Medvedev's rant

Cupcake said:
Of course players were happy about it. His being DQ'd gave everyone still in the draw a better chance of going further, making more money, and even winning. Liking someone in the locker room is different than recognizing a good opening. Feeling sorry for how Djoko was ousted is different than being pleased that he's gone. You can feel both things at the same time.

Politics at play? That's just silly. Follow the rules, but in the end, follow the money. Djokovic (and Nadal and Federer) being gone means probably lower ratings for the final. Most non tennis people won't be that familiar or interested in either finalist today which will mean lower ratings.
Click to expand...

Plus the tournament weakened some of its intended COVID restrictions, largely to get Novak to play. so the idea that the tournament was out to get him doesn't really hold up.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
Med is like Kyrgios. Doing stupid things and make it as an excuse when not wining.
Pathetic behaviour. He ain’t gonna win a slam being like this.
Click to expand...

I don’t understand what you mean. If you mean ranting at the umpire over a bad call, then every player is like Nick in that sense.

If you mean basically throwing the rest of the set because he was still angry, I agree that was dumb, but I think he was honestly not wanting to delay the match any further as he sincerely apologized to Thiem during the changeover about the very short delay he caused.

Honestly, that was his biggest mistake to me. Nadal or Federer would have had a very long conversation with the umpire and even sat down and demanded the ref explain the situation to them. Not that it would make a difference, but it would give them a chance to get the anger out and be able to focus once the match resumed. Med was a little too kind to his opponent in this instance, if anything.
 
topher said:
I don’t understand what you mean. If you mean ranting at the umpire over a bad call, then every player is like Nick in that sense.

If you mean basically throwing the rest of the set because he was still angry, I agree that was dumb, but I think he was honestly not wanting to delay the match any further as he sincerely apologized to Thiem during the changeover about the very short delay he caused.

Honestly, that was his biggest mistake to me. Nadal or Federer would have had a very long conversation with the umpire and even sat down and demanded the ref explain the situation to them. Not that it would make a difference, but it would give them a chance to get the anger out and be able to focus once the match resumed. Med was a little too kind to his opponent in this instance, if anything.
Click to expand...
He is a skinny kid that doesn’t know how to fight :p

Nah, he is whining too easily. Christ, be a man and just win the match and stop making all these drama of excuses.

giphy.gif
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
He is a skinny kid that doesn’t know how to fight :p

Nah, he is whining too easily. Christ, be a man and just win the match and stop making all these drama of excuses.

giphy.gif
Click to expand...

The same could be said for Rafa in other instances then, he’s certainly “whined“ for longer over calls he felt were wrong. This call decided the first set essentially, and the first set determines the match in many even contests (see the record of Big 3 after losing/winning first set).

Maybe you just don’t like Med, but his being upset here was perfectly logical to me. And he even apologized to Thiem about the delay, something I’m not sure I’ve ever even seen Rafa do, if anything he was too nice. Not at all like Nick imo, basically the worst insult of a tennis player.
 
Medvedev is one of the most interesting players to listen to in tennis. Check out his post SF presser. This guy is straight-up.
 
topher said:
The same could be said for Rafa in other instances then, he’s certainly “whined“ for longer over calls he felt were wrong. This call decided the first set essentially, and the first set determines the match in many even contests (see the record of Big 3 after losing/winning first set).

Maybe you just don’t like Med, but his being upset here was perfectly logical to me. And he even apologized to Thiem about the delay, something I’m not sure I’ve ever even seen Rafa, if anything he was too nice.
Click to expand...
medvedev.jpg

medvedev has his ups and downs,he can be nice too! But the way that he is arguing with the umpire was in a nasty way. He has some pathetic behaviour in my opinion which is like embarrassing to watch:X3: Never seen Rafa discussing like that, it’s rare any player discuss like that. Novak is much nicer for example. To me Medvedev is Kyrgios level. They are also friends so.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
He is a skinny kid that doesn’t know how to fight :p

Nah, he is whining too easily. Christ, be a man and just win the match and stop making all these drama of excuses.

giphy.gif
Click to expand...

He's doing a lot of complaining already for sure, and its been like that for years. I like the fact that he has a lot of attitude and confidence, and he's a rock solid player, but he still needs to remember a few things about his status and keep a low profile.

look at federer and nadal at the same age..... these guys were cold blooded killers on court and had that sense of belief and confidence, but they weren't throwing their weight around like No 1's until they were winning majors.
 
Steve0904 said:
I like Medvedev because I don't mind a bit a drama. He spices things up. But that said the heat he got in NYC last year was altogether justified considering he snatched the towel away from the ballkid in a very aggressive manner. I didn't like that at all and I'm sure many others didn't as well. Then he played it up and turned it into a scene so as to be entertaining. It was must see TV.

Then he got a lot of new fans by pushing Nadal as hard as he did.

Now he'll make fans out of all the Djokovic apologists with this statement if he really did say 4th RD and this is what he's referring to so he really is a Big Brain 5head kind of guy.
Click to expand...

I like him because this is a sport, I want to be entertained and I'm all for characters. Besides, I genuinely appreciate his candour even if he can be excessively dickish. That said, I do have a VERY high threshold for dickishness and "characters". But I don't see the point in treating sportsmen as moral exemplars or to be necessarily put off them because they aren't one. When it crosses the line for me is if a player is cheating and therefore undermining the sporting conduct of what is a sport. Keep it clean.
 
TheGhostOfAgassi said:
medvedev.jpg

medvedev has his ups and downs,he can be nice too! But the way that he is arguing with the umpire was in a nasty way. He has some pathetic behaviour in my opinion which is like embarrassing to watch:X3: Never seen Rafa discussing like that, it’s rare any player discuss like that. Novak is much nicer for example. To me Medvedev is Kyrgios level. They are also friends so.
Click to expand...

I can see how he lets his emotions get the better of him and the sarcasm is a sign of less emotional maturity than preferred. But the “be a man” and calling it just as excuse: if a call of that caliber goes against Rafa at RG while playing Novak or Thiem I think you’ll muster up some more sympathy. Much less compare him to Nick (a grave insult).
 
topher said:
I can see how he lets his emotions get the better of him and the sarcasm is a sign of less emotional maturity than preferred. But the “be a man” and calling it just as excuse: if a call of that caliber goes against Rafa at RG while playing Novak or Thiem I think you’ll muster up some more sympathy. Much less compare him to Nick (a grave insult).
Click to expand...
I guess we have different opinions on this ;)
Medvedev makes me sometimes cringe of embarrassment.
 
-NN- said:
I'm a fan of two stupid idiots so my tennis fandom future isn't looking bright. :(

But fortunately my fave player in tennis is Naomi Osaka so I've been temporarily saved on the Slam winning front.
Click to expand...
No, not really, we watch them for their athleticism, not for their brain power.
 
-NN- said:
I like him because this is a sport, I want to be entertained and I'm all for characters. Besides, I genuinely appreciate his candour even if he can be excessively dickish. That said, I do have a VERY high threshold for dickishness and "characters". But I don't see the point in treating sportsmen as moral exemplars or to be necessarily put off them because they aren't one. When it crosses the line for me is if a player is cheating and therefore undermining the sporting conduct of what is a sport. Keep it clean.
Click to expand...

I don’t care much about what he says to umps or anything like that, unless it is very extreme, they’re adults, but being aggressive towards ballkids is off limits for me. There’s no need. I don’t believe they’re paid are they? If they are I’m sure it is not much.

So personally for me, adult to adult I don’t care too much. Adult to ball kid is something else entirely. Not a fan of it.

And that goes for anybody wacking a ball in any unsafe way towards a ball kid (or anybody else) as well.
 
Steve0904 said:
I don’t care much about what he says to umps or anything like that, unless it is very extreme, they’re adults, but being aggressive towards ballkids is off limits for me. There’s no need. I don’t believe they’re paid are they? If they are I’m sure it is not much.

So personally for me, adult to adult I don’t care too much. Adult to ball kid is something else entirely. Not a fan of it.

And that goes for anybody wacking a ball in any unsafe way towards a ball kid (or anybody else) as well.
Click to expand...


Yeah I hear you.


(PS, just realised NFL is well and truly underway now. Awww yiss.)
 
-NN- said:
Yeah I hear you.


(PS, just realised NFL is well and truly underway now. Awww yiss.)
Click to expand...

Yeah, trying to watch a couple games here. Watching Packers and Vikings, and the new Superman led Patriots. Definitely watching the Bucs Saints game after this one. Must see how Brady does with his un retired TE buddy I suppose.
 
Fedforever said:
How is hitting the ball fast without looking not abusing it to some degree? If you wanted to send the ball to the back of the court why not look where you're hitting it?

Of course he didn't mean to hurt anyone but he sent a fast hard ball at head height without looking, in an area where he presumably knew (or should know) a linesperson would be standing.
Click to expand...
It was not hit hard. He barely touched it
 
Beckerserve said:
No players were happy about it. It goes against the narrative but Djokovic is hugely popular in the locker room as he mixes with all the players more than Fedal. The players will have known politics were at play. Once the event is over i expect many to criticise the USTA and ATP as ill bet the ATP had some input even though it was an ITF event.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see tennis without sponsors.
 
Street said:
I wouldn't neccessarily disagree but to be fair, the umpire did cost him the loss of a break.
Click to expand...
when you lose 3 straight sets, you can hardly blame the line judges, referee or umpire. Granted the last 2 were tiebreaks but sounds like he still has a long way to mature. It isn't just winning that makes you a champion.
 
dunlop1975 said:
when you lose 3 straight sets, you can hardly blame the line judges, referee or umpire. Granted the last 2 were tiebreaks but sounds like he still has a long way to mature. It isn't just winning that makes you a champion.
Click to expand...

Where has he blamed anyone for the whole match? Although the bad call played a pivotal role in the 1st set. And when you’re up a set it’s much easier to play lose and clutch in tight moments (like Thiem did in tiebreaks) than when you’re down a set.

Thiem had the winning play for the day either way, but I think it could have gone 4 or 5 sets and been more entertaining if Med had gotten some good breaks rather than the bad one in the first set.
 
"My sincere apologies, ref, for crossing the net. It’s okay? It’s okay? It’s okay?"

This guy singlehandedly will save ********'s
image.
 
FRV3 said:
Must have been the Djokovic thing, good catch. Maybe some players were not happy about it.
Click to expand...
Most players weren’t actually. The main reason Djokovic can branch out and create the PTPA is because he’s extremely popular in the locker room, both ATP and WTA. If you noticed, even Serena Williams backed him.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
Not true.

Almost (?) all amateurs that play the sport rely on themselves and we have been underway for decades.

8-B
Click to expand...

Yeah I was referring more to player endorsements actually. Not tournament sponsors and whatnot. The UFC hardly has them these days. And the ones that did exist in the past typically weren't corporate.

Can't imagine many people will come out and support Novak at least in part because of them. Although I am sure most players actually do side with him. Medvedev's comment is not surprising.
 
dunlop1975 said:
when you lose 3 straight sets, you can hardly blame the line judges, referee or umpire. Granted the last 2 were tiebreaks but sounds like he still has a long way to mature. It isn't just winning that makes you a champion.
Click to expand...
I don't think Medvedev blamed the judges for losing the match and neither did I. I did, however, say the umpire was responsible for Medvedev losing that break because umpire's mistake made medvedev lose the break point.
 
Best part of the match.

Tennis' elite have a real rough ride.
 
Tennis_Hands said:
@woodrow1029

Would you give us insight into the situation and the rule itself. Thanks!

:cool:
Click to expand...

two parts, and I apologize for not reading the whole thread, but I have a feeling that you are talking about one of two things.

1. He couldn’t challenge because he played the shot. If it had been a winner by him or if he caught it or let it go then challenged it would be fine. But by Playing the shot, even though it looked like he was only half hitting it, it does not show an immediate interest in the call...

2. If a player goes across the net to look at a mark and it’s not on a change of ends, it’s a code violation for unsportsmanlike conduct... the players all know this... Hingis got in trouble with this at the French in 1999 too.

It’s showing up the umpire. The umpire may have made a mistake, but for example in baseball, an umpire may miss a ball/strike call, but if the batter marks the batters box with a line where he thought the ball was outside, he will be ejected, it’s a similar thing.

I hope one of those are what you were discussing.
 
Medvedev is firmly going in the direction of attaching himself to the "victim" train, and his actions clearly show it. He is almost there where he thinks that he is entitled because he is treated "unfairly", that is why he didn't see crossing the net as a fault of his own, hence the ridiculous question "I killed someone, right?"

8-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

M
US Open - Other All Time Great Matchups like Federer-Nadal that were one match away from happening
Replies
1
Views
125
Hitman
Hitman
Zardoz7/12
Zverev is doing what Medvedev should do
Replies
7
Views
662
smalahove
smalahove
M
Players who played Federer hard and loss in a Grand Slam match - whatever happened to them?
Replies
7
Views
466
Federev
Federev
WhiskeyEE
Was the Shanghai final the moral USO final?
2
Replies
65
Views
3K
-NN-
-NN-
skypadq
what 's the reason marat safin hasn't won slam in 2001 ~ 2002 ?
Replies
8
Views
656
travlerajm
travlerajm
Back
Top