Toni Nadal on Rage

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

You think mono or no mono Fed was going to beat Nadal at RG that year? Nadal was also knocking on the door at Wimby as well so it was no surprise he finally won it. Fed hardly "gifted" Nadal a d*mn thing.

And Fed did not suffer from mono all year long. Unless you expect us to believe you instead of Fed himself.

You can't have it both ways.

And I didn't say anywhere that Federer suffered from mono all year - I said he "had almost an entire year affected by mono" which is fact. If you get off on the wrong foot the comeback is harder - even once you're past the illness. It makes it comparatively easier for others around you. If it's even in subtle and minor ways, that's usually the difference between being champ or not quite.

[Mustard]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

I'm happy to accept that... but, on the same token are all the Nad-***** going to accept that Federer had almost an entire year affected by mono - which gifted Nadal the top ranking and a couple of majors?

I doubt it.

Exaggeration much? Federer himself said in an interview with Sue Barker at 2008 Wimbledon that the mono had passed around, late March? He admitted that he had missed some training, but said that the actual mono was over.

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by Mustard

Exaggeration much? Federer himself said in an interview with Sue Barker at 2008 Wimbledon that the mono had passed around late March? He admitted that he had missed some training, but said that the actual mono was over.

He also said he was fine at Wimbledon when he was beaten by Berdych... only to say later he'd been carrying a thigh strain or some such.

Having had family members and co-workers suffer from mono in the past I personally think it unlikely someone who'd had it from Dec into early Jan would be back at 100% in March. Some cases I've seen include a workmate who was off and on at work for a year - sometimes fine then not being able to make it to work for weeks at a time.

Regardless of what he may have told Barker we wont know if he was back to 100%. The fact remains on this topic - if Nadal fans want to play the injury card to explain poor results then they have to accept it being played on them too. Failure to do so is admission of blatant myopia.

[Clarky21]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

You can't have it both ways.

And I didn't say anywhere that Federer suffered from mono all year - I said he "had almost an entire year affected by mono" which is fact. If you get off on the wrong foot the comeback is harder - even once you're past the illness. It makes it comparatively easier for others around you. If it's even in subtle and minor ways, that's usually the difference between being champ or not quite.

I guess his mono only flared up when Nadal beat him at RG and beat him in the Wimby final. Fed himself said he was over the mono long before he lost to Nadal.


And you didn't answer my question. Do you think Fed would have beaten Nadal at RG that year even if he had't been sick?

[Mustard]

It would be better if everyone took the view that if a player starts a match, then he or she is fit to play.

[Sabratha]

Originally Posted by Clarky21

I guess his mono only flared up when Nadal beat him at RG and beat him in the Wimby final. Fed himself said he was over the mono long before he lost to Nadal.


And you didn't answer my question. Do you think Fed would have beaten Nadal at RG that year even if he had't been sick?

No. Look at his other finals at Roland Garros against Nadal.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

I'm happy to accept that... but, on the same token are all the Nad-***** going to accept that Federer had almost an entire year affected by mono - which gifted Nadal the top ranking and a couple of majors?

I doubt it.

Not the same. I have actually no problem accepting Fed was having physical problems when he lost to Berdych in 2011, even though he wasn't really on his prime anymore while Nadal was in the matches we're talking about) and he lost in the quarters, not in the first week, and against a top 10 player.
He himself had said he was fine by the time of RG and Wimbledon in 2008 though. Plus, which two majors would he have gifted Nadal?. Let's not forget Nadal had showed he could very well beat him at Wimbeldon the year before...

[Towser83]

The thing that I don't like is not people saying someone was injured, it's people assuming and insisting they know for a fact that the match would have gone the other way if not for that. Upsets do happen. Nadal at Wimbledon was not likely to lose to Rosol but then again Rosol played a great match and Nadal has often been troubled at Wimbledon before by low ranked players. He won 5 set matches against Robin Haase, Petzschner, Youzhny, Soderling and Kendricks - the first 2 of those mentioned were in 2010 when he won Wimbledon and 2 other slams. It's not absurd to think one day someone would actually win one of these 5 set matches vs him, and Rosol kind of had the lack of respect that maybe you need to beat a top player. Nadal had just won RG supposedly recieving treatment so he could continue playing, he then decided to play doubles as well as singles at Queens.. it seems whatever injury he had he was managing well enough to play even if he was heading for disaster.

At RG in 2009, again it's unlikely that he loses to Soderling. But you have to figure in 8 years of play, one year someone is probably going to beat him even if he is fit. He might have been below 100% but in previous matches he looked good and still looked a certainty for the title. Soderling probably played a one in a million match. Another day Nadal would have kicked his arse in the exact same shape, but that day it didn't happen, partly because the court looked faster, partly Soderling played his best ever match and hit masses of winners, partly Nadal wasn't competing at 100%. But not every time you play will you be 100%. That's different from being unable to play.

Federer lost to Djokovic in Australia 2008. I think he was not at his best, still a bit below par and out of practice. But I think he would have lost anyway. Maybe a bit closer, but saying he would have won that for sure is absurd.

Maybe the matches would have had a different result, but maybe not. There's not much point debating it unless a guy retires while significantly in the lead and clearly dominating but is not able to carry on playing. You can also apply this to things like wind/roofs/rain/darkness. Even though it may have a bigger effect on one player's game it doesn't mean the result would be different. Something like wind or darkness just makes a game more error prone and adds a random element. It may favour a safer player, but that doesn't mean they would not win anyway.

[PhrygianDominant]

Originally Posted by Mustard

It would be better if everyone took the view that if a player starts a match, then he or she is fit to play.

Thank you.

[Rhino]

Imagine how Federer feels: Zero Masters Series on Grass. But you don't see him moaning about it.

Rafa and Toni don't know when they've got it good.

[Razoredge]

Their should be a masters 1000 on grass.

Edit: Also nadal should stop picking his butt.

[SQA333]

So wait, Nadal-***** (like Clarky), it's fine when your hero moans about an injury WEEKS AFTER an embarrassing loss, taking credit away from his opponent, yet it isn't fine to reference a debilitating illness which compromised another player's training regime - affecting his whole year?

....not to mention the unnecessary whining about the number of hard court events, just because your nephew isn't good enough to win them consistently when the top guys are in form.

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by Rhino

Imagine how Federer feels: Zero Masters Series on Grass. But you don't see him moaning about it.

Rafa and Toni don't know when they've got it good.

Why would he moan about it?, he's got 6 masters on hard court. Oh, and 2 slams.

[The Moonballer]

Nadull hasn't won a title off clay since October 2010 (Tokyo) by beating Clownfils

[merlinpinpin]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Not the same. I have actually no problem accepting Fed was having physical problems when he lost to Berdych in 2011, even though he wasn't really on his prime anymore while Nadal was in the matches we're talking about) and he lost in the quarters, not in the first week, and against a top 10 player.
He himself had said he was fine by the time of RG and Wimbledon in 2008 though. Plus, which two majors would he have gifted Nadal?. Let's not forget Nadal had showed he could very well beat him at Wimbeldon the year before...

Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009. The Wimbledon loss was clearly due from the beatdown he took at RG three weeks before (he was totally unable to play in the first two sets), and he lost because he was afraid of Nadal. Even more so maybe in Melbourne, where he clearly had the upper hand for the first four sets but was unable to wrap it up.

For the record, I fully share Mustard's view, though--even though I think Federer would very probably have won both these tournaments had he let Monfils through in the RG 2008 semi (for he knew he was going to get destroyed in the final this year), as long as you come on court, you're fit to play and you accept the result as it is, no excuse.

[merlinpinpin]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Why would he moan about it?, he's got 6 masters on hard court. Oh, and 2 slams.

You haven't been following tennis the last ten years or so, have you?

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by merlinpinpin

Wimbledon 2008 and AO 2009. The Wimbledon loss was clearly due from the beatdown he took at RG three weeks before (he was totally unable to play in the first two sets), and he lost because he was afraid of Nadal. Even more so maybe in Melbourne, where he clearly had the upper hand for the first four sets but was unable to wrap it up.

For the record, I fully share Mustard's view, though--even though I think Federer would very probably have won both these tournaments had he let Monfils through in the RG 2008 semi (for he knew he was going to get destroyed in the final this year), as long as you come on court, you're fit to play and you accept the result as it is, no excuse.

Oh, OK, I guess you can say a mental aspect played (maybe a big) part in those matches. I thought you were saying he had lost them due to mono though.

Originally Posted by merlinpinpin

You haven't been following tennis the last ten years or so, have you?

Sorry, I don't see your point.

[President]

Federer's 2008 would have been a lot different if it weren't for the mono, he shouldn't have declined that quickly after a stellar 2007. In fact his 08 form was probably worse than his current 2012 form even though he is 4 years older now; the reason for that IMO was the strain and interruption of training and rhythm caused by mono. No way he loses to Djokovic like that at the AO and then continues to lose to random mugs all year and gets creamed at RG.

[TMF]

Originally Posted by Crisstti

Straw man?

By the way TMF, I happened to come across the video with Toni where your signature comes from. Somewhat different from your version of it. Make what you want of it (as I'm sure you will):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=CEEDuANwZwE

It's a lecture in a prison (!) in Palma: "Whether we will be at the top again, I don't know. I didn't know it when everything was going well and I don't know it now. I trust Djokovic and Federer get injured, and that will allow us... (interrupted by laughs and clapping). Well, if between all of us we could get them injured we'd do very well...".

I'd say he's putting down Nadal's chances by saying he will be at the top if the others get injured.

You got your resource I got my resources.

Toni Nadal: "I hope now Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic will get injured"

http://www.tennisworldusa.org/Toni-N...icolo7168.html
http://www.tennisearth.com/news/tenn...red-478826.htm

[Crisstti]

Originally Posted by TMF

You got your resource I got my resources.

Toni Nadal: "I hope now Roger Federer and Novak Djokovic will get injured"

http://www.tennisworldusa.org/Toni-N...icolo7168.html
http://www.tennisearth.com/news/tenn...red-478826.htm

Lol, my source is the original one. Yours are inaccurate translations. I did you the favour of translating it for you (you're welcome, btw). You can take my word for it or learn Spanish and see for yourself.