Monday, June 12, 2006
--
Federer fans around the world might be screaming this loudly right about... now. "HOW DID FEDERER MANAGE TO LOSE!" Well my fellow Federer fans, we're all in the same boat. We feel hugely disappointed, demoralised, and at a loss as to how the Swiss maestro, master tactician and craftsman of the most exquisite shots managed to let the only Slam he has yet to conquer slip out of his grasp. As I sit here, reflecting on the match gone by, I can only slap my head in disbelief...Here are some of the reasons why I think our Roger lost today.In several departments, Federer was simply outplayed from the 2nd set onwards. For example, his backhand was horrendous. Why so? This is simply down to his use of a single-handed backhand. This allows greater flexibility and variety of shot - a whippier stroke which mimics the forehand. However, dealing with high balls poses a large problem. And with Nadal's ferociously kicking forehands, Federer was forced to hit most of his backhands about one to two feet above his shoulder. Which is really quite amazing if you think about how tall Federer is. Add in Federer's valiant attempts to topspin and get over the top of these high kickers, and there you have it - a hopeless backhand.Of course being the unbiased, gracious-in-defeat blogger that I am, I will give Nadal credit for making life difficult for Federer. Although Nadal was owned in the first set, he came out in the second with all guns blazing, and was back to his best, running down every ball doggedly, attacking Federer's Fragile backhand while mixing it up by making those rare forays into the net. He is undoubtedly the master of clay, winning his 60th STRAIGHT clay court match and 2nd consecutive Roland Garros title. His stunning rise in the tennis world should be greeted with nods of approval as he challenges Federer for top honours, injecting much needed enthusiasm into the tennis circuit, preventing it from being merely a dull one-horse-race.Going back to the match, I can't seem to get this nagging thought out of my head. It really seemed pretty insignificant, but now looking back at it, it seems like it was the turning point of this match. At 40-0 up, serving at 0-1 in the 2nd set, Nadal hit a forehand which landed precariously near the baseline and was called out by the linesman. The umpire didn't over-rule, and Nadal didn't question. In fact to me he was walking away having conceded the point. However up comes Federer who stares at the mark, and asks the umpire to check the mark in an effort to over-rule the line call which was in his favour. The umpire inspects it, calls it good and the point is replayed. Loud, resounding claps of approval can be heard throughout centre court. Sportmanship has prevailed. But Federer goes on to lose this game. And the set, 6-1. When it comes to huge, career-defining matches such as this, when and to what extent should sportmanship be applied? Maybe this nagging thought was on his mind and bothered him enough that he lost the last 3 sets. "I should have walked away... I should have walked away...". I'm sure Nadal wouldn't have done any act of sportmanship. In fact, he was flounting with the rules, taking an extravagantly long time between points. Going through a routine which included scratching his butt. Wow. I'm sure that helps to ensure a precision serve. And so Nadal gobbled up the freebie point that Federer gave him, and continued to munch on free points, and on his act of sportmanship.At the end of the day, the player who displayed sportmanship lost... And the victor was the mean machine. Intruiging. Lets see who gets knocked out of Wimbledon first. HAH.
www.blogger.com isn't working properly so i'll add photos and dress this article up another day. cheers.
| patty fought for sanity @ 1:27 AM|
__________
