

The fact that Beckham became a superstar is what led people to believe he was a great footballer - not the other way round,

Rubbish, he is/was a brilliant player. Sure the media frenzy about him became a bit ridiculous and that's why Fergie got rid but his crosses were missed in the years between him going and Ronaldo pwning.

Grass_for_cows
06-25-2009, 06:00 PM
He would dominate until Rafa takes up futbol, then he'll just cry a lot.

GraniteHoosier
06-25-2009, 06:03 PM
Geez, he's kind of thin I think he would get hurt if Polamalu hit him just once.


Oh, did you mean the other football? Sorry, I'm American. :)

quest01
06-25-2009, 06:04 PM
Roddick, Nadal, Agassi, and Hewitt would have probably won a few more grand slams.

lawrence
06-25-2009, 06:50 PM
Every time someone knocked him down, he'd be crying. Glad he chose tennis where crying from winners/losers is OK.

yeah and diving is OK too

here are your fifa world champions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fr2oTmQ0GwM

pathetic

Tennis_Bum
06-25-2009, 08:21 PM
Federer could not be successful in any team sport.

Did Fed win a gold metal with Warinka? Or is it that Fed played both sides and Warinka just took credit for the win? What is your point?

I thought double is a team sport? Is it still so, or gj011 changed it to something else.

TheNatural
06-26-2009, 12:01 AM
Has Federer actually ever shown any aptitude for futbol? Was he ever any good at futbol as a kid like Nadal was?

Blinkism
06-26-2009, 12:05 AM
Ok, I see all your points about Beckham but I think the OP just used Beckham as an example (very commercial name, easily recognizable, even by the most casual of followers).

Let's just say Shevchenko, Ronaldo, or Zidane, instead? Or Pele, Puskas, and Best (for the older generations)...

joeri888
06-26-2009, 12:06 AM
He would probably reach high amature levels but I find it hard to believe he'd be a pro. No international pro anyway. Absolutely no proof to back that up. I think tennistop pro's mostly have a great feel for ballgames, but there's a lot more needed. I don't know whether Federer would have had the time to 'develop' mentally in a teamsport like Soccer.

of course people are making fun of Federer again, but he's got a lot going for him. Don't think he'd be famous though.

kOaMaster
06-26-2009, 02:17 AM
Has Federer actually ever shown any aptitude for futbol? Was he ever any good at futbol as a kid like Nadal was?

up to the age of 12 he was playing tennis and soccer both on a very good level (football @ at first team of concordia basel in that category).

malakas
06-26-2009, 02:21 AM
Somewhat ironic, ocnsidering most pro football players are richer than tennis players :)

I kinda agree with gj. Federer seems like the type who likes things to be done his own way. Not that it's a bad thing (14).

yes,but who football player is richer than Federer??as you know in tennis,money depends on results day in and day out,in contrast with football.That's why a guy like Fed who consistently wins big tournaments,is going to make more money than even the top footballers.I don't know about the ridiculous C.Ronaldo though.:roll:

I also agree that Fed wouldn't be that successful in a team.A guy like Safin on the other hand,would be so much more successful playin a team sport.

Sentinel
06-26-2009, 02:56 AM
We would never have had nadal_freak, vero and other fed haterz :-(

valiant
06-26-2009, 03:08 AM
Becks and Federer are my favourite players along with Sachin Tendulkar. Most of you might not know the latter.

And I am surre Fed took tennis coz he thought he played it better than football. :D

marpiw
06-26-2009, 04:05 AM
Personally I think he would be a bad football player because there is no team called FEDERER.
He is good individually and I think that team sport is something completely different.So dont change an excellent Tennis player for a bad Football player...

ESP#1
06-26-2009, 05:40 AM
Think Fed wouldve made on average to good futbol player, so overall i think he made the right choice because he is the greatest tennis player ever imo,

I think Nadal might have been better than his uncle at futbol, cant say he wouldnt have been a great defender, he would've won the euro instead of wimbly last year

GoaLaSSo
06-26-2009, 06:28 AM
in a way its easier to make it as a footballer/soccerplayer.
There are a lot more of them but the 40th best footballer in the world makes a lot more money and has more stability then the 40th best tennis player in the world.
i don't think fed would have been a superstar but maybe a good player.

Also beckham was a great player. One of the best. I don't particularly like him but he was an extremely hard worker and deserved his fame.

batz
06-26-2009, 07:01 AM
If Roger had taken up football he would have eclipsed anything achieved by Pele or Maradona.


After that, he would single-handedly have won The Grand National, The Boat Race and all four Golf majors, before finding a cure for cancer, bringing peace to the middle east, stopping gloabl warming and being the first human to fly under his own steam.

FedFan_2009
06-26-2009, 07:03 AM
If Roger had taken up football he would have eclipsed anything achieved by Pele or Maradona.


After that, he would single-handedly have won The Grand National, The Boat Race and all four Golf majors, before finding a cure for cancer, bringing peace to the middle east, stopping gloabl warming and being the first human to fly under his own steam.

Don't forget he would have:

* invented workable nuclear fusion reactor
* telekineses
* play WR for the NY Giants

VivalaVida
06-26-2009, 07:06 AM
Federer could not be successful in any team sport.
Neither will Djokovic. He would probably retire when his team will need him. har har

kOaMaster
06-26-2009, 08:22 AM
in a way its easier to make it as a footballer/soccerplayer.
There are a lot more of them but the 40th best footballer in the world makes a lot more money and has more stability then the 40th best tennis player in the world.
i don't think fed would have been a superstar but maybe a good player.

Also beckham was a great player. One of the best. I don't particularly like him but he was an extremely hard worker and deserved his fame.

but maybe there are also 20 times more licenced and/or professional players than tennis (that is just a guess, but not too far from reality I'd say), ever thought of that?

if you become that famous in all over the world and not just in the sport you do, you really made it.
I don't think there are many football players in the present with a worldwide higher publicity...maybe it's cristiano ronaldo, maybe beckham. not even sure about those two.

theduh
06-26-2009, 11:52 AM
Neither will Djokovic. He would probably retire when his team will need him. har har

Not retire, but probably out for the entire season.

Mick
06-26-2009, 12:01 PM
there would be no K90 without Federer

RCizzle65
06-26-2009, 12:04 PM
Wasn't Rafa ridiculously good at Football aswell? And Murray? Maybe they should make a ATP team.

That would be interesting, I'd watch even though I'm not a big fan of soccer. I'd also be interesting to see if people like Federer and Djokovic played together, to see if they ever passed each other the ball.

SempreSami
06-26-2009, 12:09 PM
Ok, I see all your points about Beckham but I think the OP just used Beckham as an example (very commercial name, easily recognizable, even by the most casual of followers).

Let's just say Shevchenko, Ronaldo, or Zidane, instead? Or Pele, Puskas, and Best (for the older generations)...

Shevchenko's a **** example, Beckham might have been on a decline since he joined Madrid but he's still been able to put in some decent performances, whereas Shevchenko was past it when he joined Chelsea and it shows.