Roger and Andy special features on the Beeb

Just in case you didn't know there are two coming up

The first is on 5Live on Thursday about Roger's success

And the second is a BBC 2 documentary on Andy on Sunday night

Fitting that the current two best grass court players have their own show - let the fur start flying after that comment

well the comment is true thou.

Lets just see what happens and if Murray lives up to the billing at wimbeldon. I really feel like this may be his best chance to date to win this title.

"The first is on 5Live on Thursday about Roger's success."

Only one program? Sounds more like a serial. You could make a whole DVD box set about that subject.

Can't wait for the Murray documentary. The cameras followed him around during 2012 so I understand (couldn't have picked a better year) and you really get a rare insight into his personality apparently.

Should be great.

Yep! Looking forward to both

My comment was me being a WUM by the way

Let's be honest at Wimbledon, considering we've had all four winning the last four 'major' events at Wimby - there ain't much between them

I just checked the BBC website and I think the Federer documentary is today at 9.30pm BST on five live and the Murray documentary is on Sunday at 22:25 BST on BBC One.

Anyway am looking forward to both! 

Maybe I have Mr Overend wrong. I was listening to the radio this morning and he was on talking about (promoting!) the Federer documentary. He used phrases such as 'the nicest guy in sport' and 'certainly the best player I've seen on a tennis court'.

I nearly verged onto the hard shoulder in shock. Maybe the anti-Fed rhetoric I've been picking up from his blogs have been a figment of my imagination!

Then again after he's interviewed him I suppose he has to be a little nice doesn't he!

Anyway I wish I could somehow tape the interview so I could listen to it.

It shows a certain amount of conceit on Murray's part that he is doing this documentry, as though we are so interested in him walking the dogs and taking a bath.

Johnyjeep wrote:Anyway I wish I could somehow tape the interview so I could listen to it.

Download the blog or use i-player

Andy11 wrote:It shows a certain amount of conceit on Murray's part that he is doing this documentry, as though we are so interested in him walking the dogs and taking a bath.

He's received loads of criticism in the past for being closed off from the media and public, so it's interesting to hear him criticised for opening himself up a little with a documentary.

I can't wait to watch it, and I know lots of people that are the same. This is Britains best tennis player for 3 quarters of a century... Why wouldn't people be interested?

Andy11 wrote:It shows a certain amount of conceit on Murray's part that he is doing this documentry, as though we are so interested in him walking the dogs and taking a bath.

I probably fast forward through the bit where he's in the bath, but the rest I'm very much looking forward to.

I shall probably watch, though in part I am disappointed by his participation in the documentary as part of what has made me like & respect Murray is his focus on the tennis and his shunning of the celebrity guff. That said, the BBC have got Wimbledon to promote so would probably have done some sort of feature on him anyway. Still, I wish he'd just put a guard round his private life and declare it off-limits.

Also, obviously I haven't watched it, but I dread that it will be full of the media cliche that the "nation" has warmed to him after his tears after last year's Wimbledon final. Sue Barker even takes credit for endearing him to the nation by handing him the microphone. Based on my own experience, people who didn't like him before didn't suddenly find him endearing, and people who were indifferent to him felt a bit of sympathy and went back to their indifference. And in my experience, most of the British public are fairly supportive and continue to be so. If anything though, the kind of over-exposure he gets on the BBC this time of year, with the lazy journalism story about how we've now all learned to love him, is likely to turn more people towards the hater category. I'm curious if anyone else thinks this might be a consequence of the hype we are about to endure.

YvonneT wrote:If anything though, the kind of over-exposure he gets on the BBC this time of year, with the lazy journalism story about how we've now all learned to love him, is likely to turn more people towards the hater category. I'm curious if anyone else thinks this might be a consequence of the hype we are about to endure.

No, in a word!   I think it will help his public image and being reminded of a great OG win and a well fought final will endear him once again to the crowds that enjoy Wimbledon greatly but don't follow tennis that closely for the rest of the year. 

(One thing I am dreading about the hype around the tournament is the increased hysteria  that I envisage, from the British commentators, about his chances at Wimbledon now that he has won his first major.)

Missed the Federer programme earlier tonight (though I'm sure it will be available on iplayer .... or podcast .... whatever .....)

Very much looking forward to the Andy M documentary. 

When cameras follow someone for such an extended period of time, the interest factor of the end result depends to a very large extent on the quality and 'balance' of editing.

The Beeb did something similar with Jessica Ennis in her run-up (excuse the pun ho ho ...) to the Olympics and the final cut made for some good viewing.

But as tp says .... the less frenzied hype about Wimbledon title prospects the better. Not just for us, but I feel sure for AM himself too.....

Oops  ..... just realised the Fed programme is not till tomorrow. So I can't have missed it..... !!  

YvonneT wrote:Sue Barker even takes credit for endearing him to the nation by handing him the microphone

When she's presenting Tennis, I'm not a huge Barker fan - I find her lazy in her summations. But to be fair to her, it's everyone else who goes on about this

Lazy is a good description.

No sign of proper research ahead of her appearances, no sense of preparation ..... quoting facts off the top of her head which very often turn out to be error-strewn and generally adding very little that's fresh or insightful to the quality of overall debate/punditry.

I'm always surprised that for someone who did reach such a fine level in her own playing career she herself appears to contribute so little of interest, whilst at the same time asking the most inane of rhetorical questions of others in the studio  ("Andy will be wanting to win this first set, won't he John .... ??")

lags72 wrote:Lazy is a good description.

No sign of proper research ahead of her appearances, no sense of preparation ..... quoting facts off the top of her head which very often turn out to be error-strewn and generally adding very little that's fresh or insightful to the quality of overall debate/punditry.

I'm always surprised that for someone who did reach such a fine level in her own playing career she herself appears to contribute so little of interest, whilst at the same time asking the most inane of rhetorical questions of others in the studio  ("Andy will be wanting to win this first set, won't he John .... ??")

Or remember her interviewing Fed on CC after the final last year:

"He really had you worried there, didn't he? a set and a break up"

emancipator wrote:

lags72 wrote:Lazy is a good description.

No sign of proper research ahead of her appearances, no sense of preparation ..... quoting facts off the top of her head which very often turn out to be error-strewn and generally adding very little that's fresh or insightful to the quality of overall debate/punditry.

I'm always surprised that for someone who did reach such a fine level in her own playing career she herself appears to contribute so little of interest, whilst at the same time asking the most inane of rhetorical questions of others in the studio  ("Andy will be wanting to win this first set, won't he John .... ??")

Or remember her interviewing Fed on CC after the final last year:

"He really had you worried there, didn't he? a set and a break up"

In front of the whole World.

I truly, honestly and without arrogance know that I and many others could do a better job.

I haven't listened to the Roger special yet, in full, but for the first time ever was actually impressed with Overend (yes, I know I need to go lie down in a dark corner and keep taking the tablets!!)

For the first time ever he came out with a comment, which shows he does know something about the game. It was when he was remembering a vintage Fed half volley forehand, which "stayed with him".

Good to see he remembers some of the free Tennis he watched

Now he' off, to be replaced by someone arguably even more faceless and 'jack of all trades'

bogbrush wrote:

emancipator wrote:

lags72 wrote:Lazy is a good description.

No sign of proper research ahead of her appearances, no sense of preparation ..... quoting facts off the top of her head which very often turn out to be error-strewn and generally adding very little that's fresh or insightful to the quality of overall debate/punditry.

I'm always surprised that for someone who did reach such a fine level in her own playing career she herself appears to contribute so little of interest, whilst at the same time asking the most inane of rhetorical questions of others in the studio  ("Andy will be wanting to win this first set, won't he John .... ??")

Or remember her interviewing Fed on CC after the final last year:

"He really had you worried there, didn't he? a set and a break up"

In front of the whole World.

I truly, honestly and without arrogance know that I and many others could do a better job.

She was so unprofessional after the final. Her disappointment at Andy losing was so evident, she could barely muster the fortitude to conduct a proper interview. Which is a bit nauseating even when it's a British broadcast but to be so transparent in front of the whole world.

banbrotam wrote:I haven't listened to the Roger special yet, in full, but for the first time ever was actually impressed with Overend (yes, I know I need to go lie down in a dark corner and keep taking the tablets!!)

For the first time ever he came out with a comment, which shows he does know something about the game. It was when he was remembering a vintage Fed half volley forehand, which "stayed with him".

Good to see he remembers some of the free Tennis he watched

Now he' off, to be replaced by someone arguably even more faceless and 'jack of all trades'

The one who murders me is Fordyce, who just runs this endless "joke" about taking it all over-seriously. BBC cricket coverage by live text has become a parody of self-congratulatory "humour" all geared to who can pretend to be the biggest fan, recount the most stupid made up story usually involving endlessly patient girlfriends. They all do it now on there, backed up by losers who text in their own efforts.

I always struggle to take cricket as a sport seriously...grown men handing woolly jumpers to the form prefect behind the stumps, jogging 22 yards between ends every now and then when they feel like it. My uncle took me to a test match as a 10 year old. I was surrounded by old men who were fast asleep with white hats over their faces...as I watched the bunch of 'players' milling about in the outfield for 15 mins I realised why. Never went to another cricket match or watched it on TV since.

lydian wrote:I always struggle to take cricket as a sport seriously...grown men handing woolly jumpers to the form prefect behind the stumps, jogging 22 yards between ends every now and then when they feel like it. My uncle took me to a test match as a 10 year old. I was surrounded by old men who were fast asleep with white hats over their faces...as I watched the bunch of 'players' milling about in the outfield for 15 mins I realised why. Never went to another cricket match or watched it on TV since.

hehe

Amen brother.

We had this debate quite often on the GOAT thread where some people tried to make Bradman the GOAT of all sports.

I, the emancipator, soon put an end to that nonsense!



emancipator

Moving more & more off-topic here, but wrt the wacky world of cricket .......

In contrast to the views of lydian and no doubt many others, I'm actually a bit of a fan of the game - although I'd put myself very much in the category of a casual and fair-weather watcher.

Either way, you gotta admit we would surely lose something pretty unique if it were all to come to an end ....

I mean ..... is there another sport in this big wide world which observes, with near-religious fervour, interruptions not only for lunch but for 'Tea' ....... 

I was never a huge fan of cricket to be honest, especially test match cricket which is just boring! However, the limited overs game is quite interesting and when its a tournament such as a world cup or the one on at the moment it can be interesting to watch and as exciting as a 5 set final.

Cricket has moved on from the days described by Lydian. It is more vibrant now. I would rather watch a cricket match than football...

I prefer Test Cricket. Test being the optimum word as that is what it dies.....tests. It tests all aspects of players game ie when batting for long spells concentration is key plus having to deal with changing pitch condition and atmospheric conditions. Limited overs is more of a game of chance as far as I am concerned - or a thrash and bash as it is also known.

Watching cricket.............that is my idea of true punishment. Nearly as painful as Sue Barker interview last year, I agree that it was pretty uncomfortable for Federer.

Random slasher fact, you know that Sue Barker used to go out with Greg Norman. The shark must enjoy a spot of tennis, was married to Chris Evert too. That guy is so damn cool that it wouldnt surprise me if he managed to reel in one of the current players despite his advancing years

Well he is pretty cool, I'll grant you. But not always on the golf course.

He didn't look that cool when he famously blew a six shot lead over the final round of the 1996 US Masters and conceded the title he desperately wanted to Nick Faldo.

In fairness to Norman, he did take the loss like a man. One of the better examples of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory - which can happen to the very best, as we know.

lags72 wrote:Moving more & more off-topic here, but wrt the wacky world of cricket .......

In contrast to the views of lydian and no doubt many others, I'm actually a bit of a fan of the game - although I'd put myself very much in the category of a casual and fair-weather watcher.

Either way, you gotta admit we would surely lose something pretty unique if it were all to come to an end ....

I mean ..... is there another sport in this big wide world which observes, with near-religious fervour, interruptions not only for lunch but for 'Tea' ....... 

To be fair, they don't have much in the MTO area.

Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks cricket is a good cure for insomnia.
Cricket is so competitive that if a test match is locked in battle but it rains for the last day - well they just call it off as a drawn match!
Can you imagine Djokovic and Nadal at RG'12 when Sunday was rained off...."sorry lads, you'll have to share the trophy, we cant be bothered coming back another day".
Then again, you would be hard pressed to drag the crowd in for another day of woolly jumper exchange at Lords.
10cc must have been on crack...

It can't really be a sport either if only 8 countries (or something) play it

lydian wrote:Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks cricket is a good cure for insomnia.
Cricket is so competitive that if a test match is locked in battle but it rains for the last day - well they just call it off as a drawn match!
Can you imagine Djokovic and Nadal at RG'12 when Sunday was rained off...."sorry lads, you'll have to share the trophy, we cant be bothered coming back another day".
Then again, you would be hard pressed to drag the crowd in for another day of woolly jumper exchange at Lords.
10cc must have been on crack...

My Dad said that Test cricket reflected life. It goes through many phases and isn't always fair (like at the end if you're miles ahead and they're hanging on, then you run out of time).

I appreciate Test cricket. It's a different kind of watch from tennis; you can watch it for a while, take a break and do something else and come back ages later at which point everything may appear to be exactly as it was when you left off. Nothing at all like a Djokovic / Nadal match..............

bogbrush wrote:

lydian wrote:Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks cricket is a good cure for insomnia.
Cricket is so competitive that if a test match is locked in battle but it rains for the last day - well they just call it off as a drawn match!
Can you imagine Djokovic and Nadal at RG'12 when Sunday was rained off...."sorry lads, you'll have to share the trophy, we cant be bothered coming back another day".
Then again, you would be hard pressed to drag the crowd in for another day of woolly jumper exchange at Lords.
10cc must have been on crack...

My Dad said that Test cricket reflected life. It goes through many phases and isn't always fair (like at the end if you're miles ahead and they're hanging on, then you run out of time).

I appreciate Test cricket. It's a different kind of watch from tennis; you can watch it for a while, take a break and do something else and come back ages later at which point everything may appear to be exactly as it was when you left off. Nothing at all like a Djokovic / Nadal match..............

The other thing about test cricket is, like life, everything can change dramatically in an instant when nobody expected it to, but the person who kept alert and working hard is the one who takes the advantage.

Yeah, this is what it's all about. It trundles on and you keep grafting, and then good things can happen or you crash & burn.

I think it's cool.

More examples of of superb Beeb reporting

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/22988896

Castle is a loose cannon. I saw him play Jeremy Bates once and he wore some political tee shirt or something that made him look a complete d**k.

Bates stuffed him.

I find Castle often OK as a commentator as he is quite good at explaining technical stuff, to the numerous casual fans we have to accept that the Beeb have to cater to

But he is way too smug and his Lloyd quip was another example

lags72 wrote:Moving more & more off-topic here, but wrt the wacky world of cricket .......

In contrast to the views of lydian and no doubt many others, I'm actually a bit of a fan of the game - although I'd put myself very much in the category of a casual and fair-weather watcher.

Either way, you gotta admit we would surely lose something pretty unique if it were all to come to an end ....

I mean ..... is there another sport in this big wide world which observes, with near-religious fervour, interruptions not only for lunch but for 'Tea' ....... 

Thats got to be the best analogy of cricket for a long time.

I played cricket as a boy and loved it, waiting for the right ball then smack over the bowlers head for a four or six. Watching the game is a snooze and the only real cricket to watch is international or county games, although I don't speak from experience, but rather from some friends who do.

Did watch a village game years ago, in deep Sussex by the Sea, got bored and went for a walk over the downs. Came back and stayed to the end, had tea, a pint and a laugh with the team. All in all, very enjoyable, the scenery was amazing !

Reading the Sue comments........yeah not really a fan of hers.

Always view Virginia Wade as the moral bastion of the game, I'm sure she would give Laura a good telling off for swearing the other day.

Look forward to the Murray doc, be nice to see his other side.

Bamm-Bamm

Love it!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/tennis/23014728

Slight change of subject but is anyone watching / has watched the Venus & Serena documentary?

As much as there is to admire about her, I still find Serena rather objectionable as a character.

I watched and my overall impression was much the same as yours HMM.

Nor was there anything in the material shown that would make you warm to their father Richard. I can accept that he is a very driven sort of individual ; but equally, I was quite struck by just how little outward pleasure & satisfaction he appeared willing to show, in relation to the huge success that his efforts have brought.

Lags, yes, Richard seems a pretty intense character.

I thought Venus came over quite well though.

I really enjoyed that. 'Twas a fascinating look at the life of a top class tennis player and things they go through behind the scenes. Those ice baths look horrific!! I didn't realise Nadal had a personality either and his story about the prank text messages was great.

Yes an excellent watch. It also showed the nice sides of Rafa, Roger and Novak. It was good to get an idea of what motivates him and makes him tick.

Another thing I got from the great documentary last night was that Andy is very headstrong. Now that has worked for him in ways but against him in other ways. Evidently, when he was in his early teens he saw how Rafa trained so professionally not having to concentrate so much on school and Andy was adamant that is how he should be training/learning tennis as well. He got his way and was shipped off to Spain at a live-in tennis academy. That certainly was a very wise move and he has benefited from that. On the downside that headstrong and stubborness probably has hindered him when listening to advice of others who have tried to cut out his loss of focus and getting angry on court. That doesn't help him.

I'm going to watch it on the iplayer soon................

Fascinating documentary on Andy, and my respect for him has grown if anything. Seeing him break down at the mention of what his home town went through was very tough to watch. 

Nice to see Henman and Murray talk about the England Scotland banter that resulted in the media "Andy despises anything English" whitch hunt. I was hoping someone was going to mention that his grandparents, girlfriend, most of his team were English just to banish that nonsense for good, but hopefully that's been done anyway. 

I thought he came across as grounded, funny, emotional and exceptionally committed to his trade. He also came across as normal and not flash at all. Great program.

Totally agree Danny. If people watched that and still hold negative issues with him then I despair.