What should rising Djokovic have done differently?

[skaj]

The dictionary defines "hater" as:

1. a person who hates someone or something
2. a person who actively and aggressively criticizes and disparages something or someone

If you don't see yourself fitting in one or both of these definitions regarding Djokovic, I don't know what to tell you.

You see the bad in him as bad, and you see the good as also bad (because he is only "faking" it to be liked)

The definition of popularity(you know, the topic here, which is not me nor your ideas of me):

the state or condition of being liked, admired, or supported by many people.

If you can't accept the fact that his behaviour is behind his lack of popularity, I suggest you don't write here, especially digressions regarding your ideas about and obsessions with me(the one who says this simple truth).

I am not "aggressive" and I see bad because it's - bad, and fake because it's - fake(He acts in the way which is representative, until he loses control and shows his real face => he was faking it. He says one thing and does the opposite => he's faking it).

 

[beltsman]

Djokovic has suffered from a popularity deficit relative to Federer and Nadal, who preceded him at the top and overlapped many years on the big stage.

Part of the problem, it seems to me, is that Novak’s rise to #1 seemed come due to the decline of Fedal, because he was #3 fiddle, or even #4 when Murray was on the rise, for so long.

My question is, is there anything Novak could have done, on-court performance aside, during his ascent, that would have made the public view him differently?

Could he have used Muhammad Ali style bold boasts to influence opinions? Could he have cultivated a chosen-one hero image better? Or maybe a heel image? What should he have done?!!!

Don't fake injury and retire from matches and insult the crowd

 

[jeroenn]

If you don't see yourself fitting in one or both of these definitions regarding Djokovic, I don't know what to tell you.

You obviously haven't encountered real hatred in your life yet. That's ok, and lucky for you.

If people would really hate him, he'd have to fear for his life, not fear a bad review and negative comments on an internet forum...

 

[RoddickAce]

Been a fan of fedal for a long time, and never really had any issues with Djoko catching up and surpassing them. Was even rooting for him to complete the CYGS.

But all the racquet breaking/throwing into stands, screaming and shirt ripping, hitting the USO lines lady and then still not changing this risky behaviour, the "toilet break" that inspired Tsitsipas, random "scandals" like partying without a mask during the adria tour, the whole AO issue, etc...these things add up. Compare that with fedal, who obviously are not perfect but come nowhere close in terms of negative publicity.

 

[jm1980]

The definition of popularity(you know, the topic here, which is not me nor your ideas of me):

the state or condition of being liked, admired, or supported by many people.

If you can't accept the fact that his behaviour is behind his lack of popularity, I suggest you don't write here, especially digressions regarding your ideas about and obsessions with me(the one who says this simple truth).

It's a free country... I never argued his behavior was exemplar, just that it's not nearly as bad as you're suggesting with your distorted "truth". His few incidents of bad behavior are exaggerated and used repeatedly by people as a justification for their dislike of him, when in reality the real reason is he beat their favorites.

Djokovic arrived late in the scene. The fans of more classic tennis flocked to Federer, and those who didn't went with Nadal. These people formed attachments to these players and saw Djokovic as some sort of usurper. He lost the battle for popularity without ever standing a chance no matter what he did or how he behaved.

I am not "aggressive" and I see bad because it's - bad, and fake because it's - fake(He acts in the way which is representative, until he loses control and shows his real face => he was faking it. He says one thing and does the opposite => he's faking it).

Why is his "real face" the rare moments when he loses control, and not the vast majority of the time when he is fine?

 

[skaj]

Been a fan of fedal for a long time, and never really had any issues with Djoko catching up and surpassing them. Was even rooting for him to complete the CYGS.

But all the racquet breaking/throwing into stands, screaming and shirt ripping, hitting the USO lines lady and then still not changing this risky behaviour, the "toilet break" that inspired Tsitsipas, random "scandals" like partying without a mask during the adria tour, the whole AO issue, etc...these things add up. Compare that with fedal, who obviously are not perfect but come nowhere close in terms of negative publicity.

Never been a fan of "fedal", and I think the same.

 

[skaj]

It's a free country... I never argued his behavior was exemplar, just that it's not nearly as bad as you're suggesting with your distorted "truth". His few incidents of bad behavior are exaggerated and used repeatedly by people as a justification for their dislike of him, when in reality the real reason is he beat their favorites.

Djokovic arrived late in the scene. The fans of more classic tennis flocked to Federer, and those who didn't went with Nadal. These people formed attachments to these players and saw Djokovic as some sort of usurper. He lost the battle for popularity without ever standing a chance no matter what he did or how he behaved.

Why is his "real face" the rare moments when he loses control, and not the vast majority of the time when he is fine?

Not sure what country you are talking about.

I am not "suggesting" nor "distorting" nor "exaggerating" anything , I am presenting (many)examples for his bad behaviour which gives you the answer why he lacks popularity. The only one who is repeating something is him repeating his poor behaviour, and the moments he loses control are far from "rare". Why is his real face the one when he loses control is self-explanatory. There is no reason for most people not to accept a new face which would bring new dynamics to tennis, especially after a lot of criticism about only one rivalry dominating tennis.

The one who is giving excuses is you, the person who is trying to justify his poor behaviour and denying the obvious causation.

 

[Lauren_Girl']

Been a fan of fedal for a long time, and never really had any issues with Djoko catching up and surpassing them. Was even rooting for him to complete the CYGS.

But all the racquet breaking/throwing into stands, screaming and shirt ripping, hitting the USO lines lady and then still not changing this risky behaviour, the "toilet break" that inspired Tsitsipas, random "scandals" like partying without a mask during the adria tour, the whole AO issue, etc...these things add up. Compare that with fedal, who obviously are not perfect but come nowhere close in terms of negative publicity.

Most of these points are either inaccurate or taken totally out of context.

What AO issue? It's been proved over and over again that he didn't break any rule in Australia. If anyone screwed up it's Tennis Australia or the messy government. Djokovic was given a valid exemption and was given the green light. He would never have entered Australia if they directly told him NO. They completely screwed up and he payed the price unfortunately.

Not sure what "scandals" you're refering to. The Adria Tour was staged in agreement with the autorities. There were no more covid restrictions in Serbia at this moment of the year. Most weren't wearing masks.

His longest "toilet breaks" never exceeded 5-6 minutes. He never exaggerated this. The one he took in that French Open final was exactly 5 minutes. Tsitsipas (and other players, like Opelka) regularly left for more than 10 minutes. Tsitsipas is totally delusional if Djokovic inspired him. How about the way he DELIBERATELY tried to hit Kyrgios in Wimbledon, and then how he hit a spectator with his ball. Still wasn't defaulted. Neither were Brooksby, Rublev, Ostapenko, Begu... for way worse infractions.

Not sure when is the last time he smashed a racket but that wasn't recently. Not even this year as far as I know. I personally wouldn't turn on a player just because he breaks rackets. Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Rublev would all have 0 fan, they all do it and more regularly. Even Federer has smashed rackets and thrown balls in anger and I have no problem with that.

 

[jm1980]

Not sure what country you are talking about.

it’s a free country | meaning of it’s a free country in Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English | LDOCE

it’s a free country meaning, definition, what is it’s a free country: used, usually humorously, to say that yo...: Learn more.

www.ldoceonline.com

I am not "suggesting" nor "distorting" nor "exaggerating" anything , I am presenting (many)examples for his bad behaviour which gives you the answer why he lacks popularity. The only one who is repeating something is him repeating his poor behaviour, and the moments he loses control are far from "rare". Why is his real face the one when he loses control is self-explanatory.

You managed to produce a handful of examples when the guy has been a professional player for 19 years, at least 16 of which were at or near the top level. That is the definition of rare. Not to mention the off court stuff, specially about his involvement with the Serbian government and alleged Serbian war criminals is tenuous at best, and nobody who didn't have anti-Serbian views to begin with will care about that

There is no reason for most people not to accept a new face which would bring new dynamics to tennis, especially after a lot of criticism about only one rivalry dominating tennis.

The reason people won't accept a new face is, as I explained, the attachments they formed to their favorites who were still at the top of the game.

It's very different from, for example, Fed fans now clamoring for new talent to topple Djokovic and Nadal

 

[jeroenn]

Most of these points are either inaccurate or taken totally out of context.

What AO issue? It's been proved over and over again that he didn't break any rule in Australia. If anyone screwed up it's Tennis Australia or the messy government. Djokovic was given a valid exemption and was given the green light. He would never have entered Australia if they directly told him NO. They completely screwed up and he payed the price unfortunately.

This is factually not correct on so many levels. Go re-read the court documents and watch the trials, they should be still viewable. Then read up on Austrialian Visum laws. He was never EVER given a 'green light'. He was issued a visum which is subject to review upon entry. His laywer is on the record stating that Djokovic misrepresented that he wasn't in other countries before coming to Australia. TA was told not once but twice that previous covid infection was NOT ground for exemption. And then there was the cut-off date. All for starters.

He should not have gotten on the flight to Oz, simple as that.

 

[skaj]

it’s a free country | meaning of it’s a free country in Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English | LDOCE

it’s a free country meaning, definition, what is it’s a free country: used, usually humorously, to say that yo...: Learn more.

www.ldoceonline.com

You managed to produce a handful of examples when the guy has been a professional player for 19 years, at least 16 of which were at or near the top level. That is the definition of rare. Not to mention the off court stuff, specially about his involvement with the Serbian government and alleged Serbian war criminals is tenuous at best, and nobody who didn't have anti-Serbian views to begin with will care about that


The reason people won't accept a new face is, as I explained, the attachments they formed to their favorites who were still at the top of the game.

It's very different from, for example, Fed fans now clamoring for new talent to topple Djokovic and Nadal

I was referring to Serbia (which is not a free country), sorry if it wasn't clear.

Your definition of rare is again your thing. He had numerous poor behaviours during his career, I gave just some examples(which alone are enough for it not to be "rare"). His involvement with Serbian government is a fact, well documented in the media. People who have "anti-Serbian" views are the only ones who could condone that involvement of his, since the government is anti-Serbian.

You explained the reason for the die-hard fans of the players who came before, we are talking about general popularity where this does not play a significant role(otherwise Steffi Graf would have had as many "haters" as Djokovic).

 

[jeroenn]

Not sure when is the last time he smashed a racket but that wasn't recently. Not even this year as far as I know.

Correct. He just hurled one where a ballkid had to duck away....

Novak Djokovic’s launched racket nearly hits ball boy in Serbia Open controversy

Fans and analysts are scratching their heads to determine whether the Serbian’s racket throw was intentional or not.

nypost.com

Edit:
He came close tho:

Novak Djokovic under fire over 'awful' act during Rafa Nadal clash

Novak Djokovic cut a frustrated figure during his clash with Rafa Nadal at the French Open. Read more here.

au.sports.yahoo.com

 

[RoddickAce]

Most of these points are either inaccurate or taken totally out of context.

What AO issue? It's been proved over and over again that he didn't break any rule in Australia. If anyone screwed up it's Tennis Australia or the messy government. Djokovic was given a valid exemption and was given the green light. He would never have entered Australia if they directly told him NO. They completely screwed up and he payed the price unfortunately.

Not sure what "scandals" you're refering to. The Adria Tour was staged in agreement with the autorities. There were no more covid restrictions in Serbia at this moment of the year. Most weren't wearing masks.

His longest "toilet breaks" never exceeded 5-6 minutes. He never exaggerated this. The one he took in that French Open final was exactly 5 minutes. Tsitsipas (and other players, like Opelka) regularly left for more than 10 minutes. Tsitsipas is totally delusional if Djokovic inspired him. How about the way he DELIBERATELY tried to hit Kyrgios in Wimbledon, and then how he hit a spectator with his ball. Still wasn't defaulted. Neither were Brooksby, Rublev, Ostapenko, Begu... for way worse infractions.

Not sure when is the last time he smashed a racket but that wasn't recently. Not even this year as far as I know. I personally wouldn't turn on a player just because he breaks rackets. Medvedev, Zverev, Tsitsipas and Rublev would all have 0 fan, they all do it and more regularly. Even Federer has smashed rackets and thrown balls in anger and I have no problem with that.

I never said he broke rules in Australia did I? The issue refers to the fact that:
a) either he falsified testing positive for COVID
Or b) he did tell the truth but met with others while being positive

Regarding his racquet breaking, a simple google search yielded this:

 

[jm1980]

LMAO at this video, padded with every time he broke a racquet and every retirement in his career

Hurling his racquet into completely empty stands in Tokyo also included

 

[RoddickAce]

LMAO at this video, padded with every time he broke a racquet and every retirement in his career

Hurling his racquet into completely empty stands in Tokyo also included

Would challenge someone try to pad their video with fed or rafa doing the same amount of things, combined.

 

[sportsfan1]

Djokovic wasn't a "problem" until he started winning more and more titles. In fact a lot of Federer fans liked him when he beat Nadal in 2011. But the more he won, the more hostile they became towards him

Maybe, but he's also got people rooting against him/for his opponent most tournaments, regardless of who he plays whether it's a tour veteran or a new player. He's great on court as far as winning, but he does have broad appeal issues.

 

[TU87]

He should have signed with Nike early in his career. I believe a majority of Fed and Nadal's popularity is based on branding from Nike. Nike has been the best at branding their athletes and they have always embraced controversial athletes as well. Serena has never had the greatest personality but her branding by Nike has always helped her. Nike is always behind the scenes pressuring media like ESPN to speak favorably and often about their athletes.

 

[travlerajm]

He should have signed with Nike early in his career. I believe a majority of Fed and Nadal's popularity is based on branding from Nike. Nike has been the best at branding their athletes and they have always embraced controversial athletes as well. Serena has never had the greatest personality but her branding by Nike has always helped her. Nike is always behind the scenes pressuring media like ESPN to speak favorably and often about their athletes.

In other words, every image has a good PR guy behind it.

 

[skaj]

He should have signed with Nike early in his career. I believe a majority of Fed and Nadal's popularity is based on branding from Nike. Nike has been the best at branding their athletes and they have always embraced controversial athletes as well. Serena has never had the greatest personality but her branding by Nike has always helped her. Nike is always behind the scenes pressuring media like ESPN to speak favorably and often about their athletes.

How did you get to this conclusion?

Serena does not have the best reputation.

 

[Razer]

6 things.

01. Should have identified his gluten allergy earlier, his prime could have started 2-3 years earlier.
02. Should have hired Boris Becker around 2009-2010 but I guess this is something which we can predict only in hindsight, not at that time.
03. Should have signed NIKE and not rejected it, they have a big role in promoting Europeans in USA. Going against them not wise!
04. Should have taken/at least faked the vaccine with a proper certificate, there is no need to be a rebel off the court.
05. Maybe should have done surgery on his elbow 1 year earlier.
06. Should not have started PTPA, what a useless organization.

There is nothing else that he should have done differently, the shouting on court, breaking racquets is all necessary at times to get into an aggressive mood or to vent out anger, these are all rituals that are part of winning. Going against the crowd is also important, it is important to draw motivation from your haters to beat them and then enjoy their pain in defeat, it is all important.




Great Hair !!!

"Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away"