Printable View
A wee break from the 100% football fix we've all had over the last 2 weeks. Wimbledon 2018 starts today and although Andy Murray will sadly not be taking part, it will hopefully be another enjoyable tournament at SW19.
Personally can't see past Roger Federer adding to his tally of Grand Slam titles although perhaps his shock defeat in the final of Halle a week ago may just have cast some doubt in his mind?
He opens up play on Centre Court today at 1pm against Dusan Lajovic.
Watching Federer just now. The man is the definition of class
He swatted Lacko aside today in fine style. Gets better and better.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenNWhiteArmy
Federer beaten
Could be here all night with this one.
This is brilliant, anyone else watching?
After 5 and a half hours it's currently 15-15 in the deciding set.
Still Nadal v Djokovic to come too!
17-18 now.
Mental stuff
Absolutely crazy. Six hours on court and still no end in sight. Be better telling Rafa and Novac to come back tomorrow and play the final on Monday.
21-21
I'm pretty certain that's going to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by iwasthere1972
It's highly unlikely that their match is going to get finished tonight even if Anderson-Isner finishes just now. They'll also need to close the roof which takes about 40 minutes to get the air conditioning etc sorted. So it's probably going to be around 8:30 at the earliest before they get started.
I think they'll play them tomorrow before the ladies final and then play the men's final on Monday.
Anderson breaks to go 25-24 up and he'll serve for the match.
Anderson wins 7-6 6-7 6-7 6-4 26-24
guid scottish surname in the final :cb anyways...who was that blonde in his trainers camp box thingy ? she is abserrrlutely gawjuz :greengrin
waiting on Nadal for a sweet double ££
To put it into some context that was the 4th longest tennis match of all time.
Or four football matches. Plus the spectators can't be getting up every fifteen minutes or so for a pee or a pie. Maybe even both.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Here we go. Three hours for Rafa and Novac to play before the final whistle is blown at 11pm.
Some match so far between Nadal and Djokovic some of the shots have been unreal.
One set all just now and almost certain that they'll have to come back tomorrow as they only have an hour left to play tonight.
Great tennis today although the first semi final went on far too long. Maybe in the fifth set they could start a tie-break at 12 games each or something.
I can see an argument for and against it to be honest. From a spectator/fan point of view I quite like the drama and excitement that no tiebreak in the final set brings.Quote:
Originally Posted by heretoday
However I can understand why the players might want a change. Playing a match for that length of time would really harm your chances of progressing any further. Having a tiebreak situation prevents it going too far.
Having two big servers like Anderson and Isner playing against each other is always going to throw up the possibility of that happening.
Wimbledon showing their true colours again by potentially delaying the women's final so the men's semi final can be played to a conclusion at a nice time on Centre Court. Terrible decision IMO.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Nadal vs Novak is the far bigger match, correct call.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I take it you don't have any daughters...Quote:
Originally Posted by IGRIGI
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Regardless of what is the 'bigger match', it makes sense to play the semi first to give them as much rest as possible before Sunday's final.
They have another court...Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Why make the fans choose which game to watch?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Start the mens at say 1, women's at 4. Fans get a full day of entertainment and everyone gets their games played at a reasonable time.
Honestly don't see the problem and would expect the same if it was the women's semi that needed finished today.
Fair enough, you can argue that this is the practical solution, but it's the women's final of Wimbledon. It's always at 2pm on the Saturday. It's arguably the biggest game in the women's tennis calendar. And it's been bumped by the men's SEMI final.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
The two participants of the biggest game they can possibly be involved in don't even know when they're going to start.
What sort of message does that give young female tennis players/fans? "Yeah, you're important, just not quite as important as the men, ok?"
It's about more than 'the fans' or mere practicalities IMO.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
And if the women's final went to 64-62 in the final set and dragged on to the Sunday then the men's final would be 'bumped'.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
That's pure hypothesis, and also not comparing apples with apples though, is it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
Firstly, I could equally as easily predict that in that scenario they would put the women on court 1 to finish their match on Sunday.
Secondly, that would be a final bumping a final. Not a semi.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
What's their "true colours"?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
If Nadal-Djokovic have a similar length of match to Anderson-Isner yesterday, they potentially have another 4 hours of tennis to play. You might say that's unlikely but it's possible and they need to get them off the court as early as possible to give the winner as much rest as possible ahead of the final tomorrow.
As for them playing on No 1 court, they can't do that. As I understand it, a decision has been taken to finish the match today with the roof closed, just like it was last night. Because Centre Court is currently the only court at Wimbledon which has a roof, that's the only court they can play on.
There's nothing sexist or underhand going on here. It's just common sense.
Interesting. Why do they need to close the roof today? It's blistering sunshine! If that's common sense, I'm a Hearts fan!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
To ensure that the playing conditions are the same throughout the entire match. Once a match starts with the roof closed, or it closes during the course of a match due to rain or bad light, they don't usually open it again until the end of the match.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
...and yet they will close it during a match if it rains. Sounds like a daft rule to me. It's a different day FFS!!! They can't guarantee the conditions would be the same if the roof had stayed open.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Anyway, I sense a bit of diversion. Bottom line is someone had to be inconvenienced by the Anderson game, and surprise surprise, it's the women.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
How would you have done the scheduling any differently, with the way things panned out yesterday?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I would have put the men's semi final on court 1, therefore allowing the showpiece of the women's game to carry on as scheduled.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
I've already explained that wasn't an option though due to the Nadal-Djokovic match having to be played under the roof.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
How would you have scheduled things under the rules of the roof policy?
Does it really matter? The womens final will still be played at primetime on Saturday in front of exactly the same crowd for exactly the same prize money. So they have to start an hour or 90 minutes later due to unforseen circumstances. Big deal, they would have had to do that if it started to rain as they were warming up.
Anyway Nadal and Djokovic putting on a bit of a show here. Fans getting 1 and a half great matches for their money rather than just 1.
Who made the daft roof policy? Who is responsible for the scheduling? The same people surely?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
I repeat what I said before. I would have applied 'common sense' (as you put it) and changed the roof policy for one day.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Clearly plenty people don't think it matters. I personally think it sends out a message that women are second class citizens at least in the tennis world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
Some people may call it 'common sense', I call it casual misogyny at best.
Enjoy the tennis everyone!
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Why? I've seen nobody else mention this other than you.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
By the way (roof policy aside), if Djokovic v Nadal was played at the same time as the women's final you'd have people complaining that it undermines the women's final as many people would opt to watch that instead.
What do the (female) players think? That is more important, Shirley, than a bunch of guys debating it online?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
If they are okay with it, so should we be.
What about my 9 year old daughter? Does she not get a say? There seem to be plenty women on twitter with the same opinion as me.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
But what about the people most directly affected? The players.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I have no opinion on this, at least until I know how they feel.
If you want to take this thread as an indication of the general population, I make it about 80-20 in your favour. I would consider 20% to be a small but significant minority!Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
It's not just about the players, it's about more than that and I expect you are patently aware of that fact!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I am, but I'd like to know how they feel before I come to my opinion. They are the most important people in this.
Again.... what are their thoughts?
Unfortunately I'm not in a position to ask them as I'm not allowed in the female locker room! I'm surprised you thought I might know.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
If it were an issue to them, I would've thought there would have been something in the media to that effect. I get that they won't be shouting off to the press in advance of the match, but I'll be interested to see tomorrow whether there is anything.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
If there isn't, I'll guess that it's no big deal to them.
If Angelique Kerber and Serena Williams aren't bothered then I don't see why anyone else should be.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
As someone else has already said, to anyone who has an interest in the women's game, this arrangement should be preferable to McS****y's suggestion of putting Nadal-Djokovic on No 1 court and playing at the same time as the ladies final.
At least this way they are not competing for viewing figures and they're getting their special day all to themselves.
Tomorrow I would guess the winner will say nothing as they... well... won. And the loser will say nothing as it may look like sour grapes. So I guess we'll never know what their thoughts are. I hope they do talk about it tomorrow though. And I hope the journalists at least ask the question.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
If we're talking about the players, I guess their 'special day' is more about the occasion and atmosphere on Centre Court than how many people are watching on TV.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
But hey ho, you all have your opinions and I have mine. Meanwhile Djokovic and Nadal continue to fight it out while Williams and Kerber try to stay warmed up and focused....
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
This is the first tennis I've seen in this year's Wimbledon.
I don't tend to watch it much when Andy Murray isn't playing, but this is one of the best matches I've ever seen.
Not sure what the ladies finalists will be thinking, but I'm sure the fans who are getting to witness this as well as the final that follows will be happy enough.
Some match!
Djokovic wins 10-8 in the final set.
Brilliant stuff.
Just had a quick Google whilst waiting for the game to start...Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
How does "6 time doubles grand slam winner Reannae Stubbs" grab you for a player's point of view?
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.i...161.html%3famp
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
It's an opinion, but it doesn't answer my question. :cbQuote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Fair play. You want to keep it ultra specific so the question can't be answered. No bother!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Of course it can be answered. It just needs someone to ask them. ThemQuote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Sorry, I meant you were ensuring that I couldn't answer the question, not that the question physically couldn't be answered.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I truly hope the question is asked. But even if someone does ask the question, can we be sure that the players would answer it fully and honestly?
In the meantime, can you explain to my 9 year old daughter why she's had to wait an extra 2 and a bit hours to see the premier women's tennis match in the world which is played at 2pm on Saturday every year except this one?
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Me? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I'm sure if they were annoyed enough about it then they would make their feelings known.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
In today's world of social media, they have plenty of opportunities to get their views out to the public domain.
Serena Williams in particular is never backward in coming forward so if it's as big a problem to her as it is to you then I'm sure we'll know soon enough.
Yes, you! Because she's quite pissed off about it and you seem to think that it's only the players that matter here!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Hope so! But as I keep trying to explain, it's not just about the players. Particularly, it's about the message this gives to young girls. "You'll need to wait, the men are still playing" etc etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Surely you can explain it yourself to your nine year old daughter as you are fully aware of the reasons why she has had to wait. Whether you agree with it is immaterial.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Your 9 year old daughter surely can't be getting worked up about the women's final starting at 4pm instead of 2pm? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
It's not as if it's starting at some ungodly hour that means she can't stay up and watch it.
She's pissed off about the inequality, not her bed time!Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Lol, nice one! I already have. I'm trying to make a point but you go ahead and take me literally, as if you didn't know better, you cheeky scamp!Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Anyway folks, it's been a blast, and clearly I'm on my own here, so I'll retreat gracefully and watch the game with my family.
All the best!
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
:thumbsup: Enjoy the game, I still think the women should be made to play 5 sets though :wink:
You've misquoted or misunderstood me.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Again. I have no opinion on the scheduling, and won't have until I hear what the most important and most affected people think.
I'm good with kids, though, if it takes the heat off you. :greengrin
There is no inequality. The finals (mens/womens/singles/doubles) all depend on the preceding matches being played in line with the original schedule. That hasn't happened so there has been a delay.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
What are you not getting about that?
Tell her the truth. All the money, sponsorship etc is in the men's game therefore it's going to be pushed and prioritised more, is it right, probably not but I can see why it happens, could also tell her that the bonus is that because of all this the ladies get the same prize money as the men for playing less timeQuote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Ok. Good first set. So time for a couple of responses. What I don't get is that the organisers had a decision to make: inconvenience the men or inconvenience the women. And they chose to inconvenience the women's final before the men's semi.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
That's all. I know you don't agree, and that's your prerogative. Thanks for the chat though!
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Sorry. Looks like I misunderstood you. My bad!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
I see where you're going with this, so I'll not bite. Thanks for the opinion!Quote:
Originally Posted by Mon Dieu4
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Living up to your 'cheeky scamp' label I see!Quote:
Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
In what way are the women inconvenienced?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Och, come on! I'm done here, I have no time for daft laddie questions like that! Enjoy the rest of your day.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Fair enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
4pm start or 2pm start. I'm genuinely not seeing the inconvenience.
Sigh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Speedy
1pm definite start for the men's semi.
Maybe 2pm, maybe 2.30pm, maybe 3pm, maybe 3.30pm, maybe 4pm, maybe 4.30pm, maybe 5pm etc etc start for the women. And they'll not know till 20 minutes before.
Slightly different, no?
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Surely the same could have happened in reverse, if one of the women’s semi finals had run as long as the Anderson/Isner semi final had, and one of the men’s semis could have been similarly delayed for a few hours?
also, whilst I take your point, is your daughter similarly pissed off that she doesn’t get the opportunity to watch as much women’s tennis at Wimbledon as men’s, since they only play to 3 sets? Since you’re banging the inequality drum.
Theres also the argument that the men are more often the ones delayed because of rain, where the men’s final is bumped to the Monday so the women’s final is played on the Sunday, therefore forcing boys to wait to watch their heroes, no?
i see your point, I just think you’re taking it a bit too far, for the sake of a couple of hours. It’s not sexist, it’s just logistics.
Correct.Quote:
Originally Posted by McD
If Wimbledon (and the other Grand Slams) are going to be accused of sexism then it's against the men, due to your point I've put in bold.
Oh dear. Not the best start for neutrals wanting a decent two hour match to take us up to the France Croatia game. This could be over quickly...
ah well, it's all over bar the shouting :agree:
Think you could be right , Anderson looks like he's beaten already in his own headQuote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
hit the red button to watch tseng v draper, at one set each at least it's a contest
William and Kate couldn't be sitting further away from each other, looking like someone's taken a ***** in Kate handbag. Cheer up ffs you've got the best view in the house.
What a total anti climax this is proving to be.
Wimbledon men's final day is one of my favourites days of the year so this is a massive letdown.
Similar to last year's slaughtering that Roger Federer gave Marin Cilic.
martina navratilova starting in the invitational pairs final...61 years of age..respect
The final was always going to be a bit of a non event once Federer went out. The winner of the Nadal Djokovic semi was going to be a shoe-in for the title.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir David Gray
Can't effing stand Djokovic so not bothering to watch it but will tune in for the mixed doubles final later which hopefully Jamie Murray can win for a third time.
I think SH is correct. Not posted by a cheeky scamp either.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
...aaand we're off again!Quote:
Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY
I take your point. And I wouldn't dare call you a cheeky scamp. (Not to your face anyway.)
Some interesting points have emerged since I last posted:
1. Both Serena and Kerber have cited the delay of their final as the 'only option' or the 'right thing to do' - Kerber even went so far as to say the men would need rest before 'the biggest final' - Way to go, Angelique, Girl Power! So CWG, you have your answer, and no doubt that's case closed for you. But do sporting superstars always say exactly what they mean to the press?
2. Kim Clijsters on Twitter stated that the men were given the choice as to whether they wanted to play before or after the Ladies' Final. I find that... interesting.
3. Last one for now, apparently the players were also consulted on whether to play with the roof closed or open on Saturday. Apparently Djokovic insisted that it should stay closed. Nadal was asked by a journo whether he agreed with the decision, to which he replied, "No, but I'm not going to talk about it because you will write about it." So SDG, apparently the roof issue is not as clear cut as you thought. Also lends a little more weight to my last sentence in point 1 above.
Has your daughters rage subsided now that her idols have said the delay was the right thing to do ?Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
Rage :faf::faf::faf::faf::faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by makaveli1875
Good one, pal.
Maybe it was nothing to do with the gender and it was a case of getting one match finished before beginning another. And/or only one person from the 4 players was coming out to play the following day, regardless of whether it was man or woman.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I do think, though, that the men's semi finals should have started at 11am on Friday. Good chance that both matches were going to be long. Although I understand that scheduling would all be arranged before the draw was made and you can't just take into account how long matches are going to be based on who is in them. I'd also have had Rafa and Djokovic out earlier on the Saturday.
Also - time to do away with the ongoing matches in 5th sets. If a tie-breaker is fair in any set, it's fair in the deciding one.
Maybe. I guess we'll never know.Quote:
Originally Posted by WeeRussell
For the record, I wasn't suggesting that the men shouldn't have started earlier on the Saturday. I was suggesting that they could have moved them to Court no. 1. Which was widely poo poo-ed by some on here for two reasons:
1. It would have taken away from the occasion on Centre Court as they might have been playing at the same time (I dispute this, as Centre Court would still be full, Princess Kate or whoever would still have been there, therefore the occasion is not lessened).
2. It wasn't physically possible, as the rules dictate that the match had to finish under the roof. Which wasn't actually the case.
But hey, the players said it was ok, so who am I to have an opinion? :wink:
Now that they have expressed their opinion which happens to differ from yours you are now wondering if they were being honest, what chance does anyone have against that? I doubt you would've questioned it if they happened to share your point of view. Anyway, its not worth getting your knickers in a twist about.
Is it just me or, the odd match notwithstanding (Nadal v Del Potro) was this year’s Wimbledon quite flat (Men’s and Women's)?
While not being an authority or über fan I enjoy watching tennis, particularly the majors, but this year’s tournament really didn’t grip me at all. Maybe am just getting auld and dull(er).
Och well, roll on The US Open...
I'm not sure how that would work in terms of ticketing and audiences. Most people have purchased tickets for the Saturday on the understanding they are going to watch the Women's final. Having Nadal V Djokovic to finish beforehand was a bonus for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
I do think the match should finish on the court it started on though, roof or nae roof.
If I was involved I would have flirted with pitching the idea of letting things run to Monday. Mental eh... but, you would still fill the 15,000 no problem and could organise the scheduling to conveniently eradicate the world cup final clash :thumbsup:.. and probably milk some more money out of the occasion while you're at it.
I probably didn't get to see as much as I would normally (similar to the world cup) largely down to a busy last month or so. (I probably watched as much at work as I did in my spare time!!).Quote:
Originally Posted by Greentinted
However I enjoyed what I did see as much as any other tournament. The Nadal v Djokovic semi was brilliant, and was really pleased for Kerber (albeit it wasn't the most competitive of finals for either the men or women).
Perhaps you're an Andy Murray fan and that took the shine off it compared to the last few years?
If you read up a few posts, I had suggested before they played that they may not 'bare all' for various reasons - surely you can see why that might be the case. Kerber's response was particularly disappointing for me, referring to the men's final as the 'biggest final' does not set her up as an ideal role model for young girls/women!Quote:
Originally Posted by HUTCHYHIBBY
You're right though, when we're all building straw men (either around players being economical with the truth, or citing non-existent rules) then there can never be any certainty. We are, however, all allowed opinions. But seeing as mine is being dismissed as "getting my knickers in a twist", I'll retire back under rock I crawled out from :wink:
Have a nice day!
I'm not saying it was.. I didn't see her making comment, but is there a chance she may have been referring to them playing in the longer final (i.e. 5 sets)? Although her English is very good, she is German, and sometimes words are misplaced/not necessarily the ones we would use.Quote:
Originally Posted by McS****y
If it wasn't and sees the men's final as the biggest one... she shares the opinion of many, and it's not disappointing if she is being honest.