Why so much Murray hate?

Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by jamesblakefan#1, Sep 8, 2009.

  1. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    The British see Murray in a completely different light than others and for understandable reasons. For them, he's the best they've produced in a long time and he's definitely a top 5 player at the moment. Murray is just the excuse - the British really really want to be able to celebrate a tennis champion of their own - someone like Roger for the swiss and Nadal for the spaniards.

    Problem is, if you objectively look at Murray and his achievements, sure, he's a great player on a given day, having beaten the likes of Roger, Nadal, Djokovic and others on big stages like the Master's series, but there seems to be a disconnect between the "hype" and the reality.

    Here's the hype:
    The demand of respect from the British media, his rabid fans and somewhat from Murray's own behavior and statements. I remember something similar from Djokovic fans when he first came on the scene.

    The reality:
    With peers like Roger and Rafa, whose achievements in the past few years on the biggest stages in the sport, when a lot is on the line, has been so stellar, Murray has a long way to go before he's talked about in the same breath as those two. Also, there are a bunch of other players who don't get as much press, but are contenders in their own right. Murray is put on pedestal ahead of them - people like Djokovic and Del Po.


    The Hype:
    Murray is the most talented player ever to play the sport, has the tennis IQ equivalent of Einstein and has already hit the shots which should be enshrined alongside Roger's and Rafa's on youtube tribute videos.

    The Reality:
    Murray is definitely talented and it reflects in his ranking position. He's probably a thinking player who relies a bit more on guile but at the end of the day, that's not what matters, its the Ws. There are different types of players on tour - some talented and tennis-smart, others improvisational and yet others who rely on heart and their enjoyment of the fight. No one style is better than the other. The only proof is in the pudding - which is, how this the style translate into wins when it matters most. Sure he hits pretty shots sometimes off that backhand, but compared to Roger's inside out forehand against Haas at the FO that saved his match, or Rafa's stupendous DTL shot against Roger during the Wimby 08 tiebreak, where are his memorable shots when it most matters? He lost meekly to Cilic yesterday.

    Also the pusher moniker is justified. If you cannot dictate play when you want to, is the guile part really guile or just a lack of options? Nadal for the longest time was called a pusher. He's really not. Try giving him a short ball and see. Yesterday's match against Monfils is a great example. Rafa can step in, force action with authority, finish points at the net and make his opponents go for more than they are capable of. Murray doesn't have the instinct (or ability?) to force action similarly. He's content to hit from the baseline and relies on his opponent's mistakes more than his own offense. Even when the opponent is playing really well, he does not seem to be able to shift gears.

    Hype:
    Master's series shields are the sh$t and all those 3 set matches he's won matter.

    Reality:
    Put all his trophies so far on one side and make him an offer - a USO trophy with memorable wins against Rafa and Roger along the way OR all those trophies he has now. I doubt he would pick against a slam trophy and that's the reality. Everyone wants the big prize. The small prizes are definitely important for a player coming up, but when his competition is a guy who has 15 majors and another who has 6, they are not looking for small fish to fry.
     
    #51
  2. usmeagle91

    usmeagle91 New User

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    35
    That's just it though. Maybe deep down he's content with winning all the other events, and that's why he isn't as motivated as the others to win a slam? To me he seems a whole different person playing in the Masters tournament. I mean, why can he beat Fed at lower level events, but lose at Grand slams? Obviously because he isn't as motivated, and that's why Federer and Nadal don't think he's much of a "favorite", or a threat to them.
     
    #52
  3. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    I think it's the opposite, he actually wants it too much and gets tight on big occasions, such as the Roddick match at Wimbledon this year. Another aspect is the pressure from the British media to win a slam, most British people don't even know about the Masters Shields and Queens is usually the time each year where they need to get updated on how well Murray has done that year.
     
    #53
  4. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    Its not because of him, its because of the others. The other top players play to peak at the Slams which carry the most status and ranking point rewards. If Roger is judged only on his 3-set results this year, then there's no way he could have won 2 majors and been in the finals of the third out of the 3 majors so far. Clearly, Roger's capable of much more but he does not push himself as much at the 3-setters anymore because he does not need to. He has done that a zillion times when he was coming up.
     
    #54
  5. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,208
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    He's a pusher. Pushers aren't real players.
     
    #55
  6. usmeagle91

    usmeagle91 New User

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    35
    Yea, but Murray does push himself at these lower levels. Sure, Roger has won something like 48 non GS events, so he's not too worried about losing or winning those, but Murray is. I know Murray wants it, but maybe not enough or you would think he would realize that you need to be aggressive. He probably thinks that how he won the other events is how he should play, but the Grand Slams are a whole other animal.
     
    #56
  7. CaptainInsano

    CaptainInsano New User

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    95
    Attitude.

    When things don't go his way, he whines and complain. Can't give credit to other players. And believes it's simply 1 or 2 matches that differentiate him from a record-breaking Federer..."


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/tennis/8208463.stm

    "It's not that far. It's a matter of a couple of the matches," he said. "I know it's a long way from losing the semi finals [at Wimbledon] to winning but that would have made a huge difference.

    "I would be very close to Roger in the rankings if I had won those two matches from the semis onwards.

    "That's really the only difference - getting a Slam - between being number one and two. The other tournaments has been pretty similar."
     
    #57
  8. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    Yeah he can talk up his chances all he wants, but he hasn't produced where it matters most. I especially don't understand his constant comparison with Roger. Even Nadal, who has beaten Roger in the finals of the FO, AO and Wimby is more humble about his position. And truth be told, that's more powerful than talking up one's achievements. Everyone knows when Roger faces Rafa what he's up against - doesn't matter if Rafa is no.1, 2 or 3.
     
    #58
  9. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,760
    Location:
    VA Beach
    He'd probably double bagel your arse in 15 minutes...
     
    #59
  10. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    He's talking about rankings, Djokovic has twice been a match win away from world number two and failed to do it, so he's right in saying the difference between rankings is not that much.

    Also he's not trying to imply that being number one would make him better than Federer career wise, but the rankings give an idication of who is the better player at a particular time.
     
    #60
  11. cknobman

    cknobman Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2007
    Messages:
    6,076
    Location:
    Saudi Arabia
    I dislike him because of: his on court personality, defensive game, constant hype from the media, and looks.
     
    #61
  12. ClubHoUno

    ClubHoUno Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,150
    Location:
    Scandinavia, Europe
    Murray is the one top player I just hate to watch and here are all my reasons:

    1. He's a pusher
    2. He yells 'Come on' all the time
    3. He looks like a dork and acts like one too on the courts
    4. He plays in the ugliest Fred Perry cloth on earth
    5. He's scottish, yet all the UK guys seem to focus on the fact that he's a Brit too
    6. On top of that he's a pale red head gut with an angry nerdy personality :)
     
    #62
  13. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130

    Post a photo of yourself up here then so we can all swoon over your adonis-like features then?
     
    #63
  14. john5527

    john5527 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2008
    Messages:
    410
    Location:
    Chicago
    I don't hate Murray, I just don't like watching him play, which is why I don't watch most of his matches unless he is in a grand slam event. Then it's just to see him lose.:)
     
    #64
  15. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,208
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    IT wouldn't take him that long :)
     
    #65
  16. pmerk34

    pmerk34 Legend

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2007
    Messages:
    5,208
    Location:
    L. Island, NY
    #66
  17. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    Pretty depressing thought: going by that guide Murray is the only 7.0 player from Britain atm. No other players in the top 200.

    Although he's not a real player so he doesn't count ;)
     
    #67
  18. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    WTH are the British so enamored with having a Brit champion. Just enjoy Roger like the rest of us do. He's a champion for the whole world, not just Switzerland.
     
    #68
  19. jamesblakefan#1

    jamesblakefan#1 G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2007
    Messages:
    15,760
    Location:
    VA Beach
    Even I know not everyone SHOULD be a Federer fan, that's like saying no one should have cheered for Henman when Sampras was out there. Either way, don't patronize people for their choice of who they cheer for.
     
    #69
  20. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    If aliens ever challenge us to a tennis match to decide the fate of the earth I would support him.

    Never under any other circumstances.
     
    #70
  21. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    Haha that's a good one. No, I don't mean to stop you guys from cheering for Murray. What I don't get is how BADLY you guys want him to win everything in sight. Instead, if you guys enjoyed him for what he is and ALSO the current best like Roger, Rafa and others, then his success will come when it comes and it won't feel as bad every time he loses.
     
    #71
  22. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Your'e right. We've had so many champions these last seven decades; we've got champions coming out of our arses - it's a toughie why we want Murray to do well.
     
    #72
  23. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579
    Who ever said that? Two slam titles in his career would do me nicely.
     
    #73
  24. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    How about India, or Zambia or Singapore or Nepal or Egypt......shall I go on? What does nationality have to do with cheering for a player in an individual sport? I guess my question is, why would a British champion who has won say a single slam be more important to you than say the best player to have played in perhaps all of history. Why the parochialism?
     
    #74
  25. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    I guess being from the same country (or in my case just down the road) makes you feel a little more connected to him than anyone else.

    Why does anyone support their national team or player at anything?
     
    #75
  26. nikdom

    nikdom Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    4,725
    Location:
    Tennisville
    See where there is a definite face off between nations like in a soccer match, its understandable to cheer for one's country. Even then, its possible to enjoy the opposing teams' players. Maradona or Pele were not Englishmen but do you not think what they did was great? In my country of origin, India, we cheered for our own cricket teams always but it never stopped me from appreciating the Aussies or the West Indians or even the Pakistanis and Sri Lankans.

    Also, what if the top 10 had 4 Britishers? Would you not be cheering for one that was your favorite over another? So at the end of the day, its more about individuals in sports (in general) and tennis in particular - at least for me.
     
    #76
  27. Weathered33

    Weathered33 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2009
    Messages:
    130
    Of course I can appreciate Federer's game but I don't see why I should support a player just because he's the best but I shouldn't support the guy from my own country.

    And if there was another British player in the top 10 but he was English I would probably support Murray anyway.

    If someone from Glasgow meets someone from Edinburgh he's a GLASWEGIAN, they then meet an Englishman they both become SCOTTISH! If those 3 guys meet a Frenchman they become BRITISH! If those 4 guys meet an American they suddenly become EUROPEANS! It's all very immature but that's just the way things are.

    And in regard to the Indian cricket team at least I don't burn effigys of Murray when he loses.
     
    #77
  28. DCM

    DCM Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Here today, probably here tomorrow...
    Don't know why so omany people hate murray :shrug:

    He' very entertaining and he will be a GS winner next year. I guess you guys are going to have to put up with him :)
     
    #78
  29. batz

    batz G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2009
    Messages:
    14,579

    The guy comes from a little town about 10 miles away from me, a town that has had more than its fair share of bad days. As Murray said in his presser yesterday, worse things have happened to him in life than losing to Cilic in R4 of the USO. It's hard for me not to be parochial and root for him. It doesn't mean I dislike Roger or anyone else; I admire all the top players and Roger in particular. But I'll never have the connection with him that I do with Murray.
     
    #79
  30. Gorecki

    Gorecki G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2007
    Messages:
    13,230
    Location:
    Puerto y Galgo....
    now this is the moment where i could take a low blow at you for some of the absurd claims you (and others) posted in the Serena hate thread... but since i respect you, ill refrain from that!
     
    #80
  31. norbac

    norbac Legend

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2008
    Messages:
    8,490
    What I don't get is how badly Fed fans want him to win everything in sight...while he's pretty much won it already... For me though, I don't really care that much if Andy ever wins a Slam, I just enjoy watching him play...it'd be awesome if he did win one someday though.
     
    #81

Share This Page