If Nadal Was Selfish He Would Have Retired

If Nadal was selfish he would have retired and handed the trophy with a large * attached to Wawrinka. These are the relevant bits from his post match press conference

Q.  Obviously a very difficult occasion for you emotionally.  Did your back go when you played that forehand in the first game of the second set when you doubled over?
RAFAEL NADAL:  No.  The back, since the beginning I felt a little bit, from the warmup.  It was a little bit worst in the first set.  End of the first set, I start to feel worst.

Then at the beginning of the second was the key moment that I felt, during a serve in a bad movement, is very stiff, very bad.

That's not the real moment to talk about that.  Is the moment to congratulate Stan.  He's playing unbelievable.  He really deserve to win that title.  I very happy for him.  He's a great, great guy.  He's a good friend of mine.  I am really happy for him.

So just congratulate him for everything.  He had a great year last year and start the new year winning two titles is just amazing.

So congratulations.



Q.  Much as it's not easy to talk about, could you share with us what happened when you went off the court?  Presumably to have treatment.
RAFAEL NADAL:  Yeah, what I did?

Q.  Yes.
RAFAEL NADAL:  Just try to    I don't know.  You can ask the physio, because in that moment I was too worried to think about what happened.  The physio tried to relax a little bit the back.  When that happen during a match is almost impossible.  I tried hard.

Last thing that I wanted to do was retirement.  No, I hate to do that, especially in a final.  Same time, is tough to see yourself during the whole year you are working for a moment like this, and arrives the moment and you feel that you are not able to play at your best.

So was not an easy situation for me to be on court like this, but I tried hard until the end, trying to finish the match as good as I can for the crowd, for the opponent, for me.  So that's what I did:  tried everything until the last moment, but was impossible to win this way.  Opponent is too good.

http://www.ausopen.com/en_AU/news/interviews/2014-01-26/201401261390737985774.html

So it was obvious that he had no chance to win the match. Any doubts about that can easily be checked by looking at Nadal's serving statistics from the AO site. But having been booed for taking a MTO he continued to play on for the sake of the crowd, the viewers and to the benefit of Wawrinka.

Someone has to say it so I will  

It required two Swiss players, in consecutive matches to take Nadal down.

Seriously, it is tough, but wise to continue play. The crowd was very clear in what they wanted, which was tennis of good quality over five sets. What they got was 2 sets of it.

He also won a set by playing on. Had Stan frozen in that situation he might have taken it to a fifth set. Then who knows? At the start Stan had nothing to lose, anything more than straight sets defeat would have resulted in plaudits coming his way.

Compare that to the situation after Rafa's MTO, everyone would have been saying "if he doesn't win now he never will". That would be too much for some, and Stan looked lost for a set.

My point is that not everyone could have seen it out like Stan did, had he been mentally weaker Rafa might have got back into it. And I think after the third Rafa knew this. It was competitive for the last two sets. I think Rafa was trying to find a way to win, because he's a great competitor. I don't think altruism alone kept him on court.

Wondered if Nadal would have retired had he been facing Lukas Rosol or even Steve Darcis ?

I confused as to what point this is trying to get across? Nadal, who was fit enough to win a set in a GS final (and how many games?) didn't walk off court because he was losing and had a niggle?

This is what vexes me. Elevating this achievement like he's some kind of super hero and we should be thankful.

We all go to work when not feeling 100% for what ever reason. Nadal does the same. As do lots of tennis players.

I think OP is just trying to say Nadal wanted to carry on rather than retire so the MTO was needed instead of shaking hands. Time to move on from this now...none of it changes the result.

Johhnyjeep. Nadal was serving at an average of about 150kmh and he didn't run for anything out of reach. If he was selfish he would have walked off court. It wasn't the sort of "niggle" that a player has and then continues with little visible effect. I'm sure some are glad he stayed on court not because they got to watch a none competitive final rather than none at all but because it hides the *.

lydian wrote:I think OP is just trying to say Nadal wanted to carry on rather than retire so the MTO was needed instead of shaking hands. Time to move on from this now...none of it changes the result.

Wawinka would have the trophy whether Nadal retired or not or whether he was allowed a MTO or not. Nadal chose to give the viewers some sort of match and allowed the record books to record a finished match. I'm not sure if finishing the match in these circumstances was the best course of action for Nadal. He acted unselfishly.

Indeed. I wonder the reaction on here had he simply walked to the net to shake hands? Probably would have been vilified for not carrying on!

Nadal, rightly, chose to play on waiting for the effect of pain killers to kick in, and to see if it eased. It did to some extent, and then he received further encouragement as Stan went into a brain freeze of the level that poor Sabine Lisicki suffered at Wimbledon.

It was worth sticking around to see if Stan could beat himself. He had a good go at it, which I'm 99% sure he wouldn't have had Nadal not been injured. Weird really, it brought both players down.

Yeah, and how many times have we seen players fail to consolidate opportunities from opponent injury? It's like when you play someone much worse than you, they drag you down to their level, then before you know it you've lost all feel and touch. It's also like footie team trying to beat 10 or 9 man sides, the change of dynamic throws people. Stan was just able to get it back together...oddly as Nadal started to play a little better. Nadal should have kept up the slower serving and blazing winners rather than become a lesser version of his normal play which was enough to bring Stan back into gear again. Funny old game is tennis.

hawkeye wrote:Johhnyjeep. Nadal was serving at an average of about 150kmh and he didn't run for anything out of reach. If he was selfish he would have walked off court. It wasn't the sort of "niggle" that a player has and then continues with little visible effect. I'm sure some are glad he stayed on court not because they got to watch a none competitive final rather than none at all but because it hides the *.

What?

Yes, we are all thankful he stayed on court and did his job. I'm also grateful Stan gifted him the 3rd set and allowed him the possibility of getting back into match. I hate those non-competitive 4 set matches.

If only he'd have walked off the court earlier in the tourament when his serve mph was down cus he couldn't hold the racquet. Some would say that's probably why he stayed on today. Because there was still a chance he could win. Back's can free up as quick as they can seize up. He had pain killers and treatment and needed to give that time to see if worked. Didn't something happen very similar to Fed when he last won Wimbledon?

Nadal stayed out there not out of duty to the crowd or Stan. He stayed out there cus he could still compete. And there was a possibility, no matter how big or small, he could win. It was neither selfish or unselfish. Please stop trying to categorize it in someway to add some kind of meaning to his actions.

Agreed Lydian and BB - for the whole 2 weeks, Stan has looked better combatting high quality play. He's laboured a little when not facing such quality.

The last 2 sets were competitive and good to watch. Credit to Rafa for that. But then you don't get to where he is without immense character and fight.

lydian wrote:Yeah, and how many times have we seen players fail to consolidate opportunities from opponent injury? It's like when you play someone much worse than you, they drag you down to their level, then before you know it you've lost all feel and touch. It's also like footie team trying to beat 10 or 9 man sides, the change of dynamic throws people. Stan was just able to get it back together...oddly as Nadal started to play a little better. Nadal should have kept up the slower serving and blazing winners rather than become a lesser version of his normal play which was enough to bring Stan back into gear again. Funny old game is tennis.

Exactly right.

Very pleased to see that on this forum, we have enough intelligent Tennis watchers to emphasise that Stan was fully deserving of his win, regardless of Nadal's state

It kind of reignites my belief in these excellent boards, so that answers a question put the other day  

It would be great if Auntie Sue, Uncle Andrew and then all the ignorant headline writers could not lead on Nadal's injury - but we can't have everything   

You cannot run like a machine every day. The final came at the wrong time for him, and Stan was in very good form. I believe if Nadal had got the first set he wouldn't have showed any weakness and would win the match.

I still don't see him losing RG unless some massive hitter shows balls and doesn't choke.

Tomic was selfish - he retired. Rafa thinks only of others. Bless him.
Dozens of players play on every year through injury - are we going to create threads for all of them lauding them to sainthood?
Yes, he battled on, credit to him, but the idea that he did it out of some sort of Mother Theresa-like compassion for the crowd is misplaced.

Also Kia and other oh his sponsors would not be happy if Nadal did give up so fast.

Money talks and kicks ass too.

Its the beeb Ban, theyre still living in the 2008 Wimby final. Yeah its been a good reaction, (though I havent seen homo anywhere yet), mostly because Rafa fans like me, recognised he was well up against it before he really pulled something.

Fact is Stan took out Novak, and was playing with no fear in the final, thats gotta be worth the title without any begrudging at all.

The MTO's and not retiring, yeah I mean you can be blind optimist or bast**d cynic as to why he kept going either way. End of the day he DIDNT quit, which meant it went down as a Stan win REGARDLESS of reasons, and despite Nadal clearly feeling the jig was up. He could have done a henin, but he didnt, and thats to be, and has mostly been, respected.

JuliusHMarx wrote:Tomic was selfish - he retired. Rafa thinks only of others. Bless him.

From what I've read Tomic retired and is now to undergo hip surgery. He did the right thing but the bad press he received shows that retiring is viewed as selfish. But when a player plays on in a situation were it is clear that they have no chance of winning they have nothing to gain personally from doing so. In fact they have a lot to lose by continuing with the pretense of a competitive match. Some of it due to the fact that some can now pretend it was a genuine match and that Rafa just had a niggle   

The show must go on! And we can all pretend it was genuine   I for one have not been fooled.

Well Tomic actually TORE something, in his case retiring was completely sensible, thats not his fault

Exactly falzy, Rafa didn't tear something, and I'd expect any player to play on in those circumstances, without people thinking it's some sort of heroic act for the sake of the crowd.

hawkeye is now saying it wasn't a genuine match for heaven's sake - what was it, a fake one?

Fair enough. To be fair Rafa couldn't be sure if he was gonna hurt himself, but its besides the point.
Noones expecting him to be hailed as the new super Ghandi for it, but he clearly understands his responsibilities to the game and to himself, not everyone would have played through it. That does deserve some respect, greats of the game have quit on finals for less.

Best the match is analysed as little as possible from here, it only gets more muggy, and theres no need.

falzy21 wrote:Fair enough. To be fair Rafa couldn't be sure if he was gonna hurt himself, but its besides the point.
Noones expecting him to be hailed as the new super Ghandi for it,

Not quite no-one!

falzy21 wrote:but he clearly understands his responsibilities to the game and to himself, not everyone would have played through it. That does  deserve some respect, greats of the game have quit on finals for less.

They have? My memory isn't that great but when was the last time a player had to stop during a GS final?

Henin, heck people seem to forget her nowadays...

falzy21. I was saying that Tomic should have retired. And he didn't know what the injury was or if anything was "torn" all he knew at the time was that he was unable to continue competitively. If he had in order to please the crowd or give Rafa a win that looked good in the record books apart from not gaining anything personally he could have caused further injury.

Julius. Of course it wasn't a genuine competitive match   Rafa may have kept the "show" on the road but IMO personally he gained nothing by doing so in fact he could only loose out (personally) by playing on.

Which did you really mean HE - a 'genuine match' or 'a genuine competitive match' - they are 2 different things.
I haven't read everyone's posts today, but I assume you've already given Stan full credit for the deserved victory and that you're not trying to take anything away from him by claiming that the injury cost Rafa the title?

falzy21 wrote:Henin, heck people seem to forget her nowadays...

Was thinking on the men's side?

Henins a great of the game isnt she? Apparently Roy Emerson may have

does anyone know yet if it was just an unfortunate spasm, or a rather more serious muscle tear?

What do you want me to say falzy? OK, not everyone would have played through - Henin and maybe Emerson, but we're not sure.

As I said, credit to him for battling on, but I still don't see that sets Rafa apart from hundreds of other players in that respect.

I'd be staggered if it was a muscle tear KR. Rafa played pretty well in the set he won, I don't think that would be possible with a back muscle torn. Not in a sport so demanding on the back.

We'll see though. The usual thing is they let it settle down for a day or so then get it scanned.

Yeah, Danny, my thoughts exactly. He said it went off during warm ups, so maybe he didn't quite stretch properly, or the nerves made him tighten up physically. Just kinda hoping it's one of those things which can and do happen, but have little or no future consequences.

For all that, I agree with Julius (uh...). It's a credit to Nadal for deciding to play on, but with so many records about to be broken in one fell swoop... I cant see anyone retiring, not least someone with 13 slams. Over achievers (and make no mistake, everyone with a slam is an over achiever, no one is "born" to win a slam, of all things) are embedded with eternal optimism. Plenty weekend warriors brave worse for less reward, and quitting on your stool isn't something I think any athlete wants to do - I know I've finished a rugby match with a broken collar bone, and a cricket game with a cracked hand... I love tennis, but I sometimes feel it's a slightly emasculated sport..
when we wonder whether players intended to hit other players on passing shots, and falling on your shield is ameritorious achievement, and not the expectation.

Yes, Rafa should have retired

from tennis

about 10 years ago

---from a Federer fan

Lol....and we all know that's why so many have a downer on the guy...

Here's Nadal post match presser....have to feel for the guy.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1ac1ta_sad-presser_sport

lydian wrote:Lol....and we all know that's why so many have a downer on the guy...

His melon sized prostate?

Nice.

lydian wrote:Lol....and we all know that's why so many have a downer on the guy...

That does kind of invite comment.

That presser is depressing to watch, he looks shattered by the experience.

I make that three top players with severe lower back issues over the past year   

I know BB...as did HBs.
What can I say, it's been a great day to be a Rafa fan...

You shouldnt really play when youre in pain or cant stretch, thats your body telling you somethings wrong and to stop. In any normal circumstance, you would retire, thats the sensible thing to do , and probably the right thing.

For example playing a rugby match with a broken collarbone, whilst brave is INCREDIBLY stupid, a lot of rugby people have died or been paralyzed with that kind of expectation on their backs. More than that, not to be cruel but Nadals body is worth a lot more than any of ours

Unfortunately the occassion was soo big that it would have felt a cop out even if he was in serious pain, soo he went on for whatever reason, without knowing whether he might have been in serious harm. Just blocking the pain with pills and assuming its ok is again a monumentally stupid thing to do, your bodies in pain for a reason.

I do not beleive in some churchillian spirit bo**ocks that says its normal just to carry on when your body cant.

Soo no its not heroic by any stretch, but by no means is it just what you should do , any other circumstance hed have pulled out, and been right to do soo. He should earn no ridicule, or the
old "just suck it up" argument for that.

Indeed silver, the top guys require such strong cores for extended groundies they risk spasms all the time. It's unusual for Nadal though, I still wonder if its a side effect of him changing his swing to cope with the blister.

lydian wrote:Indeed silver, the top guys require such strong cores for extended groundies they risk spasms all the time. It's unusual for Nadal though, I still wonder if its a side effect of him changing his swing to cope with the blister.

Yes when watching these guys torque their bodies to generate the kind of heavy spin on their shots puts tremendous constant pressure on their back, shoulders, core, and joints in their arms. It is surprising that this type of thing doesn't happen quite as often. It just goes to show he kind of shape these guys are in and the level of core strength they have.

gboycottnut1 wrote:Wondered  if Nadal would have retired had he been facing Lukas Rosol or even Steve Darcis ?

??? He didn't retire when he played them. So that question has been answered.

banbrotam wrote:Very pleased to see that on this forum, we have enough intelligent Tennis watchers to emphasise that Stan was fully deserving of his win, regardless of Nadal's state

It kind of reignites my belief in these excellent boards, so that answers a question put the other day  

It would be great if Auntie Sue, Uncle Andrew and then all the ignorant headline writers could not lead on Nadal's injury - but we can't have everything    

It's part of the game. Nadal wasn't physically up for it. Wawrinka was the deserving winner (plus knocked out the defending champion in the past two grand slams)

Nore Staat wrote:

banbrotam wrote:Very pleased to see that on this forum, we have enough intelligent Tennis watchers to emphasise that Stan was fully deserving of his win, regardless of Nadal's state

It kind of reignites my belief in these excellent boards, so that answers a question put the other day  

It would be great if Auntie Sue, Uncle Andrew and then all the ignorant headline writers could not lead on Nadal's injury - but we can't have everything    

It's part of the game.  Nadal wasn't physically up for it.  Wawrinka was the deserving winner (plus knocked out the defending champion in the past two grand slams)

+1

Only thing to take from this is it sounds like a back spasm. Could happen to anyone during a match, but it will usually be precipitated by what Rafa did in the match, which was push bits of him he shouldn't have hard because he had to against Wawrinka. I 100% believe that if that injury hasn't occurred during the match Wawrinka still would have won the way he was playing and the way nadal was off his best anyway.

We just don't know CJ...Wawrinka may have won, or may have declined as the match went on and the pressure to win built. It is what it is.

I see that when Nadal is asked about an injury in his post-match press conference, and he talks about it, that's all right....

But when Serena is asked about an injury in her post-match press conference, and she talks about it, she's being ungracious.

One law for the Medes, another for the Persians....