Murray: under appreciated or overrated?

First topic message reminder :

I would say overrated    

But what do other members of 606v2 think?

Ah poor Nadull. Seems to get bagelled so often

Novak looking scary good at the moment. Stan getting an absolute hammering.

emancipator wrote:Ah poor Nadull. Seems to get bagelled so often

True, not only that but it's not even a surprise.

Unfortunately this confirms Nadal is in rapid permanent decline, and is now at the end of his career basically, I have very very low expectations for him this year.

That would be awesome if it were true but sadly I suspect not. His bionic knees will no doubt insert new life into him and he'll continue to bore clobber, grind people to death.

It Must Be Love wrote:

emancipator wrote:Ah poor Nadull. Seems to get bagelled so often

True, not only that but it's not even a surprise.

Unfortunately this confirms Nadal is in rapid permanent decline, and is now at the end of his career basically, I have very very low expectations for him this year.

But secretly those low expectatios must include at least 2 slams right?

Oh gentlemen... were only 2 days into the new year here. Ill believe Murrays back to his best and Nadals finished (again again) when this happens in a match that counts

Emancipator, it's not his knees which are bionic, it's his back which is half bionic. Also we don't know how half bionic backs work with tennis, it may not be a good combination.

emancipator wrote:But secretly those low expectatios must include at least 2 slams right?

Preposterous allegation, at most I had hoped he would win 2 ATP 250s.
However after some killjoys closed down Estoril Open (they really did, look it up) my dreams have been shattered.
The only credible hope left now is this scenario: getting up at 3am UK time for some final somewhere in a Spanish speaking country in South America, Nadal up against another fellow Spaniard or similar, a 4 hour high octane long rally Vamos-ing fest match, and eventually Nadal beats Andujar/Almagro/Berlocq etc. in a deciding set tiebreak.

temporary21 wrote:Oh gentlemen... were only 2 days into the new year here. Ill believe Murrays back to his best and Nadals finished (again again) when this happens in a match that counts

I get your point, but when any of the Big 4 meet each other, they view it as vital - simply because they don't want to yield an inch to each other

Early days, though. I do think there's a fair chance that Andy will be competitive as compared to catching up

Andy was smashing the ball today, proper flat hitting, moving his opponent about and minimising his workload. Its what he needs to take stress off the back. Say they face in the quarters of the Aussie... does he still have the commitment to the style to play the same way?

Is it just me, or did Murray dye his hair?

Back to the clinic training ground for Rafa.

Im fortunate that all my joints and body parts function correctly and without pain. I would be horrified if I needed treatment for it, and people were turning their nose up at me, as though it made me somehow "weaker".

Wow you would think that Stan the Man and Nadal would put up better fights in these matches against Murray and Djoko. Well Murray and Djoko for the final looks like both guys are finally playing at the high level. The question has to be asked of Nadal when will all these various physical ailments catch up with him and when will he finally not be able to put together another comeback? I can't say personally, I have doubted him in the past and been burned and at other times I have backed him to comeback and he has proven me correct. So every time he has been able to regain his level of dominance but we know that at some point he won't be able to, so is this the time or does he have another comeback or two in the engine room?

I refuse to say Murray is 'playing at the high level' at the moment. All he did was hammer a mightily rusty Rafa Nadal who has been out of the sport for a few months and this was his first match back after surgery. The only other gauge we have on Andy's form is that he toiled to a three set win over Lopez who promptly lost in straight sets to Almagro so that is hardly a glowing indictment is it? I will wait before proclaiming this as Andy's resurrection. A better gauge will be in his showing V Djokovic later today. A straight sets defeat and I will feel it is 'as you were' from the tail end of last year. A defeat in three sets will offer crumbs of hope and any win and that would be encouraging indeed.

CaledonianCraig wrote:I refuse to say Murray is 'playing at the high level' at the moment. All he did was hammer a mightily rusty Rafa Nadal who has been out of the sport for a few months and this was his first match back after surgery. The only other gauge we have on Andy's form is that he toiled to a three set win over Lopez who promptly lost in straight sets to Almagro so that is hardly a glowing indictment is it? I will wait before proclaiming this as Andy's resurrection. A better gauge will be in his showing V Djokovic later today. A straight sets defeat and I will feel it is 'as you were' from the tail end of last year. A defeat in three sets will offer crumbs of hope and any win and that would be encouraging indeed.

CC good analysis you follow him much more closely than I do so I defer to it and it makes sense. It is good for Murray though confidence wise, either way it is a win against Nadal his biggest nemesis regardless of its exhibition like nature. Still will be good for Andy to give it ago against Djoko. And of course from this one match it is too early to tell regarding either Nadal or Murray.

The win V Nadal does offer a confidence boost but Andy is the sort that will know not to read too much into it considering that Rafa is so far off the pace at the moment. Personally, I'd take more from a narrow defeat against Novak today than an easy win over a mightily rusty Rafa yesterday.

Murray has said he has a sore shoulder, so I'm not expecting much from him today. Yesterday was a huge confidence boost- especially as he beat Rafa playing the aggressive style of tennis he has indicated he intends to play going forwards.

Born Slippy wrote:Murray has said he has a sore shoulder, so I'm not expecting much from him today. Yesterday was a huge confidence boost- especially as he beat Rafa playing the aggressive style of tennis he has indicated he intends to play going forwards.

Well he was holding his shoulder at times yesterday but it never stopped him sealing a comfortable win yesterday so I don't see why it should prevent him (if he is in any type of form) putting on a good show today.

Hopefully, it isn't anything serious, Murray has had a lot of physical problems since his two grandslam wins which have hurt his game. He needs a prolonged spell of health more than anything I think to regain that form he had during that period. That is the biggest part of the confidence thing is being confident in your own body.

There were some positive signs from Andy yesterday, he was quite aggressive and laid into Rafa with his backhand. Certainly there seemed to be more identity about his game than we've seen in a long time.

But like Craig I do not see it as a clear sign he's back to his best. Far from it. I actually think he'll get comfortably beaten by Novak later.

Sadly, the final is not going to happen as Novak has a fever and has pulled out of the final. Perhaps just as well though as Andy is talking about having an ultrasound scan on his shoulder which is troubling him. So Murray wins by default.

Nadal played a lot better today against Stan, winning in straight sets. Still far from his best.

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sadly, the final is not going to happen as Novak has a fever and has pulled out of the final. Perhaps just as well though as Andy is talking about having an ultrasound scan on his shoulder which is troubling him. So Murray wins by default.

Disappointing to see such a late withdrawal by Novak, but if he believes he's not fit, then we cannot reasonably expect him to play ; and understandable of course that he would wish to save himself when there are bigger battles ahead.

Let's hope he doesn't come in for anything like the level of unwarranted criticism levelled at Federer for pulling out in London, when I seem to recall one particular poster suggesting that Fed should have had the decency to show up, give it a go, and if need be taken his beating like a man.

lags72 wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:Sadly, the final is not going to happen as Novak has a fever and has pulled out of the final. Perhaps just as well though as Andy is talking about having an ultrasound scan on his shoulder which is troubling him. So Murray wins by default.

Disappointing to see such a late withdrawal by Novak, but if he believes he's not fit, then we cannot reasonably expect him to play ; and understandable of course that he would wish to save himself when there are bigger battles ahead.

Let's hope he doesn't come in for anything like the level of unwarranted criticism levelled at Federer for pulling out in London, when I seem to recall one particular poster suggesting that Fed should have had the decency to show up, give it a go, and if need be taken his beating like a man.

A little bit of different scenario in a exhibition in Abu Dhabi right before a grandslam event and Federer pulling out of the tour finals, a fever is also something that you can easily get over in a couple of days. Completely different scenario lags and you know it.

So the paying customers at Abu dhabi deserve less consideration than the paying customers at wtf that you so passionately championed over and over-crying over the loss of their hard earned money...

Your next bit of logic- you think federer having just spent a lost season due to back injury and battling it his whole career should have played 1/2 a day after suffering a new back injury- not knowing how bad it was, not getting an mri due to quick timetable, but djoko with a fever which only means he would have felt horrible while playing and wouldn't have resulted in a long or permanent injury like a back could- was okay not to play.. Smh.
The hypocritical logic of haters always amuses.

Have to say that Djokovic shouldn't be afforded any less criticism than Federer at the WTF.

I just wish these players wouldn't put unrealistic physical limitations on themselves. I do admire the commitment, but at the same time they should think of their bodies a bit more.

TRuffin wrote:So the paying customers at Abu dhabi deserve less consideration than the paying customers at wtf that you so passionately championed over and over-crying over the loss of their hard earned money...

Your next bit of logic- you think federer having just spent a lost season due to back injury and battling it his whole career should have played 1/2 a day after suffering a new back injury-  not knowing how bad it was, not getting an mri due to quick timetable,  but djoko with a fever which only means he would have felt horrible while playing and wouldn't have resulted in a long or permanent injury like a back could-  was okay not to play.. Smh.  
The hypocritical logic of haters always amuses.

Yes the last match of the year at the tour finals is quite different than exho, if that is what equals hypocrisy in your world Ruffin you lead a charmed existence.

Except for Federer it wasn't the last match of the year. He still had the Dc to play - a team event.

The point is that you blasted him endlessly for making the right choice on the basis that the fans were being screwed over and he was only concerned about himself for saving himself for the Dc. Yet djokovic pulls out to save himself for the Australian open (rightly so imo) and the fans lose out again but for you that's ok. I agree major double standards.

For the record, I think they both made the right choice.

TRuffin wrote:

..............................................

.........................................................
The hypocritical logic of haters always amuses.

Yep, the sheer hypocrisy is indeed amusing Truffin, but I'm pretty sure you would agree that it also comes as no great surprise.

Speaking personally as someone who has the highest regard, admiration & respect for Djokovic and Federer, I take an even-handed view ; and if they say they are unfit to play, I just accept they are calling it as it is - ie the decision is made for perfectly honest reasons. I can't say I have ever seen any grounds to doubt their word.

But of course things do look very different if you adopt the biased mindset of someone who, over a period of many years, has showered one player with praise while looking for every available opportunity to take pot shots at another. Then you can easily come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories, accusations of poor sportsmanship, ulterior motives and questionable behaviour. And you can of course very easily convince yourself that "your" player is doing the right thing - unlike the guy you're not a fan of.

You can even get yourself to the point where you consider that asking overly-noisy members of the crowd at a match to "Be quiet" is the most heinous of crimes. Although I guess if you think uttering the simple words "Be quiet" is best described as "going postal" then you might have led a charmed existence ......

emancipator wrote:Except for Federer it wasn't the last match of the year. He still had the Dc to play - a team event.

The point is that you blasted him endlessly for making the right choice on the basis that the fans were being screwed over and he was only concerned about himself for saving himself for the Dc. Yet djokovic pulls out to save himself for the Australian open (rightly so imo) and the fans lose out again but for you that's ok. I agree major double standards.

For the record, I think they both made the right choice.

The fans were one part of the argument the other was the importance of the event to the tour as it was a signature event in the calendar. Also part of the argument was that Federer himself stated that "he couldn't play Novak" he didn't say he couldn't play at all and a couple of days later he practices and a few days later he plays a five setter. A fever is something that can be so bad that it is dangerous for you to play, and it can go away in a day or two. Plus again an exho. Feel sorry for the fans but they should know that an exho before a slam is not going to be taken seriously and no one is going to risk injury over it.

lags72 wrote:

TRuffin wrote:

..............................................

.........................................................
The hypocritical logic of haters always amuses.

Yep, the sheer hypocrisy is indeed amusing Truffin, but I'm pretty sure you would agree that it also comes as no great surprise.

Speaking personally as someone who has the highest regard, admiration & respect for Djokovic and Federer, I take an even-handed view ; and if they say they are unfit to play, I just accept they are calling it as it is - ie the decision is made for perfectly honest reasons. I can't say I have ever seen any grounds to doubt their word.

But of course things do look very different if you adopt the biased mindset of someone who, over a period of many years, has showered one player with praise while looking for every available opportunity to take pot shots at another. Then you can easily come up with all sorts of conspiracy theories, accusations of poor sportsmanship, ulterior motives and questionable behaviour. And you can of course very easily convince yourself that "your" player is doing the right thing - unlike the guy you're not a fan of.

You can even get yourself to the point where you consider that asking overly-noisy members of the crowd at a match to "Be quiet" is the most heinous of crimes. Although I guess if you think uttering the simple words "Be quiet" is best described as "going postal" then you might have led a charmed existence ......

Way to rewrite history about the "be quiet incident". That actually isn't what happened. He went postal at Djokovic's parents and they yelled out after the point was over, which they like other fans are entitled to do. Nice way to federize history there lags.

I think both Federer and Djokovic were right to pull out, and that matches the evidence I've observed so far.

However I do see where Socal is coming from, Federer's wording when he pulled out was something along the lines of 'my level is not high enough to compete with Novak'- which is sightly ambiguous.
I remember legendkiller saying at the time that the impression he got was that if it was Nishikori, Federer would have played, but because Djokovic is too good he didn't- once again I do see where LK is coming from, but from the evidence I've see (his match against Monfils the next week) I disagree with LK.

Yes we can rely on IMBL with all the usual bias to come to socal's support.

Cue the traditional line from IMBL of Federer was quite right .... or ...I quite like Federer ......BUT ....now that I've spotted an angle where I can have a pot at him, let's do exactly that. Old habits die hard, after all.

Wow, that is remarkable. How on earth was that post disagreeing with Socal saying that I think Federer was right to pull out 'having a pot at Federer.'

Repost the same thing:

I think both Federer and Djokovic were right to pull out, and that matches the evidence I've observed so far.

However I do see where Socal is coming from, Federer's wording when he pulled out was something along the lines of 'my level is not high enough to compete with Novak'- which is sightly ambiguous.
I remember legendkiller saying at the time that the impression he got was that if it was Nishikori, Federer would have played, but because Djokovic is too good he didn't- once again I do see where LK is coming from, but from the evidence I've see (his match against Monfils the next week) I disagree with LK.

This just shows, even if I write a post saying Federer was right to pull out, some don't bother reading it, and shower me in pointless nonsense accusations of 'taking a pot at Federer'.
I do see where both LK and Socal are coming from, I don't think either of them are loons, however I respectfully disagree with their position.
And Lags, not the first time you've made false allegations as to what I've said and tried to misrepresent my position. Beyond farcical.

Lags apart from a dislike of imbl. What's your point in relation to the current topic?

This was a reasoned debate until you decided to take swipe at someone out of nowhere. Can we please keep it to the debate?

Novak pulled out because he had a fever. That's fair I guess. Federer mistake was not pulling out till the last second and taking the mic to work the crowd.  It wasn't necessary and it had the effect of making the final all about him.  Which probably wasn't jntentional but was the end result

Yes but surely it's better for Federer to wait until the last second, in case his back did improve and he could play ?
If he pulled out earlier, then he would have no chance of changing his mind, even if he back dramatically improved.

Maybe soo. It ended up a bit of a farce in the end. Perhaps it was better he just quietly pulled out at the last opportunity. His good intention ended up just making people more annoyed in the end

I see where I've been going wrong in my unbiased assessment when I said I had no problem at all with either of the withdrawals and the respective reasons given (or indeed the manner of notification).

Clearly, it's not right to judge both players impartially. As if it wasn't bad enough that Federer pulled out at the last minute with a bad back (he should have realised that pulling out with a fever a good few hours in advance is fair and thus in no way would have annoyed the crowd or prompted any criticism), he then goes and compounds the "mistake" by taking the time to apologise in person to the crowd, which apparently only served to annoy them (not that we have much in the way of evidence of any such annoyance). What a poor show apologising like that ; a farce even.

Shame on you Fed, now I know why you got all that flak last month from certain posters.

When you say 'certain posters' can you clarify who exactly you're talking about ?

You first brought up Fed's withdrawal from the WTF on this thread before anyone else, then randomly falsely accused me of 'taking a pot' at Federer, just after I wrote a post disagreeing with Socal saying he was right to pull out when he did, and now you don't apologise for that clear mistruth and go on complaining about 'certain posters'.

How about looking at yourself first and stop writing incendiary posts full of falsehoods ?

Clearly this has hit a big nerve.  May I suggest you both take a break and a few deep breaths before getting annoyed at ea h other for the terrible crime of having different interpretations     People see things differently, also water is wet. You guys need to stop getting angry at one another every time it happens, because it's anatural thing. IF this fight derails further you're gonna force is to do something

There's a difference between interpretations and mistruths, saying I agreed with Socal when I made it clear I disagree with him and then saying I took a pot at Federer when I said he was right to withdraw... that is beyond a misinterpretation and simply a lie.

I know water is wet, not sure what that has to do with anything, and pointing out when someone lies about what I'm saying is not the same as getting angry.

If you have a serious issue with the post then you gotta do the official thing. Flag it, give reasons and well see about changing it.    To lags , please stop getting exasperated every time someone views something differently to you. It's not an insult to you it's natural for it to happen .also please refrain from making posts specifically designed to annoy another poster       Now this is "officially " dealt with.  Shall we discuss murrays performance at the hopman cup?

I've no interest in getting involved in your talk of "incendiary posts and falsehoods". Feel free to judge my posts as you wish IMBL, and to get as offended as you see fit.


Meanwhile, if you're still in any doubt as to which posters were either criticising Federer heavily for withdrawing from WTF and/or judging Djokovic's withdrawal from Abu Dhabi to be perfectly okay, I suggest you simply look back through a) the WTF thread and b) this one.

I'm outta here anyway now, on a plane headed down to Melbourne and the AO.

lags72 wrote:I've no interest in getting involved in your talk of "incendiary posts and falsehoods". Feel free to judge my posts as you wish IMBL, and to get as offended as you see fit.

I'm not offended, it's just slightly annoying when I write a post saying I think Federer was right to withdraw, and you immediately write below how I'm saying the opposite.

Now thats all nice and clean. Has anyone incidentally watch the hopman cup?

I missed it temp. What channel was showing it? A solid win for Murray but this shoulder niggle of his is a worry.

Only his left shoulder though. A mild concern I would say. Sounds like he played some decent stuff versus Paire, albeit with the mandatory service drop straight after breaking in set 2.

Born Slippy wrote:Only his left shoulder though. A mild concern I would say. Sounds like he played some decent stuff versus Paire, albeit with the mandatory service drop straight after breaking in set 2.

Yes I agree it is only a mild concern but I'd prefer if that there was no concern. He needs to be in A1 health for the new season.