Home Login Register
MurraysWorld  >  Andy Talk  >  USO F: Murray vs Federer
Poll
Who wil win
Murray in 3 - 8 (18.6%)
Murray in 4 - 18 (41.9%)
Murray in 5 - 7 (16.3%)
Federer in 3 - 5 (11.6%)
Federer in 4 - 4 (9.3%)
Federer in 5 - 1 (2.3%)
Total Voters: 43

Pages: 1 ... 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 Reply

USO F: Murray vs Federer
Johnny Handsome
Quote
what i realised tonight is that even though he had a winning record agaenst fed he really dosent have a clue of how to play him - i remember djokovic saying that you learn a little something everytime you play federer and murray had only played him 3 times in three years, first meeting dosent even count - after a couple more matches against federer murray will have the measure of him
IP Logged
Bevc
Quote
Quote from: dmarc on September 09, 2008, 12:41 am

Night all see you soon


wave  Andy's next match Davis Cup?
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: invisibleman18 on September 09, 2008, 12:36 am

Yeah it's his own fault for not stopping but it is such a massive risk to stop during the point. If you're wrong, you lose the point. I'm not saying the computer should make every call. I just don't see why you can't challenge after the point when you are allowed to challenge during it, that's all. If challenges are allowed, they should be allowed at any time until you've used up your 3 wrong ones IMO. You're allowed to challenge a winner even if you go for it and just don't get there aren't you? You didn't stop playing, you just didn't reach it. So why is it different?


You have to challenge immediately. The umpire has the call of what "immediately" means. Rules are rules. I disagree with you though. Why should the other player have to play say 5 more shots to "win" the point only for the other player to challenge a shot 5 shots back.

The reason I think that is unfair is this.... say you were playing your mate and NOT on clay obviously. He hits a shot you are not sure about being out and you finish the point which he wins. Would it be fair for you to say that because you lost the point you should replay it as you weren't sure if his ball was out 5 shots ago?

I don't feel it would be keeping with the spirit of the game if that sort of thing happened. It's effectively meaning that the computer will make all the line calls however you look at it. The rule is there for a reason. If Murray wasn't sure about it, he was right to play on, as in a situation with no line judges that's what would have happened. If he was sure it was out, he should have followed up with the challenge. That's the bottom line.
IP Logged
Bevc
Quote
Quote from: come on muzza! on September 09, 2008, 12:42 am

what i realised tonight is that even though he had a winning record agaenst fed he really dosent have a clue of how to play him - i remember djokovic saying that you learn a little something everytime you play federer and murray had only played him 3 times in three years, first meeting dosent even count - after a couple more matches against federer murray will have the measure of him


You know, Nadal said something similiar before playing Andy.  The fact that he had a 5-0 winning record, it meant nothing, it was all about the match they played on the day.
IP Logged
murray mad
Quote
Murray has done well to get as far as he did. He is not experienced as Federer so it was inevitable that he was going to lose. Andy has alot more finals to attend and and alot more grand slams to be won so all is not lost. What's next then Davis cup or what?
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: Clydey on September 09, 2008, 12:41 am



Are you really going to say Murray played well? Fed was awesome, but let's be honest. Murray was terrible. Whether it would have affected the outcome or not, Murray did get robbed of a break of serve.

On the whole, it was a terrible performance from Andy. Really surprised anyone is saying that he played well.


It was not a terrible performance. Granted, not as good as he was against Nadal, but Federer totally outplayed him and points you thought Murray was winning and indeed, after certain shots against Nadal said "that's his point" you couldn't say that at all against Fed. He just came up with the goods. Murray was not in any way bad tonight let along "terrible". Shocked that you even consider that a possibility. He wasn't at his brilliant best (not that it would have made much difference) but he was still good enough to beat most other players bar the top 3.
IP Logged
invisibleman18
Quote
Fair enough, however if you only have 3 wrong challenges, how does the computer end up making every decision?
I don't know, to me it just doesn't seem fair that a guy wins a game but is not allowed to make full use of what's available and ends up losing it. I won't change that opinion.
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: murray mad on September 09, 2008, 12:45 am

Murray has done well to get as far as he did. He is not experienced as Federer so it was inevitable that he was going to lose. Andy has alot more finals to attend and and alot more grand slams to be won so all is not lost. What's next then Davis cup or what?


Davis Cup, 19th September.
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: invisibleman18 on September 09, 2008, 12:46 am

Fair enough, however if you only have 3 wrong challenges, how does the computer ending up making every decision?
I don't know, to me it just doesn't seem fair that a guy wins a game but is not allowed to make full use of what's available and ends up losing it. I won't change that opinion.


No you misunderstand. I am saying if you introduce the ability to challenge whenever you like that's one step away (and a very very small step) from the computer automatically checking every ball.
IP Logged
Clydey
Quote
Quote from: nkp2 on September 09, 2008, 12:46 am



It was not a terrible performance. Granted, not as good as he was against Nadal, but Federer totally outplayed him and points you thought Murray was winning and indeed, after certain shots against Nadal said "that's his point" you couldn't say that at all against Fed. He just came up with the goods. Murray was not in any way bad tonight let along "terrible". Shocked that you even consider that a possibility. He wasn't at his brilliant best (not that it would have made much difference) but he was still good enough to beat most other players bar the top 3.


He wasn't as good as he was against Nadal? He didn't even approach that form. His first serve was terrible and he made countless UEs when he wasn't even going for his shots.

He did not play well.  Had he played well, the score line would not have read like that. He barely hit any winners. And the one chance he got to gain some momentum was taken from him.
IP Logged
invisibleman18
Quote
Quote from: nkp2 on September 09, 2008, 12:48 am



No you misunderstand. I am saying if you introduce the ability to challenge whenever you like that's one step away (and a very very small step) from the computer automatically checking every ball.


I'm not sure it would such a bad thing to reduce the chance of incorrect calls either. Think
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: Clydey on September 09, 2008, 12:48 am



He wasn't as good as he was against Nadal? He didn't even approach that form. His first serve was terrible and he made countless UEs when he wasn't even going for his shots.

He did not play well.  Had he played well, the score line would not have read like that. He barely hit any winners. And the one chance he got to gain some momentum was taken from him.


Yes he was unlucky not to get the line call. But as I have said challenges are there for that reason.

He DID however play well. He's just not at the same level as Federer at his best, which he clearly was tonight. Amazing tennis from both of them. The commentators were even saying so. Fed was just too good. That's all it comes down to. You are being far too negative.
IP Logged
Neil
Quote
Quote from: invisibleman18 on September 09, 2008, 12:50 am



I'm not sure it would such a bad thing to reduce the chance of incorrect calls either. Think


It's not an infallible system. Currently it's also not fast enough.
IP Logged
Clydey
Quote
Quote from: nkp2 on September 09, 2008, 12:53 am



Yes he was unlucky not to get the line call. But as I have said challenges are there for that reason.

He DID however play well. He's just not at the same level as Federer at his best, which he clearly was tonight. Amazing tennis from both of them. The commentators were even saying so. Fed was just too good. That's all it comes down to. You are being far too negative.


Come off it, he almost got bagelled in the final set and lost the first set 6-2. If that's Murray playing well, he'll never win a slam. I think you're too much of a Federer fan to concede that, while he played amazing, he came up against an opponent he offered very little resistance.

Since when have you ever seen a top form Murray go down 5-0 in a set?
IP Logged
oldtimer
Quote
Fed. played superbly well but Andy did not play as well as he did against Nadal, as many of us feared might happen.  His service game, in particular, was much weaker. As Greg. R. said, Andy will have to work on that second serve.  I am sorry that when the eyes of the world were upon him, Andy was not able to show them what he can really do.
Still, a great tournament.  Well done!
IP Logged
Pages: 1 ... 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 Reply 
MurraysWorld  >  Andy Talk  >  USO F: Murray vs Federer