Fed's speech...understated?

Jeff Nuese

New User
Dont get me wrong, I like fed and think he is one of the greatest if not the greatest player of all time, always handles himself with class and dignity, but that being said I think he 'dropped the ball' a little with regard to his victory speech . His comment about Murray being fairly consistant and having 'one slam' in him was obnoxious and understated particularly after Murray poured his heart out in that match and was emotional. Ive never been a Murray fan but after that match and Fed's speech, hes got my vote now...cmon Andy!!
 
He clearly said "at least one Slam." Meaning, Andy will win at least one slam. Not he'll win a slam, or one slam, or no more than one, but greater than or equal to one Slam.
 
Perhaps, but the word "one" should never have been spoken, I know it was the high of the win, but I felt bad for Murray
 
Shoot, I felt bad for him too, he had the weight of the entire population of the United Kingdom and 76 years without a championship win on his shoulders. To come so close, to go up a set and a break against one of the best to ever play the game in the finals at Wimbledon, was monumental. But he just couldn't turn the corner.

I don't think Federer was being arrogant, maybe he could've been a bit more gracious, but I think this one meant more to him than most people think.
 
would you have felt better if federer gave him a kiss?

federer clearly stated in multiple interviews that deep down he believes andy will win more than one slam.
 
You must have misunderstood federer. He was clearly trying to be nice to Murray without making him look bad in front of his home crowd.
 
I think it was the opposite. Andy stole Feds limelight. Fed was classy as usual. I think he was not able to celebrate well enough because of all the boo hoo Andy lost.

All he is obliged to say is "Well played Andy you will win one in future" which he did.

I feel bad that Federer has made crying fashionable to start with. Grow a pair.
 
My only observation was that Fed could have been a little more gracious, I never said he was rude., This is not a personal debate but a general observation
 
You must have misunderstood federer. He was clearly trying to be nice to Murray without making him look bad in front of his home crowd.

I think it was the opposite. Andy stole Feds limelight. Fed was classy as usual. I think he was not able to celebrate well enough because of all the boo hoo Andy lost.

All he is obliged to say is "Well played Andy you will win one in future" which he did.

I feel bad that Federer has made crying fashionable to start with. Grow a pair.
+2. What they said. Remember Fed's infamous '...hasn't had a winner in 150,000 years...' blast at the AO in 2010. Did you want him to say
'Correction: 174,000 years and counting.' He would have needed a detail of
ex-Mossad agents to get off the island alive. He aced it; was nice to Andy
and Sampras. If you want to get tweaked, go off on Sue Barker and her
stupid questions. Just hand the Maestro the mic and back up, Betty!
 
Subject to interpretation. What is not is that Murray needs to get something positive from this loss to finally win on Slams.
 
All I can say is I was impressed with the way Andy played in the past I felt like he never had a chance to win a slam but he made me a believer the way he played. But lets give Roger his due the man is 30yrs old. Lets celebrate his achievement rather than sob about what if 25yr old Andy had won.
 
..Tough crowd, Im in way over my head..now I know why I stay off this forum

I probably shouldn't have said "clearly" in my post. Sorry, I wasn't trying to be mean :(

I can see how someone would interpret what fed said as a bit rude, but I don't think that was his intention.
 
Dont get me wrong, I like fed and think he is one of the greatest if not the greatest player of all time, always handles himself with class and dignity, but that being said I think he 'dropped the ball' a little with regard to his victory speech . His comment about Murray being fairly consistant and having 'one slam' in him was obnoxious and understated particularly after Murray poured his heart out in that match and was emotional. Ive never been a Murray fan but after that match and Fed's speech, hes got my vote now...cmon Andy!!

Listen to the ceremony again, he said he things Murray will win one grand slam atleast.
 
Dont get me wrong, I like fed and think he is one of the greatest if not the greatest player of all time, always handles himself with class and dignity, but that being said I think he 'dropped the ball' a little with regard to his victory speech . His comment about Murray being fairly consistant and having 'one slam' in him was obnoxious and understated particularly after Murray poured his heart out in that match and was emotional. Ive never been a Murray fan but after that match and Fed's speech, hes got my vote now...cmon Andy!!

I know what you mean. But we cannot nitpick so much for he was talking few minutes after that big victory, must have been rattled a bit by the emotional atmosphere, maybe he should have said that andy will win multiple grand slams. But that is what he meant, and he was sincere. We cannot let some semantics create a new controversy unnecessarily.
 
Federer is human...he didn't want to rub it in not only Andy's but Great Britain's face as well.
Tennis can be so harsh; having the loser remain throughout the duration of the trophy ceremony is pretty ridiculous.
 
Back
Top