Nadal Is Such A Tease!

Not surprisingly Nadal was a little rusty and nervous in his first match at Wimbledon on centre court against Bellucci. He quickly went down two service breaks losing 4 games in a row. The BBC commentator (David Mercer I think?) was clearly a huge Bellucci fan and could barely contain his excitement. Judging by some of the comments here Bellucci is hugely popular here on 606v2 too.

I'm sure Mercer and all the other Belluccci fans were also dizzy with excitement at the prospect of a much anticipated Bellucci win. This explains Mercers distraught commentary towards the end of the match as Nadal won in straight sets. It is also understandable that some of the more emotional Bellucci fans here on 606v2 might feel a little bitter towards Nadal. Nadal is such a tease...

It was Barry Davies.

And Bellucci is a choker or Nadal would have dropped a set.

bogbrush wrote:Bellucci is a choker

Quoted for truth.
Nadal would have still won in 4 though.

He missed two consecutive volleys that I'd have made (at 4-0 30-15 iirc). Although I am Pete Sampras.

Key moment came at 4-0 in the first set when Bellucci missed two embarassingly easy volleys and lost serve. Nadal took his time getting started but that can be excpected as he isn't as natural a grass-courter as say Roger Federer. In the end he won comfortably as I expected.

Barry Davies is awful. Paired with Rusedski too, good grief. Word of the day from Grinning Greg: outphysicalised.

As for the match, Bellucci really blew the first set. Don't think it will have hurt Nadal though to get a decent work-out to shake the clay from his boots.

Worst comment of the day came from Rusedski. He was amidst saying Nadal wasn't as impressive as Djokovic and Federer then, after winning a couple of impressive points, he changed his mind and said Nadal was most impressive of the lot (or words to that effect).

Bellucci could of course have gone up 5-0 in the first set or he could even have won the first set. But for the mental health of Barry Davies and all the other emotional Bellucci fans it is probably better that he didn't...

Are you really getting all upset about people wanting Nadal to lose?

You're the queen of 606v2 schadenfreude, everyone else can only hope to reach your level.

djlovesyou

I don't know what your talking about. I can't believe anyone wanted Nadal to lose they just really wanted Bellucci to win. They might be to shy to say but I suspect Barry Davis and his other 606v2 fans were won over by his swarve good looks.

hawkeye wrote:djlovesyou

I don't know what your talking about. I can't believe anyone wanted Nadal to lose they just really wanted Bellucci to win. They might be to shy to say but I suspect Barry Davis and his other 606v2 fans were won over by his swarve good looks.

hawkeye et al:

Can you tell us what won you over to nadal who shamelessly and notoriously resorts to ugly gamesmanship to try cheating his way to victory? It definitely cannot be the king of clay’s
talent deficit, for which he has proven he still needs to compensate by
receiving on-court coaching, as recently as the FO12 final in his own back yard. Yesterday at 2-set up and in the middle of the 3rd set when Bellucci (unexpectedly) broke him to tie at 2-2, the clay specialist suddenly looked unsure of himself and couldn't resist turning to his nanny toni as though he still needed to be told what to do. What a champ! LOL



And by the way, it’s not swarve, it’s “suave”, n’est pas?

swarthy?

Nore Staat wrote:swarthy?

Nice one, Nore. But I think she meant "suave".

CommonSense wrote:And by the way, it’s not swarve, it’s “suave”, n’est pas?

By the way, it's "n'est-ce pas", n'est-ce pas?!

:roflmao: The Daily Dilbert or should I say Daily Nadal?

CaledonianCraig wrote:Worst comment of the day came from Rusedski.

Never! From the world's most incisive summariser!! It's amusing how the quality of the comments mirrors the quality of the ex-players type of play.

Greg played a very basic 'bull in a china shop' style with little subtlety or thought - which is exactly how he commentates or speaks

Contrast that with Jim Courier who not only gives a rounded view about every player, he explains what is needed to get through a draw and identifies little issues that players might be having a couple of games ahead. I found his French ITV commentary easily the best I've come across this side of Frew McMillan

CommonSense wrote:Can you tell us what won you over to nadal who shamelessly and notoriously resorts to ugly gamesmanship to try cheating his way to victory? It definitely cannot be the king of clay’s
talent deficit, for which he has proven he still needs to compensate by
receiving on-court coaching, as recently as the FO12 final in his own back yard. Yesterday at 2-set up and in the middle of the 3rd set when Bellucci (unexpectedly) broke him to tie at 2-2, the clay specialist suddenly looked unsure of himself and couldn't resist turning to his nanny toni as though he still needed to be told what to do. What a champ!

Oh dear. The 'anti Nadal' brigade are really out in force at this Slam. Do you think it's because he looks worryingly close to his majestic form of 2008/ early 09? It does seem strange that as soon as he wins a Slam in style, his boring detractors start

It always amuses me as to why some fans don't realise that questioning Nadal's character / ability isn't wonderfully ironic. Especially when he has such a great head to head over the GOAT who the same people often think can do no wrong (whether it's openly questioning the Davis Cup play of a team-mate etc - there are numerous examples of Fed being fallible)

I can't understand why anyone would like Nadal. He's dire to watch and profits from an era where attrition only wins. He's also consistently breaks the rules. I would like anyone to win apart from him although I think JUly 8th will be a sad day unfortunately.

HM Murdoch wrote:

CommonSense wrote:And by the way, it’s not swarve, it’s “suave”, n’est pas?

By the way, it's "n'est-ce pas", n'est-ce pas?!

Oui oui Monsieur Murdoch, merci beaucoup!

banbrotam wrote:

CommonSense wrote:Can you tell us what won you over to nadal who shamelessly and notoriously resorts to ugly gamesmanship to try cheating his way to victory? It definitely cannot be the king of clay’s
talent deficit, for which he has proven he still needs to compensate by
receiving on-court coaching, as recently as the FO12 final in his own back yard. Yesterday at 2-set up and in the middle of the 3rd set when Bellucci (unexpectedly) broke him to tie at 2-2, the clay specialist suddenly looked unsure of himself and couldn't resist turning to his nanny toni as though he still needed to be told what to do. What a champ!

Oh dear. The 'anti Nadal' brigade are really out in force at this Slam. Do you think it's because he looks worryingly close to his majestic form of 2008/ early 09? It does seem strange that as soon as he wins a Slam in style, his boring detractors start

It always amuses me as to why some fans don't realise that questioning Nadal's character / ability isn't wonderfully ironic. Especially when he has such a great head to head over the GOAT who the same people often think can do no wrong (whether it's openly questioning the Davis Cup play of a team-mate etc - there are numerous examples of Fed being fallible)

Get real. Nadal’s nowhere near his 2008 form. Of the top
four, he looked the least impressive in his first round match. If he'd played Gulbis i wonder if he wouldn't have been out already.
Nadal’s tactical
gamesmanship has nothing to do with any ATP players. It has everything to do
with his own curious dependency on toni and assorted dirty tricks to steal wins. He can go
on to win 100 slams and there will always be a footnote reminding us of the
nature of his tainted records. The fact that you’ve no problem with a disrespectful
tennis player blatantly breaking the rules doesn’t mean that the rest of us
should keep quiet and be forced to witness such a disgraceful conduct.


I’m not anti-Nadal per se, I’m anti-cheating. It always
amuses me as to why I have not encountered one single nadal fan with the
bravery, honesty and smarts to stand up and address nadal’s unanswered gamesmanship
questions. Instead, you evade the most relevant nadal problem by constantly
hiding behind “the anti-nadal brigade”. No body ever gets credits or credibility for changing the subject or running away from it.

CommonSense wrote:I’m not anti-Nadal per se

So what about all the other players who stretch the time rules!
Oh let me guess, you just happened to pick Nadal as a random example because you're not anti-Nadal right?

I tell you why CommonSense

Its because pretty much all the Nadal fans advocate cheating, they only want Nadal to make up the rules for tennis, and everyone else has to listen to it. Ive never know haddie to take any criticism at all on him, those people live in a bubble.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Its because pretty much all the Nadal fans advocate cheating, they only want Nadal to make up the rules for tennis, and everyone else has to listen to it.

... and you know all the Nadal fans personally and vouch for there cheating or lack thereof. For example, is he part of the many Greek government iterations?

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Ive never know haddie to take any criticism at all on him, those people live in a bubble.

... and yet you are unwilling to acknowledge a player with many current records. Bubble, what bubble?

I believe I said "nadal on clay will not be beaten" just a few weeks ago. If thats not acknowledging, then I don't know what is. Ive also said he's much better breaker of serve than Andy is, in response to those saying Murrays return is best on tour.

Josiah Maiestas wrote: Ive also said he's much better breaker of serve than Andy is, in response to those saying Murrays return is best on tour.

Purely because you hate Murray more than you hate Nadal.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:I tell you why CommonSense

Its because pretty much all the Nadal fans advocate cheating, they only want Nadal to make up the rules for tennis, and everyone else has to listen to it. Ive never know haddie to take any criticism at all on him, those people live in a bubble.

Your jokes get funnier by the day

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote: Ive also said he's much better breaker of serve than Andy is, in response to those saying Murrays return is best on tour.

Purely because you hate Murray more than you hate Nadal.

Actually he dislikes either equally and puts himself in an emotional quandry so it's impossible for him to ever be fair minded about either. Even after Murray gave us a beautiful exhibition of Tennis yesterday, our boards young whippersnapper couldn't bring himself to say well done - instead we got some inaccurate comment about his chances agaisnt Ferrer

Significantly, they both have a postive head to head against the GOAT - but Josaih likes to tell us that he isn't the worst of Fed fans

I've got a startling confession I'll take Hawkeye and all her Murray wummary any day, at least we get some intelligent information on occassions

banbrotam wrote:

CaledonianCraig wrote:

Josiah Maiestas wrote: Ive also said he's much better breaker of serve than Andy is, in response to those saying Murrays return is best on tour.

Purely because you hate Murray more than you hate Nadal.

Actually he dislikes either equally and puts himself in an emotional quandry so it's impossible for him to ever be fair minded about either. Even after Murray gave us a beautiful exhibition of Tennis yesterday, our boards young whippersnapper couldn't bring himself to say well done - instead we got some inaccurate comment about his chances agaisnt Ferrer

Significantly, they both have a postive head to head against the GOAT - but Josaih likes to tell us that he isn't the worst of Fed fans

I've got a startling confession I'll take Hawkeye and all her Murray wummary any day, at least we get some intelligent information on occassions

Boy that is some kick in the goolies for JM.

Head to head argument is really not going to wind me up, banbr. You see, Murray rarely can make it far enough to meet Federer the past year and a half, when they last did, Federer rolled him over in Dubai. Head 2 head on clay does not exist, cause Murray was too awful to ever get far enough.

You quote Craig's reply to mine but I have him blocked, well Craig seeing as you refuse to block me. I dislike Nadal much more than Murray, I would even wear a Scotland shirt if Andy could beat Nadal in a slam final.

You're getting slightly boring now JM

Josiah Maiestas wrote:I believe I said "nadal on clay will not be beaten" just a few weeks ago. If thats not acknowledging, then I don't know what is. Ive also said he's much better breaker of serve than Andy is, in response to those saying Murrays return is best on tour.

You are now on the 606v2 couch, being analysed. Watch out!.

Myopia may be the least of the maladies in question.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:Head to head argument is really not going to wind me up, banbr. You see, Murray rarely can make it far enough to meet Federer the past year and a half, when they last did, Federer rolled him over in Dubai

More lazy research. I really would stick to comparing Fed and Murray since around last November than the last year and a half when they have identical Slam records

Does anyone on these boards think that Murray and Fed always been in opposite halves of the draw and rarley beating their Top 2 rivals, has anything to do with them not meeting. Or is it just Murray's inability to "make it far enough"?

If it's the latter, "far enough" in what exactly? The Slams? Well they could only have ever met themselves in the final. Masters? Not certain where Fed was at Canada and Shanghai last year

However, we all know where he was the year before - getting a caning off Murray


Josiah, you continue to be a source of amusement, but not for the reasons you'd wish

Josiah Maiestas wrote: I dislike Nadal much more than Murray, I would even wear a Scotland shirt if Andy could beat Nadal in a slam final.

Do not let your dislike get in the way of enjoying wonderful tennis matches!

lydian wrote:

CommonSense wrote:I’m not anti-Nadal per se

So what about all the other players who stretch the time rules!
Oh let me guess, you just happened to pick Nadal as a random example because you're not anti-Nadal right?

Hello lydian, i didn't say I'm not anti-nadal. I said I'm not anti-nadal per se. You've missed my point.

I pity you, for you haven't understood or digested a single word of what I wrote in my earlier post. Or is it an easier way out just playing dumb? Never mind, in any event, talking to a brick wall is more rewarding than getting smitten rafa fans to acknowledge a terrible nadal issue others can see as clear as day light.

If you insist, I pick nadal because he represents the biggest fraud in tennis history.

Nadal should be banned for his rubbish trophy biting. IT'S NOT FUNNY NADAL.

CommonSense wrote:

lydian wrote:

CommonSense wrote:I’m not anti-Nadal per se

So what about all the other players who stretch the time rules!
Oh let me guess, you just happened to pick Nadal as a random example because you're not anti-Nadal right?

Hello lydian, i didn't say I'm not anti-nadal. I said I'm not anti-nadal per se. You've missed my point.

I pity you, for you haven't understood or digested a single word of what I wrote in my earlier post. Or is it an easier way out just playing dumb? Never mind, in any event, talking to a brick wall is more rewarding than getting smitten rafa fans to acknowledge a terrible nadal issue others can see as clear as day light.

Poor Lydian

Perhaps he needs Weetabix to digest your posts

Seriously where do these people come from. Jersey, Daltond, Seifer, Common Sense, why do they all target this forum to troll?

super_realist wrote:Nadal should be banned for his rubbish trophy biting. IT'S NOT FUNNY NADAL.

Yes I'm on the phone with the ITF, shall be putting this notion forward.
Frankly I think trophy biting is a crime against humanity, hence Nadal should be punished with immediate effect.

banbrotam wrote:

CommonSense wrote:Can you tell us what won you over to nadal who shamelessly and notoriously resorts to ugly gamesmanship to try cheating his way to victory? It definitely cannot be the king of clay’s
talent deficit, for which he has proven he still needs to compensate by
receiving on-court coaching, as recently as the FO12 final in his own back yard. Yesterday at 2-set up and in the middle of the 3rd set when Bellucci (unexpectedly) broke him to tie at 2-2, the clay specialist suddenly looked unsure of himself and couldn't resist turning to his nanny toni as though he still needed to be told what to do. What a champ!

Oh dear. The 'anti Nadal' brigade are really out in force at this Slam.

Anti nadal or not, what he just wrote was true, but sadly you resorted to attacking him rather than what he wrote. Nadal is a borderline cheat. Gamesmanship and ugly tactics coupled with his defence game that has no place on grass (but they made sure it did with new racquets, balls and slower court). Nadal can sleep comfortably thinking he won a Wimbledon title, but he didn't. He won the dumbed down wimbledon title. When his legs get tired, and he loses a pace or 2, you are not going to believe how exposed his crap talentless defence is gonna look. It is going to be very funny for me.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:I tell you why CommonSense

Its because pretty much all the Nadal fans advocate cheating

Exactly. There was this guy I knew back on the Snooker scene (not here). He was also loving flukes and gamesmanship tactics. I knew his favourite player was Mark Selby because that guy is like Nadal... but I didn't even need to ask him what Tennis player he supported because I guessed he supported the worst one of the lot for the exact same reasons. I have never seen someone as bad as Nadal. Injury time outs should be banned. If you are unfit to carry on, you lose.

I don't recall Federer using them.... yet with Mumm-Ra they seem to be here there and everywhere to name a few things. He breaks the time rule all the time, warned for it every so often. Then he gives an evil look to umpire or argues. (If he argued with me, I'd dock a game off him) The guys a complete ass.

I don't want to contribute much on this thread because I disagree with almost everything most of you on here have stated as fact (with little or less evidence), but if you really believe Nadal (aside from his slow time delays, which are out of order but if not punished, why should he change? And why single him out of every other player that does the same?)'s tactics are gamesmanship, then the onus is on the runners of the sport to change the game to stop him from doing that or to stop Nadal's (IMO both thrilling and often attractive, but I know how that'll go down...) style of tennis from being effective.