Why should the referee be scared of Rafa?Opinion supported by facts in the same article. Is that so difficult for you to comprehend?
A lot of opinions staying the same until 2017 is so telling only to be proven by more facts.
For Example,
In 2010, Tomas Berdych said "It just shows how the referee is probably scared of him and just let him talk with him too long," world number six Berdych.
Fast forward to 2016.
Cash is telling it as it is. The truth hurts.Cash is a jerk. I have a friend who used to work with him and he hated it. He said you can never make Cash happy and he thinks he knows everything. Hey Cash, how about calling Nadal out for taking too much time. That is breaking the rules.
I was at the O2 for that match sitting right behind the umpire's chair and Bernardes had a history of overruling against Nadal no matter what. Bernardes overruled a call before Nadal struck the ball and when Berdych challenged and his ball was in, Bernardes should have let them play a let but he awarded Berdych the point because he felt guilty for overruling the call. Tom Barnes came on, and as usual, the ATP supervisor never disagrees with the umpire so Rafa protested, but at no point did Rafa sit down because had he done so he would have defaulted himself, so Berdych was making that up. Rafa did walk to his bench but he didn't actually sit down. If anyone should have been affected by that incident it was Rafa because Berdych was the one who was awarded the point.Opinion supported by facts in the same article. Is that so difficult for you to comprehend?
A lot of opinions staying the same until 2017 is so telling only to be proven by more facts.
For Example,
In 2010, Tomas Berdych said "It just shows how the referee is probably scared of him and just let him talk with him too long," world number six Berdych.
Fast forward to 2016.
I was at the O2 for that match sitting right behind the umpire's chair and Bernardes had a history of overruling against Nadal no matter what. Bernardes overruled a call before Nadal struck the ball and when Berdych challenged and his ball was in, Bernardes should have let them play a let but he awarded Berdych the point because he felt guilty for overruling the call.
It's because Carlos had a history of being unfair to Nadal.I dont care if you were behind Nadal's rear side, seriously.
You couldnt be more WRONG. It was NAdal who stopped the point, prompting Bernardes to call out. Berdych challenged. Berdych won the point because it was Nadal who stopped the point.
Bernardes was absolutely correct as always.
It's because Carlos had a history of being unfair to Nadal.
Bernardes overruled a call before Nadal struck the ball and when Berdych challenged and his ball was in, Bernardes should have let them play a let but he awarded Berdych the point because he felt guilty for overruling the call.
It's because Carlos had a history of being unfair to Nadal.
Bernardes overruled a call before Nadal struck the ball and when Berdych challenged and his ball was in, Bernardes should have let them play a let but he awarded Berdych the point because he felt guilty for overruling the call.
This is not what happened in the video. Care to explain. ?
Tsonga once told an umpire that he was overruling all the calls in favour of Nadal because he was scared of him. These players all seem to have some kind of inferiority complex for Nadal.
This is not what happened in the video. Care to explain. ?
Bernardes has no history of being unfair. He followed the rules.
What has this got to do with Fed cheating?I'll explain what I see, just so you don't think you are crazy when you read out the ************* imaginary explications and surely attempts to divert the topic
Berdych hits it very deep, Rafa just hits it in the air and lifts his finger as if to challenge. Stops playing, obviously. Bernardes calls it out, late. Berdych challenges, the ball is in, Bernardes very calmly explains to Rafa he called it late, so Rafa's stoppage of play counts - point Berdych.
Rafa gets a hissy-fit. Blatantly attempts to cheat and says his ball was in - as if it matters when he stopped play already. Goes to the supervisor, gets no love and then comes back to Bernardes and says "I don't want to play." Nearly sits down. Continues: "This is horrible/crazy what you are telling me."
What has this got to do with Fed cheating?
Gamesmanship is not cheating
Gamesmanship is not cheating
Gamesmanship is not cheating
Gamesmanship is not cheating
Gamesmanship is not cheating
What has this got to do with Fed cheating?
Sorry, it wasn't (almost) 10 minutes, check your sources.Fed was off the court for almost 10 minutes:
Rafa is usually right when he challenges the umpires.You do realize that the more you avoid the topic and the more you try to divert it, the sillier you look?
Rafa is usually right when he challenges the umpires.
..Bernardes had a history of overruling against Nadal no matter what. Bernardes overruled a call before Nadal struck the ball..
...
"Nadal called for a trainer at 2-5 down against Federer with Federer serving during this [2011] year’s Roland Garros final and proceeded to win the set. This was nothing new for Federer, Nadal had done the same thing at ...Hamburg 2008...
You are wrong!
2) AT FO 2011, Rafa had a medical treatment (the trainer put a bit talc on his foot) before his service game at 2 -5.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2011/jun/05/french-open-nadal-federer-live
http://tennispurist.blogspot.nl/2017/02/federers-fairy-tale-if-it-sounds-too.htmlThe tennis world has awaken to this:
I'm talking to Jazz_Hands exclusively here. Now, you are breaking my momentum. Shame on you.Is @Rusty Shackleford saying that federer taking six months off broke Rafa's momentum ? Surely NOT the break taken during the semifinal distracted him in the final ?
But Fed actually acknowledged his MTO against Wawrinka was not due to any specific injury, which by definition makes it "strategic", doesn't it?Clever defence but it doesn't work that way.
So for you Federer uses strategic MTOs but the others "supposedly" have done so. So you've already decided Fed's was fake but the others could all be genuine.
SImilarly, it doesn't matter how many thousand times Nadal has beaten Federer, Federer beat Nadal once so it's even Stevens, right ? 23 == 12 ?
But Fed actually acknowledged his MTO against Wawrinka was not due to any specific injury, which by definition makes it "strategic", doesn't it?
I can sum it up in four words: They all do it...
Cash is telling it as it is. The truth hurts.
Diverting the topic with some sort of vitriol??
Bernardes had a history of overruling against Nadal no matter what.
Ok.
"The author" needs to do fact checking then.
Point is, this happens routinely. Did he have "scurry off the court" for an already bandaged toe? Its called "stalling".
My point is that you were wrong. See the bold text in my previous post.
Again, the "author" to that article was wrong.
And there is nothing more to say about these lies.
Nadal routinely takes MTO, even during the first set of many matches. This much is a FACT!
Pat Cash could care less about those and is worried only about Federer.
Sorry, it wasn't (almost) 10 minutes, check your sources.
Sorry, it wasn't (almost) 10 minutes, check your sources.