Is wilander too harsh on Federer?

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be anyone else.
 
Last edited:

Russeljones

G.O.A.T.
Mats is one of several older players who (at times) seem grumpy when having to share their thoughts on someone who (inadvertently) has made their achievements seem ordinary.
 

heninfan99

Talk Tennis Guru
He is pretty harsh on Fed but I like that he doesn't BS. He's not saying it out of spite he's just saying what he believes. He also compliments Federer. Fed has always been an instinctive player by nature, letting his talent win. We know the Murray's and Tomic's have to use strategy, variety and a bit of junk to win. Matt's was always thinking on the court.
 
Last edited:

Magnus

Legend
Mats over the years has been acting really strangely. On some GS events he sounded like a Federer fanboy, praising him over and over again. I think Murray took that spot in recent years, while Fed disappointed Mats with his inability to win titles or big matches lately.
 

6-1 6-3 6-0

Banned
No, he isn't. I'm glad he has the courage to say that Federer's balls shrink against Nadal. We all know it's true- but no one had the Wilanders to say it.
 

Wangtang1

Rookie
I think people mis-interpret Wilander's quotes about Federer. I remember watching the Australian nadal-federer semi in 2012 with wilander's commentary. He sounds like a really grouchy Federer fan. When Federer floated that smash out on breakpoint of the final game he sounded genuinely offended
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
No, he isn't. I'm glad he has the courage to say that Federer's balls shrink against Nadal. We all know it's true- but no one had the Wilanders to say it.
Well Mats actually apologized about Those harsh comments about Roger in 2006. What he said was out of order and humiliating. How can he say things openly to the media something that the tennis world can take part off, stuff about Federer suffering from mental block and that he has no balls, things he doesn't have a clue of. Only Roger knows whats going on in his head and it wouldnt surprise me that he Wants to smash his head in for that.
 
Last edited:

tipsa...don'tlikehim!

Talk Tennis Guru
Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, djokovic and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.
That's why more credit should be given to Nadal and Djokovic, because like you said Federer was gifted when he was born, when the 2 other guys had to work much harder to accomplish what they did.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
So, because Wilander does not kiss Federer's butt, you seek to attack him and other players.

No surprises here.
Well of course you are ****ed when he makes comments like that. In 2006 french when nadal won, he said things that was out of order. I thought it was a pretty close match and had Nothing to do with Federer Having no balls.

Dont touch Federer, My advice. GOAT
 
Last edited:

Devilito

Hall of Fame
one thing is for certain. Former players are about the worst tennis analysts ever. The better you used to be, the worse you are at analyzing others. I'm sure it's because of such immense talent and mainly focusing on their own games back when they dominated and never really paying much attention to specifics. If you think about it, most people on these forums have probably, over their lifetimes, watched 100x the tennis a former player has watched. They're too busy playing and living in their own bubbles than watching other matches and doing research about gear etc. The crap I've heard guys like Trollander, Mac, Gilbert, etc say is rather astonishing.
 
Mats is one of several older players who (at times) seem grumpy when having to share their thoughts on someone who (inadvertently) has made their achievements seem ordinary.
Quoted for truth, which McEnroe also jokes about in the "15, you did it, Roger"-commercial some years ago where he yells in a bitter voice "thanks, for making us look so average!"
 
M

monfed

Guest
I read somewhere that Mats was annoyed that Fed couldn't get it done against Nadal at RG in that 05-08 period. I guess he's been holding that disappointment ever since.
 

Danny_G13

Rookie
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. untalented b astard, but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, djokovic and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be like nadal, overtrained products.
Mats is an horrendous commentator and pundit. My God, I couldn't disagree more with your assessment;

On Eurosport he's been sucking up to Federer constantly saying his opponents should simply be honoured to be on the same court as him! And that even 'when' they lose, it's just so much 'fun' to play against him!

I didn't hear the pro Murray anti Federer comments, but the ones I have heard, if not exactly anti Murray were so revoltingly pro Federer he couldn't have been more biased if he was wearing a red baseball cap.
 

corners

Legend
Mats once said that he would love to be Federer for a day, just to experience how it feels to play like that. He's a great admirer of Fed's game.

Later, I heard him say that nothing would please him more than if Fed won the French and got his 15th grand slam victory. So I think he likes him as a person and wants to see him successful as well.

The critical comments, and there have been many, strike me as a little like how a father with idealistic expectations might treat his talented child - proud, but always wanting to be prouder, and so critical when the outside observer thinks praise might be in order. That kind of thing. I think Mats also thinks that his own brain in Fed's body would have been the ultimate player and he's a little miffed that Fed hasn't been more tactically astute.
 

robert.s

Professional
No, he isn't. I'm glad he has the courage to say that Federer's balls shrink against Nadal. We all know it's true- but no one had the Wilanders to say it.
That's an insult, only Nadal fans can applaud a guy for insulting a tennis player. For the moment, Federer is where Nadal is trying to get. People should remember that more often.
 

Gonzalito17

Banned
I care to hear and read what Wilander says and respect his opinions on tennis matters. He's not afraid to say what he thinks, nothing wrong with sincerity. Mats said a couple of years ago he saw Ryan Harrison being top 3 in the world. Sometimes he's wrong, sometimes he's right.
 

chjtennis

G.O.A.T.
Mats is just a normal human being who tries to get his points through everyone's ears. It's usual when someone expresses his opinion hard against the general consensus, he makes the same point twice, three times or even more to make himself heard clearly. I don't think Mats hates Fed but he's just trying to sell Rafa as the GOAT.
 

NADALRECORD

Banned
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. untalented b astard, but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, djokovic and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be like nadal, overtrained products.
Federer was is the ideal text book tennis player. But not the ideal tennis player. The ideal tennis player would not have a 'match-up problem'. If Federer was so talented he'd be able to go outside of the text book to overcome his match-up problem.

Also don't forget that Wilander is more qualified to assess these players. More qualified than almost everyone on planet earth.
 
Federer was is the ideal text book tennis player. But not the ideal tennis player. The ideal tennis player would not have a 'match-up problem'. If Federer was so talented he'd be able to go outside of the text book to overcome his match-up problem.

Also don't forget that Wilander is more qualified to assess these players. More qualified than almost everyone on planet earth.
Well no ones perfect, thank God.
 

syc23

Professional
Wouldn't have thought Mats would have anything negative to say about Fed. If people listen to his commentary for Eurosport, he often sounds like a Fed fangirl.
 
He comes across as a disillusioned Federer fan.

"Aw man, I thought this guy was going to go undefeated and win 40 slams in a row. Pathetic, he just lost to Nadal. No balls."

Then years later...

"I was told Federer would go undefeated and win 40 slams in a row. He didn't. Pathetic. Now I think the only reason we thought he was great is he was a product of the weakest era in history. He dominated because all the other players sucked."
 

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. untalented b astard, but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be rather like nadal, overtrained products.
I think it's ego and jealousy.

Also, I can't agree with your statement about Nadal. I think Nadal is great and a lot of people would like to be him. We are different. Tennis and talent isn't everything.

The only reason I wouldn't be Nadal is he is injured so much and he seems to suffer a lot, doesn't seem to enjoy it that much.

I would rather be someone who loves it and isn't injured, even with less titles.
 

punsalen

Banned
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. untalented b astard, but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be rather like nadal, overtrained products.
Wilander is a Fed hater on one side of reality. You on the other hand are an over the top Fed lover who probably jacks off to posters of him on your wall every night, and live in a Federer la la land and the other side of reality. Reality as often is with two extremes is somewhere in between the two of you, and nowhere close to either side.
 

RF-18

Talk Tennis Guru
Wilander is a Fed hater on one side of reality. You on the other hand are an over the top Fed lover who probably jacks off to posters of him on your wall every night, and live in a Federer la la land and the other side of reality. Reality as often is with two extremes is somewhere in between the two of you, and nowhere close to either side.
It't Wilander who is over the top when he sais Davis Cup is the biggest occasion in his career.
 
D

Deleted member 733170

Guest
Its a shame Becker left behind TV punditry to coach Djokovic. He was the best by some margin, never too much chatter and often extremely prescient on calling turning points in matches.
 

Gazelle

G.O.A.T.
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be anyone else.
LOl @ Mats knows his stuff. The guys knows little, he just talks so much (usually nonsense) that by pure accident and chance of probability he occasionnally says something insightful.
 

punsalen

Banned
Wilander is bitter because Federer made his achievements look like it wasn't nothing special.
By that logic he would be bitter towards Laver, Sampras, Borg, Lendl, and about a dozen guys as they all would make Wilander's fabulous achievements look like "nothing special" as well. He would be even more bitter towards Nadal whose achievements trump his own on every surface and in everyway. Atleast on clay, his best surface where he has his biggest legacy, he is clearly superior to Federer, but yet so far inferior to Nadal. Yet he has always been highly praiseworthy of Nadal. He has not noted Nadal dominating a period with unusually poor competition, as that isn't even true of Nadal as it is of Federer, and a tennis analyst it is his job to point out such things.

People understand Wilander is no GOAT, nor was he ever one, and most would put Becker and Edberg above him. People also understand winning 7 slams, winning 3 slams in the same year, and winning multiple slams on each surface in a very tough era (a much deeper and better one than today) is still an outstanding feat. Yet another (Federer), or I should say yet another 3 (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) making his achievements pale by comparision, something many guys before have done and had done when Wilander retired, makes no difference.
 
Last edited:

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
By that logic he would be bitter towards Laver, Sampras, Borg, Lendl, and about a dozen guys as they all would make Wilander's fabulous achievements look like "nothing special" as well. He would be even more bitter towards Nadal whose achievements trump his own on every surface and in everyway. Atleast on clay, his best surface where he has his biggest legacy, he is clearly superior to Federer, but yet so far inferior to Nadal. Yet he has always been highly praiseworthy of Nadal. He has not noted Nadal dominating a period with unusually poor competition, as that isn't even true of Nadal as it is of Federer, and a tennis analyst it is his job to point out such things.

People understand Wilander is no GOAT, nor was he ever one, and most would put Becker and Edberg above him. People also understand winning 7 slams, winning 3 slams in the same year, and winning multiple slams on each surface in a very tough era (a much deeper and better one than today) is still an outstanding feat. Yet another (Federer) making his achievements pale by comparision, something many guys before have done and had done when Wilander retired, makes no difference.
Ok, in this case Wilander is huge Sampras fan and he is bittered that Federer thrashed his records.
 

jg153040

G.O.A.T.
Maybe he is. Who is to know. We all have our favorites, why isn't he also entitled.
Well, it doesn't bother me personally. I don't expect those greats to be perfect.

They have bad days like us, just a lot few of them.

I'm just stating some possible reasons for his statements.
 
D

Deleted member 733170

Guest
By that logic he would be bitter towards Laver, Sampras, Borg, Lendl, and about a dozen guys as they all would make Wilander's fabulous achievements look like "nothing special" as well. He would be even more bitter towards Nadal whose achievements trump his own on every surface and in everyway. Atleast on clay, his best surface where he has his biggest legacy, he is clearly superior to Federer, but yet so far inferior to Nadal. Yet he has always been highly praiseworthy of Nadal. He has not noted Nadal dominating a period with unusually poor competition, as that isn't even true of Nadal as it is of Federer, and a tennis analyst it is his job to point out such things.

People understand Wilander is no GOAT, nor was he ever one, and most would put Becker and Edberg above him. People also understand winning 7 slams, winning 3 slams in the same year, and winning multiple slams on each surface in a very tough era (a much deeper and better one than today) is still an outstanding feat. Yet another (Federer), or I should say yet another 3 (Federer, Nadal, Djokovic) making his achievements pale by comparision, something many guys before have done and had done when Wilander retired, makes no difference.
I don't wish to pick on you in particular, but what a truly awful thread complete with awful replies. Wilander is prone to severe bouts of verbal diarrhoea like all pundits, but compared to 50% of the posters on TTW he should be sitting on the Throne of Rational Thought.
 

veroniquem

Bionic Poster
Mats knows his stuff and what he is Talking about... But the fact that he always has something to say against Federer is something i just cant stand. Is murray more talented? Aahahha

Him self was a pusher back in the day and physically strong. but there is no surprise he Wants to convince everyone that its better to moonball and run your points.

Federer IS PURE talent, a gift sent to the world. Nadal, and murray are PRODUCTS. Including b a stard Wilander.

Federer is the ideal tennis player and i cant think of one person who Would want rather to be anyone else.
What did Wilander say???
 
Wilander is bitter because Federer made his achievements look like it wasn't nothing special.
Wilander is the Jesse Ventura of the sport. He is a broadcast journalist who tells it like it is/how he sees it. He isn't there to dip strawberries in ice cream, pander to everybody & curtsy to the Queen like Barker, Castle, Henman etc.
 
Top