Federer on Sharapova ban

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
Why do people feel sorry for Rafa now that he's injured? They're fans. And the opposite sentiment applies. Tshooter dislikes Pova so he enjoys her predicament. All very predictable!
 

TennisHound

Legend
Basically Fed is saying, "Good, that's what she gets! And I could care less about her anyway."

Have you ever seen those people who are so overly vocal about something, because either they feel guilty or are doing it themselves. Feds stiffness and righteous indignation is over the top on this:

from the article - He also repeated his call for retroactive testing.“We should keep blood samples for 10, 15 or 20 years for scaring potential cheats,” he said.

There's no doubt Fed is hiding something, otherwise he wouldn't be acting as weird about this as he is.
 
Last edited:

dpli2010

Semi-Pro
Basically Fed is saying, "Good, that's what she gets! And I could care less about her anyway."

Have you ever seen those people who are so overly vocal about something, because either they feel guilty or are doing it themselves. Feds stiffness and righteous indignation is over the top on this:

from the article - He also repeated his call for retroactive testing.“We should keep blood samples for 10, 15 or 20 years for scaring potential cheats,” he said.

There's no doubt Fed is hiding something, otherwise he wouldn't be acting as weird about this as he is.
So there is no way to interpret what he did as just speaking his mind, plain and simple?
 

TennisHound

Legend
Look, the WADA is simply tooooo harsh in this instance. Whatever, everybody wants blood for some reason and thinks Fed had some god-like credibility just because he's a good tennis player. 2years? Really? Cmon:confused:

Why didn't he speak out so vehemently against Cilic and Troicki? Why Sharapova?
 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
“But I am for zero tolerance ... She of course has the right to defend herself, like anyone ... Whether it's intentional or not, I don't see too much difference."

Federer apparently sees no difference between being banned for only two years as opposed to four! I would have thought he could count.

After all, he has a lot of money to practise his counting skills on too.
 

TennisHound

Legend
I shutter to think what he would have done to Sharapova if he was the deciding official. Bad, just bad.
 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I'm not quite sure Federer understands this but intention is not intention to take something, but intention to cheat!

She fullly intended to take the Meldonium so it's not accidental ingestion as with Cilic.

And one can see from the two cases alone that there is even a big difference here.

But in any event, she never intended to cheat when she took the Meldonium.

I do however agree with the Tribunal at one level and that is she took it to enhance performance.

But the Tribunal confused past use of the drug for that reason with cheating.

As I pointed out in another thread, performance enhancement as such is not cheating.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I did attend the lectures of a few of his Professors, but French thought back then tended to go in waves. Marxism was followed by a quasi-religious turn and Godard did both.

I actually liked Godard's Marxist period, although it's not his best work it was more interesting than most of what followed.
 
Last edited:

mandy01

G.O.A.T.
I'm not quite sure Federer understands this but intention is not intention to take something, but intention to cheat!

She fullly intended to take the Meldonium so it's not accidental ingestion as with Cilic.

And one can see from the two cases alone that there is even a big difference here.

But in any event, she never intended to cheat when she took the Meldonium.

I do however agree with the Tribunal at one level and that is she took it to enhance performance.

But the Tribunal confused past use of the drug for that reason with cheating.

As I pointed out in another thread, performance enhancement as such is not cheating.
I understand your argument about the importance of not deriving retrospective guilt but you need to not create so many threads about it. It takes away from the weight of your argument. :D

I also don't agree with Roger about players being punished retroactively UNLESS the said drug for which they subsequently test positive was already banned when they took it.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I never publish the same thing twice, so you got that wrong. If you can't see the differences it's because you didn't read the content, as most don't.

I'm not quite sure Federer's arguing this as WADA makes the point about new methods detecting old crimes, not redefining past actions as crimes.

WADA will however prosecute any athlete for past crimes regardless of any statute of limitations.
 

CurrenFan

Rookie
Your unsophisticated sexism is not necessarily shared by the rest of the world, just in passing.
If you were half as perceptive in real life as you are in your own internet fantasy world, you would understand that my comment was not referring to my own views of Maria Sharapova, but to the fact that as one of the more attractive women in tennis, her looks, rather than her game, her personality, and her accomplishments (both on-court and off) are what are most appealing to the vast majority of Sharapova fans. I'm not talking about me, I'm talking about Sharapova's fans. Mauresmo and Bartoli are nearly the polar opposites to Sharapova in terms of popularity in the world of tennis and the reasons for that are always the same in those making derogatory statements about those two players, namely, Mauresmo's less-than-feminine looks and physique, and Bartoli's weight. Is that appropriate, fair, and reasonable? No, of course not.

But making obnoxious, ignorant, and laughably, miserably incorrect statements about what other people have written isn't appropriate, fair, and reasonable, either, is it? In fact, inaccurately and unjustifiably accusing someone else of being sexist is surely every bit as bad as actually being a sexist, isn't it? At least a sexist can grow, mature, and develop a more equality-minded viewpoint - generally speaking, obtuse people tend to remain that way and tend not to become astute and perceptive.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
I never publish the same thing twice, so you got that wrong. If you can't see the differences it's because you didn't read the content, as most don't.
Like other TW sharapova fans, the lie is your comfort zone, as the multiple threads archived reveal you have re-posted articles, quotes, etc. It is pointless to deny it--all in your sad campaign to "save" an illegal drug user.
 

Tshooter

Legend
Why do people feel sorry for Rafa now that he's injured? They're fans. And the opposite sentiment applies. Tshooter dislikes Pova so he enjoys her predicament. All very predictable!
Please stop saying I dislike her. I don't know her.

And as a player I enjoy watching her and have done so in person many times. Her shrieking and some of her mannerisms annoy me but that is not an unusual reaction and I find Vika worse.

I enjoy your predicament though.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I don't hear her shrieking because I don't follow her matches, so if you do you must enjoy the shrieking at some level.
 

THUNDERVOLLEY

G.O.A.T.
You two have a talent for trying to get things censored that you don't like - intolerance at its worst!
No censorship here, since it does not matter how many lies, articles and quotes are re-posted, Sharapova is still guilty of illegal PED use.

No one forced her to do that. It was a Sharapova Inc. decision, and now you have to live with it, by flaming members, posting GIFs, and doing anything to stop the rolling boulder Sharapova Inc pushed on themselves.
 
Top