PDA

View Full Version : Do they actually want a British winner of this championship?


Destro
07-02-2012, 11:42 AM
I see they have scheduled Del Potro and Ferrer first up on Centre Court tomorrow, whilst Murray - Cilic is to continue on Court 1, with another shocking day of weather forecast.

What on Earth are they playing at? They could've booked Murray's place in the final by putting his match on Centre, and scheduling Del Potro - Ferrer and Tsonga fish for 2nd and 3rd on court 1 respectively.

Can someone please explain this madness? First it was slowing down the grass to limit Henman. Now this.

Can you imagine the USTA taking a decision that severely disadvantages one of their players hopes of winning? Not a chance in hell.

Mainad
07-02-2012, 12:43 PM
I see they have scheduled Del Potro and Ferrer first up on Centre Court tomorrow, whilst Murray - Cilic is to continue on Court 1, with another shocking day of weather forecast.

What on Earth are they playing at? They could've booked Murray's place in the final by putting his match on Centre, and scheduling Del Potro - Ferrer and Tsonga fish for 2nd and 3rd on court 1 respectively.

Can someone please explain this madness? First it was slowing down the grass to limit Henman. Now this.

Can you imagine the USTA taking a decision that severely disadvantages one of their players hopes of winning? Not a chance in hell.

It IS nonsense! Murray/Cilic should be first on Centre Court tomorrow. Their match has already started so what the heck is the point of risking delaying it even further if more rain is forecast for tomorrow!

Sheer basic lack of common sense. And some people on here have the audacity to accuse Wimbledon of conspiring to give Murray some sort of unfair advantage. If that was ever the case, it looks to be the weirdest, most ineffective conspiracy ever since conspiracies were first invented!

batz
07-02-2012, 12:47 PM
I see they have scheduled Del Potro and Ferrer first up on Centre Court tomorrow, whilst Murray - Cilic is to continue on Court 1, with another shocking day of weather forecast.

What on Earth are they playing at? They could've booked Murray's place in the final by putting his match on Centre, and scheduling Del Potro - Ferrer and Tsonga fish for 2nd and 3rd on court 1 respectively.

Can someone please explain this madness? First it was slowing down the grass to limit Henman. Now this.

Can you imagine the USTA taking a decision that severely disadvantages one of their players hopes of winning? Not a chance in hell.

Yeah - but the linespeople all favour Murray - that balances things out.

Forecast is that it will p1ss down all day tomorrow. Andrew Jarryd (sp?) needs a boot in the haw-maws.

joeri888
07-02-2012, 12:55 PM
Uhhh the rule is clear. Once a match has started it's finished on the same court. That's a defenite rule, at least at Wimby but I think at more tournaments

woodrow1029
07-02-2012, 01:06 PM
Yeah - but the linespeople all favour Murray - that balances things out.

Forecast is that it will p1ss down all day tomorrow. Andrew Jarryd (sp?) needs a boot in the haw-maws.

Jarrett

Uhhh the rule is clear. Once a match has started it's finished on the same court. That's a defenite rule, at least at Wimby but I think at more tournaments

Well, it's definitely a preference to finish on the court you start on; however, exceptions can be made, and there is no rule that you CANNOT continue a match on a court other than the one you start on. That said, it would need to cause a serious delay before they will move a match to another court, or the court they are on now needs to be damaged.

batz
07-02-2012, 01:22 PM
Jarrett



Well, it's definitely a preference to finish on the court you start on; however, exceptions can be made, and there is no rule that you CANNOT continue a match on a court other than the one you start on. That said, it would need to cause a serious delay before they will move a match to another court, or the court they are on now needs to be damaged.

Thank you.

Moose Malloy
07-02-2012, 02:43 PM
Can you imagine the USTA taking a decision that severely disadvantages one of their players hopes of winning? Not a chance in hell

Many times the USTA scheduled American players in the 2nd semi on Sat, giving them less rest time than the winner of the 1st semi(with the final on Sunday) and they used to have the womens final played after the 1st semi, so the 2nd semi would often end pretty late.

Sampras in '00 & '01 had to play the 2nd semi(while Safin & Hewitt played the 1st semi those years. look how that turned out)
Agassi, Mac, Connors also played the 2nd semi many times.

Henman may have played more 2 day matches than anyone in history at Wimbledon(everyone remembers the semi with Goran, but he was regularly scheduled 3rd on many times, due to reaching a wider tv audience at that time. and quite often he had his match suspended to darkness)

I'm kind of enjoying this after all the criticism of the USO not having a roof, the roof doesn't solve all weather problems, & Wimbledon has been really lucky with the weather last 3 years(in '91 almost the entire first week was rained out. a roof wouldn't really help much in that sort of scenario. will be very interesting to see if they can remain on schedule after tomorrow. looks like players in the bottom half may have to play 4 matches in 5 days(which was almost the norm in the very rainy 80s/90s at Wimbledon)

joeri888
07-03-2012, 03:28 AM
Jarrett



Well, it's definitely a preference to finish on the court you start on; however, exceptions can be made, and there is no rule that you CANNOT continue a match on a court other than the one you start on. That said, it would need to cause a serious delay before they will move a match to another court, or the court they are on now needs to be damaged.

I think I cannot name a single match ever at wimbledon that started and finished on different courts. You are the expert though mate, and I hope you can give some examples. I think it's never happened. They did not upgrade the Isner-Mahut match either, and also I think the rain is not a real concern to wimbledon yet at this point as to make a rare exception. There are plenty of matches still to be played and Murray's just one of them.

I wouldn't know why wimbledon would help someone to win either. They gotta make objective calls and run the tournament smoothly, not just joggle players around and let Murray play on centre court while his match has already started. Only if a men's match is not finished by the end of today, I think they might move it to first on centre tomorrow and may move the second QF to thursday for the men.

TeflonTom
07-03-2012, 03:58 AM
brits r lot less patriotic bout sports than yanks, ozzies, etc. specially individual sports. tabloid papers go nuts durin wimby n ppl will get 'henmania' or whateva the murray equiv is, but at the end of the day nobody really cares that much.

national pride is for stuff like football n rugby n cricket. 'britain' aint even a proper country, u wont find neone from uk who says their nationality is brtitish

90's Clay
07-03-2012, 06:27 AM
Looking at all this murray hype before the match, it seems they are doing EVERYTHING in their power to make sure it happens

Murrayfan31
07-03-2012, 06:44 AM
It's simple. Murray hates indoor conditions.

Frying Pan Forehand
07-03-2012, 06:58 AM
Murray will make the final for sure, only USO final level Del Potro could have done something to him(although del potro's form was not close to that). If he plays Djokovic then Murray in 5, if he plays Federer then probably Federer, anyone else => Murray in 4.

Mainad
07-03-2012, 08:17 AM
Looking at all this murray hype before the match, it seems they are doing EVERYTHING in their power to make sure it happens

What? Like refusing to re-schedule his match with Cilic to Centre Court to avoid more rain delays! If that's EVERYTHING they're doing, then they're not exactly doing all that much IMO!

woodrow1029
07-03-2012, 08:26 AM
I think I cannot name a single match ever at wimbledon that started and finished on different courts. You are the expert though mate, and I hope you can give some examples. I think it's never happened. They did not upgrade the Isner-Mahut match either, and also I think the rain is not a real concern to wimbledon yet at this point as to make a rare exception. There are plenty of matches still to be played and Murray's just one of them.

I wouldn't know why wimbledon would help someone to win either. They gotta make objective calls and run the tournament smoothly, not just joggle players around and let Murray play on centre court while his match has already started. Only if a men's match is not finished by the end of today, I think they might move it to first on centre tomorrow and may move the second QF to thursday for the men.

My point was simply that there is no hard rule that it can't be done. Obviously Mahut/Isner wouldn't have been moved after it started. There was no reason to. As I said it would take serious rain delays that could or a damaged court, but if they have to, they can.

Russeljones
07-03-2012, 09:05 AM
Murray's opponents should start with 11 footfaults against them and the roof should be closed only above Murray's part of the court.

batz
07-03-2012, 09:09 AM
Murray's opponents should start with 11 footfaults against them and the roof should be closed only above Murray's part of the court.

Now we're talking.

Russeljones
07-03-2012, 09:12 AM
Now we're talking.

He's a sure bet for the Olympics. The javelin competition could be made on Court 1 with the javelins landing in whatever half of the court Murray's opponent is currently occupying. ;)

Fedex
07-03-2012, 09:13 AM
I see they have scheduled Del Potro and Ferrer first up on Centre Court tomorrow, whilst Murray - Cilic is to continue on Court 1, with another shocking day of weather forecast.

What on Earth are they playing at? They could've booked Murray's place in the final by putting his match on Centre, and scheduling Del Potro - Ferrer and Tsonga fish for 2nd and 3rd on court 1 respectively.

Can someone please explain this madness? First it was slowing down the grass to limit Henman. Now this.

Can you imagine the USTA taking a decision that severely disadvantages one of their players hopes of winning? Not a chance in hell.

Totally agree. You have to laugh at the foreign players and coaches saying it's the fairest way when you know in their own country it would be the complete opposite.
Hewitt has played every one of his AO matches on the Rod Laver since 2001 as one example.
it's the fairest says Ivanisevic fcking BS coming from that part of the world.
Can you imagine the Croats and Serbs putting Cillic or Djokovic at a major disadvantage like this.
I mean come on, just sheer hypocrisy.

Russeljones
07-03-2012, 09:20 AM
Totally agree. You have to laugh at the foreign players and coaches saying it's the fairest way when you know in their own country it would be the complete opposite.
Hewitt has played every one of his AO matches on the Rod Laver since 2001 as one example.
it's the fairest says Ivanisevic fcking BS coming from that part of the world.
Can you imagine the Croats and Serbs putting Cillic or Djokovic at a major disadvantage like this.
I mean come on, just sheer hypocrisy.

Ironic way to end such a bigoted statement.

Sid_Vicious
07-03-2012, 09:56 AM
Many times the USTA scheduled American players in the 2nd semi on Sat, giving them less rest time than the winner of the 1st semi(with the final on Sunday) and they used to have the womens final played after the 1st semi, so the 2nd semi would often end pretty late.

Sampras in '00 & '01 had to play the 2nd semi(while Safin & Hewitt played the 1st semi those years. look how that turned out)
Agassi, Mac, Connors also played the 2nd semi many times.

Henman may have played more 2 day matches than anyone in history at Wimbledon(everyone remembers the semi with Goran, but he was regularly scheduled 3rd on many times, due to reaching a wider tv audience at that time. and quite often he had his match suspended to darkness)

I'm kind of enjoying this after all the criticism of the USO not having a roof, the roof doesn't solve all weather problems, & Wimbledon has been really lucky with the weather last 3 years(in '91 almost the entire first week was rained out. a roof wouldn't really help much in that sort of scenario. will be very interesting to see if they can remain on schedule after tomorrow. looks like players in the bottom half may have to play 4 matches in 5 days(which was almost the norm in the very rainy 80s/90s at Wimbledon)

Great post, Moose Malloy. With your amazing memory, people can't get away with make generalized statements about the past. :)

batz
07-03-2012, 12:34 PM
I think I cannot name a single match ever at wimbledon that started and finished on different courts. You are the expert though mate, and I hope you can give some examples. I think it's never happened. They did not upgrade the Isner-Mahut match either, and also I think the rain is not a real concern to wimbledon yet at this point as to make a rare exception. There are plenty of matches still to be played and Murray's just one of them.

I wouldn't know why wimbledon would help someone to win either. They gotta make objective calls and run the tournament smoothly, not just joggle players around and let Murray play on centre court while his match has already started. Only if a men's match is not finished by the end of today, I think they might move it to first on centre tomorrow and may move the second QF to thursday for the men.

Now you can name 2 ;)

woodrow1029
07-03-2012, 12:40 PM
Now you can name 2 ;)

You beat me to it. :-)

dominikk1985
07-03-2012, 02:11 PM
Many times the USTA scheduled American players in the 2nd semi on Sat, giving them less rest time than the winner of the 1st semi(with the final on Sunday) and they used to have the womens final played after the 1st semi, so the 2nd semi would often end pretty late.

Sampras in '00 & '01 had to play the 2nd semi(while Safin & Hewitt played the 1st semi those years. look how that turned out)
Agassi, Mac, Connors also played the 2nd semi many times.

Henman may have played more 2 day matches than anyone in history at Wimbledon(everyone remembers the semi with Goran, but he was regularly scheduled 3rd on many times, due to reaching a wider tv audience at that time. and quite often he had his match suspended to darkness)

I'm kind of enjoying this after all the criticism of the USO not having a roof, the roof doesn't solve all weather problems, & Wimbledon has been really lucky with the weather last 3 years(in '91 almost the entire first week was rained out. a roof wouldn't really help much in that sort of scenario. will be very interesting to see if they can remain on schedule after tomorrow. looks like players in the bottom half may have to play 4 matches in 5 days(which was almost the norm in the very rainy 80s/90s at Wimbledon)

The roof is more for making sure to put something on TV.

in the first 2 rounds there are nearly 200 matches men and women combined. so having one roof doesn't help much to get all those matches in if it rains the first week.

however it does ensure TV time and it also helps to close the thing when the final is on (or SFs). so a roof still is a good idea.

Towser83
07-03-2012, 02:49 PM
oh come on, the murray match had started so potentially needed less time to be completed. Plus it started out on that court which usually means it's finished on that court.So what's being argued here is Wimbledon need to go out of their way and set a precedent to give Murray an advantage?

sod that. He already has the advantage of a home crowd here. Thank god Djokovic and Federer don't have slams in their home countries cos I hate to see partisan crowds putting players off.

Why is it people always complain that Murray is screwed over. If he plays in the day, it's unfair cos he's battling heat (in the US and Australia) if he plays in the night it's not fair cos he has less rest, if he has a match on court one that's unfair...

look Murray won his match and now he's on centre and Djokovic might get rained off or the other match on court one. Now Murray has an advantage. That's the way it rolls.

But basically I don't believe in helping home players. Things should be fair and the best man wins. Murray is good enough to not need any special treatment anyway. I'm glad Wimbledon has some sense of fairness and it puts it above the other slams imo

Feņa14
07-03-2012, 03:33 PM
I personally don't have a problem that they put Murray on Court One again today, my problem is that he was on there in the first place.

Hewitt has played every match on the Rod Laver arena for the past however many years. I can understand in the early rounds if you want to put him on Court One if the other big seeds have a better looking match (a talented unseeded player like Nalbandian, Davydenko, Karlovic for instance). To put the home player out on Court One when he is playing someone he has previous with in big matches (Cilic beat him at the US Open, Murray beat him in the Australian Open semi's etc..), not to mention the winner of Queen's, instead of Federer, who had a fairly uninspiring looking match with Malisse, that's poor scheduling.

Moose Malloy
07-03-2012, 04:13 PM
Now you can name 2

Radwanksa-Kirilenko & what was the other one? Del Potro-Ferrer & Azarenka-Pazsek never started on other courts, right?

I guess its good to have the roof, but something seems wrong with moving in progress matches from other courts to Center. I guess that will now become almost common in the future.

nereis
07-03-2012, 05:25 PM
I personally don't have a problem that they put Murray on Court One again today, my problem is that he was on there in the first place.

Hewitt has played every match on the Rod Laver arena for the past however many years. I can understand in the early rounds if you want to put him on Court One if the other big seeds have a better looking match (a talented unseeded player like Nalbandian, Davydenko, Karlovic for instance). To put the home player out on Court One when he is playing someone he has previous with in big matches (Cilic beat him at the US Open, Murray beat him in the Australian Open semi's etc..), not to mention the winner of Queen's, instead of Federer, who had a fairly uninspiring looking match with Malisse, that's poor scheduling.

I'm also quite puzzled.

If you want to give your man the home court advantage then you have him play on the same court for every match in front of a crowd that's firmly on his side.