What would the right way be to mention an injury, especially after a loss

[kragster]

We criticize all the top guys for any mention of injuries after their losses. Some of these injuries are probably more serious and some are more a case of exaggeration. On the one hand, we can't take the player's words as the complete truth but on the other hand it seems wrong to bash every player every single time because undoubtedly at least some of these injuries are legit.

So I pose the question - let's say a player is really injured. How would you want them to bring it up (if at all), in the wake of a loss.

a) No mention of the injury at all, completely dismiss any connection between injury and loss. Dont talk about it even if brought up.
b) No mention unless news reporters specifically ask about injury and then you can mention that it may have affected your serve/movement/fitness etc
c) Bring up injury freely even without being asked if players genuinely feels that it significantly affected their performance


Also what would the right time be for a player to mention an injury? Before a match looks like excuse making, after the match looks like a sore loser.

[dyldore]

A/B mix. I wouldn't bring it up unless asked, and if I did bring it up I would not take credit away from the other player, ex. my arm hurt, but X played great tennis today...or something like that.

[underground]

Say you've got injury but dismiss it quickly after that, or just give lots of credit to your opponent and don't see how you're affected etc.

[Murrayfan31]

You never say anything and take the loss like a man.

[Hood_Man]

Whenever. They'll get criticised for it based on how much the person dislikes them.

[Prisoner of Birth]

Originally Posted by Hood_Man

Whenever. They'll get criticised for it based on how much the person dislikes them.

Quoted for truth.

[DragonBlaze]

Originally Posted by Hood_Man

Whenever. They'll get criticised for it based on how much the person dislikes them.

This was basically my response as soon as I read the thread title. Spot on.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by kragster

We criticize all the top guys for any mention of injuries after their losses. Some of these injuries are probably more serious and some are more a case of exaggeration. On the one hand, we can't take the player's words as the complete truth but on the other hand it seems wrong to bash every player every single time because undoubtedly at least some of these injuries are legit.

So I pose the question - let's say a player is really injured. How would you want them to bring it up (if at all), in the wake of a loss.

a) No mention of the injury at all, completely dismiss any connection between injury and loss. Dont talk about it even if brought up.
b) No mention unless news reporters specifically ask about injury and then you can mention that it may have affected your serve/movement/fitness etc
c) Bring up injury freely even without being asked if players genuinely feels that it significantly affected their performance


Also what would the right time be for a player to mention an injury? Before a match looks like excuse making, after the match looks like a sore loser.

you want to label everyone on the same page with Nadal. Sorry, nadal is in a complete level when it comes to excuses after a loss, that's including MTO. He's the only player that fans/commentors(eg PMac) suspected his injuries. The difference is night and day.

[monfed]

Originally Posted by TMF

you want to label everyone on the same page with Nadal. Sorry, nadal is in a complete level when it comes to excuses after a loss, that's including MTO. He's the only player that fans/commentors(eg PMac) suspected his injuries. The difference is night and day.

EXACTLY! You absolutely got where the OP's getting at. Basically the OP is slinging mud on non-Nadal fans.

[ollinger]

Murrayfan31 illustrates why women have considerably longer lifespans on average than men -- because they don't have idiotic macho pride about their symptoms and are more likely to seek medical help for them. This pose of not mentioning injury after a match is an extension of that same silliness, that to be honest about your physical condition is either unmanly or unsporting, maybe both. It's foolishness. Answering a question honestly about your physical condition after a match is not demeaning to your opponent.

[gregor.b]

Originally Posted by ollinger

Murrayfan31 illustrates why women have considerably longer lifespans on average than men -- because they don't have idiotic macho pride about their symptoms and are more likely to seek medical help for them. This pose of not mentioning injury after a match is an extension of that same silliness, that to be honest about your physical condition is either unmanly or unsporting, maybe both. It's foolishness. Answering a question honestly about your physical condition after a match is not demeaning to your opponent.

In response to the question asked, I go with 'A'.

In response to the above comment, I go with ' If you are not fit enough to play,forfeit the match'.

If you are fit enough to play, do so and take it like a man if you lose.

[Phoenix1983]

Probably A or B.

[veroniquem]

Personally, I'd rather C, although most players are reluctant to do it because then, they get targeted for " excuse making". Ideally, the best thing would be: honesty above all and screw what other people think.

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by veroniquem

Personally, I'd rather C, although most players are reluctant to do it because then, they get targeted for " excuse making". Ideally, the best thing would be: honesty above all and screw what other people think.

True. No other fashion of mentioning it goes without criticism from the cheap seats (or, in Nadal's case, the expensive seats too). These guys can't win so may as well get it over and done with.

Sure, Federer has mentioned his niggles before during press conferences in what seemed like an undignified manner but (after the Wimbledon loss to Berdych for example) he handled it about as well as he could and it was done after that. Nadal, by contrast, reinvents history by talking about it 6 months later as if it was the only/primary reason he lost - it shows a lack of thoughtfulness or maturity on his part, a single-minded attitude which is obvious in all aspects of his tennis. It's what makes him so successful but is also what makes people dislike him.

The way Nadal acts during matches - in particular the timing of his medical time-outs - is poor sportsmanship. He does himself no favours in that he lacks the self-awareness to change (or, worse, he simply doesn't care what others think of him - a trait which made Michael Schumacher one of the most loathed sportspersons on earth). I'd like to think it was just something he did early in his career but his quirks (his OCD stuff etc) have not abated one bit - if anything they're increasing.

[intrepidish]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

True. No other fashion of mentioning it goes without criticism from the cheap seats (or, in Nadal's case, the expensive seats too). These guys can't win so may as well get it over and done with.

Sure, Federer has mentioned his niggles before during press conferences in what seemed like an undignified manner but (after the Wimbledon loss to Berdych for example) he handled it about as well as he could and it was done after that. Nadal, by contrast, reinvents history by talking about it 6 months later as if it was the only/primary reason he lost - it shows a lack of thoughtfulness or maturity on his part, a single-minded attitude which is obvious in all aspects of his tennis. It's what makes him so successful but is also what makes people dislike him.

The way Nadal acts during matches - in particular the timing of his medical time-outs - is poor sportsmanship. He does himself no favours in that he lacks the self-awareness to change (or, worse, he simply doesn't care what others think of him - a trait which made Michael Schumacher one of the most loathed sportspersons on earth). I'd like to think it was just something he did early in his career but his quirks (his OCD stuff etc) have not abated one bit - if anything they're increasing.

The paradigmatic message board delusional pundit/hater at work.

[tacou]

A) all the way. Like Roddick always said, if you decide to play you are 100%.

[Warmaster]

Originally Posted by tacou

A) all the way. Like Roddick always said, if you decide to play you are 100%.

That doesn't mean you can't get injured during the game in which case I don't see any reason not to mention the injury when asked about it.

[Sid_Vicious]

Originally Posted by tacou

A) all the way. Like Roddick always said, if you decide to play you are 100%.

Roddick was just talking big. He wasn't nearly as idealistic during press conferences after losing matches in which he played like crap. It is such a nonsensical statement. Tennis is a physical sport, if you are running a fever and lose 6-1 6-0, it is perfectly reasonable to say that your fever prevented you from playing your best. In 2007, Roddick lost to Dancevic at Indianapolis and claimed that he had a stomach bug caused from a late night fast food run.While it was a really stupid decision by Roddick, there is no doubt that he was way below 100% during that match. He was puking during the changeovers. You have to be a seriously obtuse person to claim that Roddick was 100% just because he showed up to play.

Most of the time, the pros get bashed for honesty. People bashed Djokovic after he claimed that his right eye was badly irritated by a moving contact lense in his match again Nadal (WTF 2010). It was easy for people on this forum to bash players, but those people should go out and try playing tennis with a contact lense that is sliding back and forth and then see how close to "100%" their tennis games were.

[Ellipses]

The problem with B is that no one ever cares about whether the reporter brought it up or not. That's why you have all the quote mining that goes on around here.

Personally, I would only publicly (and briefly) mention an injury if I was both asked about it and I won. Not perfect, but...

Originally Posted by Hood_Man

Whenever. They'll get criticised for it based on how much the person dislikes them.

^ This.

[albatros_forehand]

Originally Posted by Warmaster

That doesn't mean you can't get injured during the game in which case I don't see any reason not to mention the injury when asked about it.

So let's put it this way. If you decide to go on you are 100% (and no need to cry about it later)