Home Search Calendar Help Login Register
Did you miss your activation email?
MurraysWorld Discussions  >  Murray Community  >  Andy Talk  >  The Murray and Djokovic Era? 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 11 Go Down Reply
Author

The Murray and Djokovic Era?

 (Read 4978 times)
Ruthie
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,339

Gender: Female
Location: East Midlands


Touch the sky - and touch it he did.

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #45 on: October 18, 2012, 09:26 AM »
Reply

I think the point about showing the emotion is being able to do so and then move on quickly.  In the past Andy has sometimes not been able to do that.  But I think that has changed and it may well be that the racquet smashing is symptomatic of that ie it gets it out of his system in a very visible way.  Perhaps he has been advised to do that rather than take it out on himself which he has tended to do in the past.  But I agree that we don't want to watch robots.  That's why I wasn't a Borg fan.  And although he may have gone over the top at times, I was a Johnnie Mac fan and also preferred his tennis.
IP Logged
BigNose
ATP Level
***
Posts: 1,614


The Voice of Reason

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #46 on: October 18, 2012, 10:19 AM »
Reply

Tennis definitely became less interesting when Johnnie Mac retired. The guy was abnoxious on-court but his verbal attacks on umpires were compulsive viewing. In fact he's still doing it on the seniors tour! Just check out youtube.

 Instead of saying how great your opponent is etc Id like to see some of the players actually fighting each other on-court. Like when Joker takes the injury time-out at the last game of the USO, Andy takes offence, makes some "cheat" comments, Joker gets riled, they square-off and start punching each others lights out.  Can you imagine the hype for their next match?
IP Logged
TheMadHatter
World No 1
*
*
Posts: 11,750

Gender: Male
Location: Southampton


Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #47 on: October 18, 2012, 12:52 PM »
Reply

Interesting reading views on character & emotion. IMO I would not watch sport if I couldnt see raw emotion....whats the point...It would be like watching robots play sport. A complete yawnfest. I wouldnt think it possible to reach the pinnacle of any sport and not have significant character... I enjoy watching Andy partly because he does show emotion on the court....and obviously becoz of his ability too. I dont thinks thats a weakness i think its a release of 'will to win' ...and I enjoy watching people with that quality...
Agree completely. I love seeing emotion.
IP Logged
The Gnome
ATP Level
***
Posts: 2,534

Gender: Male
Location: Winchester, England


Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #48 on: October 18, 2012, 01:33 PM »
Reply

I think Novaks' racquet smash was at least a 9.8 on the Mcenroe scale
IP Logged
Emma Jean
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,961

Gender: Female
Location: Toronto, Canada


We will be Victorious

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #49 on: October 18, 2012, 01:52 PM »
Reply

I agree that Raonic has a great attitude about losing,but on the other hand,his attitude off-court could sometimes use a little work.It's grand for the most part,but there have been times when I've thought he hasn't been that respectful of his opponents,and in that respect I think a lot of people could learn from Andy's attitude-he's always very respectful of people he's facing,or might be facing-or has faced,win or lose.There is,of course,a fine line between being respectful,and then being too respectful and not believing you have a chance against them,which Andy has himself said-you do need to walk out onto the court believing you can win-but still,I think Raonic-and not just him-could do with taking a page out of Andy's book in that respect,and I do think,when people-especially in the press-talk about Andy's attitude to things,it's an aspect-or maybe a character trait-he doesn't get enough credit for.

Raonic is still a kid and I don’t think he means disrespect when he says those things prior meetings. I have noticed he doesn’t say these things when it comes to other top players –perhaps he doesn’t want to dare but he must think it. Anyway, I get the feeling he wants to spice things up but it’s definitely not the right way to go, simply because you don’t know what you are asking for. Best to keep your mouth shut and let your racquet do all the talking. At least you won’t be in for a big surprise – like the time he took it from Andy at the Open. He’ll probably grow out of this sort of unnecessary competitive nature and be more mature.

His on-court attitude is still great and that’s when people notice him or others the most. How many people really pay attention to what was said before or even after a match? Not too many – only the hard core fans. I, for one, don’t read interviews or anything all that much because it’s not that important. What you bring to the table is more important. You can tell a lot more about a player’s condition both mental and physical simply by observing them and there’s lot more truth attached to it than what they have to say about their own conditions prior or post matches.
IP Logged
teejay1
Top Seed
*****
Posts: 5,994



Courage doesn't always roar - but wins Wimbledon

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #50 on: October 18, 2012, 02:04 PM »
Reply

Hi All,

The thing with me is that I always worry for Andy when he doesn't show emotion! Take the match against Mahut at Queen's for example. I don't recall anything from Andy, not a smack on the racquet, not a 'C'MON!' a look towards his team, anything. I'm not suggesting he wasn't trying, but he looked, in a word, flat.

I do like to see Andy's calmness on court, because I think it enables him to think more clearly about what he is doing, or what he needs to do in tight moments. That said, I think Andy, like McEnroe before him, is one of those who needs that bit of fire, that bit of something that gets him over the line. So what if Andy uses the odd expletive? So what if the odd racquet loses the right to life in the name of the game? It's high octane, competitive sport that Andy plays, and he is right amongst those at the top. He's not messing around out there, he wants to win.

The key, I think, is whether Andy loses his rag and goes away in a match, or if he then turns around, gets a grip and wins. Nowadays he is doing the latter much more than the former.

I think it's also worth repeating what Mark Petchey said during Shanghai, when the issue of Andy's on court behaviour was brought up for the umpteenth time. I can only conclude that Petch is as sick of hearing about it as me, because he suggested that this is the point now where all the criticism should stop, given what Andy has done this year. He said that smashing his racquet, or something similar, now, shows that Andy is not content to settle for one slam and the Olympic gold, he wants more, and consequently expects more of himself, so when he feels he is not playing to his ability he is bound to get frustrated. Petch, as ever, has a point.
IP Logged
The Gnome
ATP Level
***
Posts: 2,534

Gender: Male
Location: Winchester, England


Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #51 on: October 18, 2012, 02:09 PM »
Reply

I've posted some classic ragefests in the tennis videos section Smile


http://www.murraysworld.com/forum/tennis/tennis-videos/msg797614/?topicseen#new
IP Logged
xxdanixx
Seed
****
Posts: 3,897

Gender: Female
Location: Ireland


Dream big, because little dreams have little magic

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #52 on: October 18, 2012, 02:26 PM »
Reply

Raonic is still a kid and I don’t think he means disrespect when he says those things prior meetings. I have noticed he doesn’t say these things when it comes to other top players –perhaps he doesn’t want to dare but he must think it. Anyway, I get the feeling he wants to spice things up but it’s definitely not the right way to go, simply because you don’t know what you are asking for. Best to keep your mouth shut and let your racquet do all the talking. At least you won’t be in for a big surprise – like the time he took it from Andy at the Open. He’ll probably grow out of this sort of unnecessary competitive nature and be more mature.

His on-court attitude is still great and that’s when people notice him or others the most. How many people really pay attention to what was said before or even after a match? Not too many – only the hard core fans. I, for one, don’t read interviews or anything all that much because it’s not that important. What you bring to the table is more important. You can tell a lot more about a player’s condition both mental and physical simply by observing them and there’s lot more truth attached to it than what they have to say about their own conditions prior or post matches.


Yeah,I think you're right about it being largely due to the fact that he's still pretty young,and he probably doesn't mean to sound disrespectful.But unfortunately that can be the way things come across!Youth won't really be an excuse for much longer,and to be honest,I'm not sure how much of a one it should be now-he's more than a year older than I am,and I'm nowhere near having perfect manners or anything-but I'd still make a deliberate effort to show a bit of respect,you know?And I just think-well,actually I think everyone should have respect for others,no matter how much they've achieved (It's one reason Smugfed gets under my skin so much at times!)-but even if Raonic is on his way to achieving big things,he hasn't got there yet,and I do think he could do with remembering that at times.Hopefully he does grow out of it soon,and someone passes on your excellent advice to simply let his tennis do the talking.

You're completely right about casual tennis fans only really taking account of his on-court attitude,but really I was more talking about the press,who write so extensively about these players,whose job it is to observe them,and listen to and know about them,who don't give Andy enough credit for his off-court attitude,and his attitude about his fellow players.I'd agree that you can tell a lot about a player's condition by observing them,but I'd also say there's a fair amount to be told by listening to them as well.
But sure,we're all completely entitled to our own ways of going about things! Very Happy

IP Logged
Ruthie
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,339

Gender: Female
Location: East Midlands


Touch the sky - and touch it he did.

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #53 on: October 18, 2012, 02:33 PM »
Reply

Hi All,

The thing with me is that I always worry for Andy when he doesn't show emotion! Take the match against Mahut at Queen's for example. I don't recall anything from Andy, not a smack on the racquet, not a 'C'MON!' a look towards his team, anything. I'm not suggesting he wasn't trying, but he looked, in a word, flat.

I do like to see Andy's calmness on court, because I think it enables him to think more clearly about what he is doing, or what he needs to do in tight moments. That said, I think Andy, like McEnroe before him, is one of those who needs that bit of fire, that bit of something that gets him over the line. So what if Andy uses the odd expletive? So what if the odd racquet loses the right to life in the name of the game? It's high octane, competitive sport that Andy plays, and he is right amongst those at the top. He's not messing around out there, he wants to win.

The key, I think, is whether Andy loses his rag and goes away in a match, or if he then turns around, gets a grip and wins. Nowadays he is doing the latter much more than the former.

I think it's also worth repeating what Mark Petchey said during Shanghai, when the issue of Andy's on court behaviour was brought up for the umpteenth time. I can only conclude that Petch is as sick of hearing about it as me, because he suggested that this is the point now where all the criticism should stop, given what Andy has done this year. He said that smashing his racquet, or something similar, now, shows that Andy is not content to settle for one slam and the Olympic gold, he wants more, and consequently expects more of himself, so when he feels he is not playing to his ability he is bound to get frustrated. Petch, as ever, has a point.
Good post tj and absolutely agree with Petch.  Like you I think Andy is at his worst when he's totally flat.  It's learning to use the emotion more to help rather than hinder him in the way that Johnnie Mac used to do [though not saying he should emulate him in yelling at linespeople etc].
IP Logged
xxdanixx
Seed
****
Posts: 3,897

Gender: Female
Location: Ireland


Dream big, because little dreams have little magic

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #54 on: October 18, 2012, 02:39 PM »
Reply

Hi All,

The thing with me is that I always worry for Andy when he doesn't show emotion! Take the match against Mahut at Queen's for example. I don't recall anything from Andy, not a smack on the racquet, not a 'C'MON!' a look towards his team, anything. I'm not suggesting he wasn't trying, but he looked, in a word, flat.

I do like to see Andy's calmness on court, because I think it enables him to think more clearly about what he is doing, or what he needs to do in tight moments. That said, I think Andy, like McEnroe before him, is one of those who needs that bit of fire, that bit of something that gets him over the line. So what if Andy uses the odd expletive? So what if the odd racquet loses the right to life in the name of the game? It's high octane, competitive sport that Andy plays, and he is right amongst those at the top. He's not messing around out there, he wants to win.

The key, I think, is whether Andy loses his rag and goes away in a match, or if he then turns around, gets a grip and wins. Nowadays he is doing the latter much more than the former.

I think it's also worth repeating what Mark Petchey said during Shanghai, when the issue of Andy's on court behaviour was brought up for the umpteenth time. I can only conclude that Petch is as sick of hearing about it as me, because he suggested that this is the point now where all the criticism should stop, given what Andy has done this year. He said that smashing his racquet, or something similar, now, shows that Andy is not content to settle for one slam and the Olympic gold, he wants more, and consequently expects more of himself, so when he feels he is not playing to his ability he is bound to get frustrated. Petch, as ever, has a point.

Very well said Teejay!I'm a bit the same-when there's nothing but flatness to be seen,it generally doesn't mean good things!That fire,that's sometimes seen as a bad thing when a racquet dies on the battlefield or maybe Andy shows off a bit of his varied vocabulary, is part of his passion,part of what's driven him to this point,and what continues to drive him onwards and (with any luck and justice) upwards!

That's an excellent point made by Petchey,and I'm glad someone is saying it.Andy has achieved fantastic,amazing things.It's time to cut him some slack,and celebrate the fact that he's not content to settle,that he still wants more!
IP Logged
Emma Jean
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,961

Gender: Female
Location: Toronto, Canada


We will be Victorious

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #55 on: October 18, 2012, 03:09 PM »
Reply

It depends on what kind of emotion we are talking about because emotion doesn’t only mean the negative kind but also the positive kind. All these Champions be it Laver or Borg or Sampras or Federer have shown a lot of emotion albeit the positive ones (raw emotion after a big win, a big title etc.) and all these players are/were very, very popular in their days – and not only that, they were also very interesting to watch. You may say that you didn’t particularly like their style but many would disagree with you. There are also a number of players who were just as popular despite not showing negative emotion, so obviously, showing “raw emotion” doesn’t equate popularity and it certainly isn’t limited to Johnny Mac type of emotion either. In fact, JM found the competition too harsh and he let his negative emotion out too many times that, in 1986, he felt the need to take a break from the tour and was never the same player after he came back. And this is simply because he invested emotionally a bit much mostly negative on court week in week out.  That’s also the reason why he has 7 Majors instead of more. The first tire of Champions I’ve mentioned have a lot more than that. People also tend to pay much more respect to them simply because they very rarely lost it while on court. It’s always very easy to lose and I don’t believe a hotheaded person can achieve all that much either. You can’t even control your own emotion for a start; forget controlling anything much, much bigger. In any case, it’s never a good strategy to let others know how you feel on court or in general unless you know the person very well. Your boss can fire you and maybe you can break a few things on your way out and it may make a great “interesting” show as well, but in reality, not only you’ll be seen as an utter fool but also, you will leave your boss no doubt that he’s made the right decision. And when you reflect back, you will know, it was never a great strategy when you let your emotion got the best of you.

Anyway, Nadal is a very competitive player but very rarely he shows his negative emotion. Nole is getting there as well though at times he let his demons out but he remains positive as a whole. I’ve seen him more together than not.  All of Andy’s emotion after the Olympics win or the major win this year was really raw and beautiful simply because they were very positive. And his cry after Wimbledon loss made history. The whole reason why he became so popular at Wimbledon was because, he seemed together the whole time no matter how hard a challenge it was in each round and people noticed that.

Conversely, it wasn’t a pretty sight when Serena wanted to shove the balls down to that Lineperson’s throat at the AO or the time Nalby injured that old lineperson because he wasn’t too happy with his calls and took his negative emotion out on that poor guy.

Besides, tennis is supposed to be gentleman’s sport. If anyone is interested in anything more violent then they have other sports for them – boxing, wrestling etc. to name a few, but tennis is supposed to be a clean sport and it’s all about the game itself and not how one shows one’s emotion. If anyone finds it boring then they have those ones to follow.

BTW, it's not robotic but a clever move.
[ Last edit by Emma Jean October 18, 2012, 03:43 PM ] IP Logged
Ruthie
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,339

Gender: Female
Location: East Midlands


Touch the sky - and touch it he did.

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #56 on: October 18, 2012, 03:25 PM »
Reply

While I agree with you about different kinds of emotion EJ  the idea that tennis is a 'gentleman's sport' is exactly what has been wrong with tennis in the UK  and what Andy has helped to challenge.  We don't want tennis to be a privilege enjoyed by 'gentlemen' - or ladies for that matter.
IP Logged
Emma Jean
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,961

Gender: Female
Location: Toronto, Canada


We will be Victorious

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #57 on: October 18, 2012, 03:38 PM »
Reply

While I agree with you about different kinds of emotion EJ  the idea that tennis is a 'gentleman's sport' is exactly what has been wrong with tennis in the UK  and what Andy has helped to challenge.  We don't want tennis to be a privilege enjoyed by 'gentlemen' - or ladies for that matter.

Actually I didn't mean it that way though I admit the original meaning might just be that. By gentleman's sport I mean a sport that doesn't have a place for typical violence that we witness in other sports. Let's say Golf - clean sport we can safely say. It's not like life is so boring that we must seek "interesting" stuff in everything even if it comes with a negative result.
[ Last edit by Emma Jean October 18, 2012, 03:42 PM ] IP Logged
Ruthie
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,339

Gender: Female
Location: East Midlands


Touch the sky - and touch it he did.

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #58 on: October 18, 2012, 06:35 PM »
Reply

Fair enough EJ.  But when you live in Britain you're more aware of the social class connotations of the 'gentleman'.   Tim Henman was perceived as one [although I don't think he necessarily always acted as one] while Andy isn't and therein lies some of the hostility that has been expressed towards him by middle England.
IP Logged
Emma Jean
Veteran
******
Posts: 8,961

Gender: Female
Location: Toronto, Canada


We will be Victorious

Re: The Murray and Djokovic Era? « Reply #59 on: October 18, 2012, 07:48 PM »
Reply

Fair enough EJ.  But when you live in Britain you're more aware of the social class connotations of the 'gentleman'.   Tim Henman was perceived as one [although I don't think he necessarily always acted as one] while Andy isn't and therein lies some of the hostility that has been expressed towards him by middle England.

Yes, I understand the social class connotations in Britain, trust me (I call them The Pretentious Bunch) but I think that, Andy was also a rough cut diamond that needed to be polished and that’s because it’s a lot about attitude as well and Andy was quite stubborn in his growing years. It’s true though that the Americans don’t really care about polished behavior as much, because they simply adored players like John McEnroe and Jimmy Connors, who actually acted like dicks at times during matches. I don’t feel Andy’s behavior was ever so bad or nearly as bad, but still, he had to take a lot of unnecessary criticism because he wasn’t anything like Henman. Well, as well behaved as Henman was, I was never really a fan, though I believe he’s really a very good person and I don’t find anything pretentious about him.
IP Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 11 Go Up Reply 
« previous next »