Jump to content

Wimbledon


Thedelldays

Recommended Posts

And i see two main things. He's never beaten any of them when it really matters, ie in finals and semi finals of grand slams. England beat Spain in a friendly, it didn't bloody well count for anything last month when they were winning their third title in a row.

 

And you have highlighted another major flaw in sport in general these days, ridiculous amounts of money on offer without actually having to win anything.

 

What do you think giving all the money coming into the game to just the winner would do to the competition?

 

In tennis, you'd only have three, maaaybe four players that would make any money at all. The rest would have to play part time, reducing their competitiveness as they wouldn't have any time to train, with most of them giving up pretty soon after.

 

In football... well, do I even need to say anything?

 

The more even distribution of money in sport is there for a very good reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Turkish, are you suggesting tennis should revert to being an amateur game - only 'gentlemen' should play? Because that would mean only the wealthy could participate (the same could apply to cricket, rugby, football, athletics .....)

 

An expert tennis commentator was saying only the other day that the likes of Fred Perry wouldn't have stood a chance against today's players because the level of fitness and athleticism is so much higher. That probably wouldn't have happened if tennis remained an amateur sport.

 

Did i suggest that? $5m of "winnings" in one year without actually winning anything? Does that sound reasonable to you??

 

As for your comment about Fred Perry; this is why i laugh at people who say if Murray had played in another era he'd have won things. Yes, he is more athletic, stronger and fitter than Fred Perry was. But dont you think Fred Perry would have had the same benefits of fitness and skill coaches, technology, diets, etc if he was playing today as Murray does, so therefore he too would be fitter, stronger, more athletic etc In the same way that if Murray was playing in 1938 he'd only have had the same things available to him as Fred perry did back then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What do you think giving all the money coming into the game to just the winner would do to the competition?

 

In tennis, you'd only have three, maaaybe four players that would make any money at all. The rest would have to play part time, reducing their competitiveness as they wouldn't have any time to train, with most of them giving up pretty soon after.

 

In football... well, do I even need to say anything?

 

The more even distribution of money in sport is there for a very good reason.

 

Did i say that Jimmy_d? i dont want to upset you as i know you get easiy offended and dish out infraction points if anyone disagrees with you, but seriousl, $5m in ONE year, in which he won F*ck all?!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyve just had David Lloyd on Radio5 (another tennis loser) who said British tennis has plenty of money but the problem lies in the fact hardly anyone plays it.

That is because the only time the public are interested in it is the two weeks of Wimbledon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theyve just had David Lloyd on Radio5 (another tennis loser) who said British tennis has plenty of money but the problem lies in the fact hardly anyone plays it.

That is because the only time the public are interested in it is the two weeks of Wimbledon.

 

I'll tell you why no one plays it mate. I used to be a member of the Hampshire tennis and health club and membership including tennis was over £1k a year, more if you wanted lessons. Generally most of the members were middle class types. A mate of mine is a member of a club in Harrogate and all the fellas in the club are Solictors, lawyers, Doctors and so on. If you want to play in a decent club then it's simply not accessable to the average person. How can a family on an average income afford to pay that sort of money to have their kids coached in a decent club by decent coaches?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did i say that Jimmy_d? i dont want to upset you as i know you get easiy offended and dish out infraction points if anyone disagrees with you, but seriousl, $5m in ONE year, in which he won F*ck all?!!!

 

All that money is in the game. It doesn't just come out of thin air, it all comes from the vast number of fans in one way or another, through ticket sales, or through fans buying products from companies that sponsor tournaments, or through fans buying products that companies advertise on the back of the tournaments.

 

If not to the players through all stages of the tournament, where do you suggest that money goes? Just to the winners, as you imply through complaining at the earnings despite winning nothing? More to the tournament organisers instead of the players? More to the officials?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that money is in the game. It doesn't just come out of thin air, it all comes from the vast number of fans in one way or another, through ticket sales, or through fans buying products from companies that sponsor tournaments, or through fans buying products that companies advertise on the back of the tournaments.

 

If not to the players through all stages of the tournament, where do you suggest that money goes? Just to the winners, as you imply through complaining at the earnings despite winning nothing? More to the tournament organisers instead of the players? More to the officials?

 

Thanks for telling me the money doesn't come from thin air. :rolleyes:

 

How about investing large amounts of it in grass roots so we can develop more players? How about setting up more clubs and coaches for kids, see my point my point above about how much it costs to be a member of a decent club in this area. or maybe we should just keep on giving Andy Murray $5m a year for not winning anything and like BTF is doing, all celebreate how well he is doing because hes got such a healthy bank balance and just remember, he'd beat Fred Perry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And i see two main things. He's never beaten any of them when it really matters, ie in finals and semi finals of grand slams. England beat Spain in a friendly, it didn't bloody well count for anything last month when they were winning their third title in a row.

 

And you have highlighted another major flaw in sport in general these days, ridiculous amounts of money on offer without actually having to win anything.

 

He beat Nadal at the US Open SF in 08.

 

Other than that you're right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that point, I'd agree with you, I'd like to see more going into grassroots tennis, but even with more expenditure at a lower level, I don't think you'd see prize money drop significantly.

 

It's not like you can say Murray has won nothing this past year though. He's won enough to be ranked higher than all but three players in the world. Maybe he hasn't won finals, but he should still be one of the top paid players in the world.

Edited by Jimmy_D
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the football equvilent of the charity shield and JPT trophy then.[/quote

 

Obviously yes :rolleyes: - the Charity Shield and the JPT are without doubt the equal of the ATP Masters in which Federer, Nadal and Djokovich also compete.

 

Who competes the charity shield every year? Dont hear Alex Ferguson banging on about how great it is they've won it more than anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On that point, I'd agree with you, I'd like to see more going into grassroots tennis, but even with more expenditure at a lower level, I don't think you'd see prize money drop significantly.

 

It's not like you can say Murray has won nothing this past year though. He's won enough to be ranked higher than all but three players in the world. Maybe not finals, but he should still be one of the top paid players in the world.

 

Dont disagree with that, but $5m a year is an obscene amount for someone who has never won anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont disagree with that, but $5m a year is an obscene amount for someone who has never won anything.

 

It's just been pointed out to you that he's won 22 ATP tournaments. He earned $5m last year (if you bothered to look at his record you'd see he doesn't WIN that every year). A lot of his income comes from sponsorship.

 

You don't get to be number four in the world by 'not winning anything'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's just been pointed out to you that he's won 22 ATP tournaments. He earned $5m last year (if you bothered to look at his record you'd see he doesn't WIN that every year). A lot of his income comes from sponsorship.

 

You don't get to be number four in the world by 'not winning anything'.

 

Prehaps i should qualify as you're clearly having difficulty understanding, he's never won anything that matters. When players careers are measured it's on how many grand slams they've won, not how many times they've won the Bangkok Indoor Hard Court trophy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Prehaps i should qualify as you're clearly having difficulty understanding, he's never won anything that matters. When players careers are measured it's on how many grand slams they've won, not how many times they've won the Bangkok Indoor Hard Court trophy.

 

I'm surprised that the top 3 even bother to enter the ATP Masters then since, in your book, they don't matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? They, like Murray do their JOB, they don't always win things! You'd do well to remember that Tennis IS his job, not a hobby.

 

Okay then, maybe i should be paid $5m a year because i won the sales person of the month 3 times in 2009. You'd do well to remember sales is my job, not a hobby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are you banging on about now?

 

Dear lord :facepalm:

 

If there's a shortage of something (gifted tennis players / actors) in a field awash with sponsorship and other money, then those at the top get well rewarded. I don't suppose there's a massive shortage of salesmen of the month however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear lord :facepalm:

 

If there's a shortage of something (gifted tennis players / actors) in a field awash with sponsorship and other money, then those at the top get well rewarded. I don't suppose there's a massive shortage of salesmen of the month however.

 

I think you're missing the point as usual. :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has he ever won a grand slam? Ie something that matters. It's quite easy BTF.

 

I presume you're asking a rhetorical question because we all know he hasn't won a slam, yet. However, those titles he HAS won obviously do matter to him and to all the other top ranking tennis players. That's why they compete in them. It's their performances in the Masters that dictate their world rankings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I presume you're asking a rhetorical question because we all know he hasn't won a slam, yet. However, those titles he HAS won obviously do matter to him and to all the other top ranking tennis players. That's why they compete in them. It's their performances in the Masters that dictate their world rankings.

 

But players are remembers and talked about for how many grand slams they've won, yes? Hence why the commentators today for example, were going on about how many times Federer has won Wimbledon, the Aussie, French and US open etc, not the Bangkok indoor hard court trophy, despite this tournement meaning so much to both of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would suggest that Tim Henman is not particularly thick, just not a particularly good tennis player.

 

 

He's an alright bloke. I used to do some work for his family up in Amesbury, met him there briefly. No airs and graces, decent type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Elitist Sport watched by an even bigger Elite,have a Family freind who played Womens Tennis for England in the 60s 70s she was allowed to join the "All England Lawn Tennis Club (Wimbledon) in the year 2000, not too long a wait for somebody who was number 3 to Wade and Barker.Tennis still suffers from the Snobbery that Cricket has almost rid itself off,just see how many hangers on were in the crowd today,Beckham? working class hero or smug self publicising C@@t ? sat with Boris J, David C,and Cliff Fookin Richard,you will see these same smug faces at the Olympics in the best seats in the house anything to win a few votes, sell a pukeworthy CD, or promote a tacky designer pair of boxers made in a sweatshop somewhere in Asia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bet you cheer on Pompey too.

 

Damn...foiled by the forum intelligenti... ;-)

 

As it happens, my uncle used to play for Pompey in the late 60s/early 70s so I do have an smidgen of historical empathy for our friends down the road. Of course, I'd never be daft enough to mention that on here...can you imagine the mental battering I would get from some of the more intellectually challenged folk...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay then, maybe i should be paid $5m a year because i won the sales person of the month 3 times in 2009. You'd do well to remember sales is my job, not a hobby.

 

Not really in the public scene though are you, you'll also do well to remember that Federer LOST yes LOST several Slam finals before his winning streak - takes a while you know!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really in the public scene though are you, you'll also do well to remember that Federer LOST yes LOST several Slam finals before his winning streak - takes a while you know!!!

 

Murray will never become a great because a) he lacks the ability, b) he's a miserable brat who does not demand respect from the crowd and he can't handle it. I love it how he let slip that he hates it when people in the crowd shout "come on Tim".

 

I laugh every time i hear someone shout it out because I know Murray will get rattled by it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Murray will never become a great because a) he lacks the ability, b) he's a miserable brat who does not demand respect from the crowd and he can't handle it. I love it how he let slip that he hates it when people in the crowd shout "come on Tim".

 

I laugh every time i hear someone shout it out because I know Murray will get rattled by it.

 

FFS are you really that retarded? What if Andy goes on to win like 4 slams, he has to lose some to win some as DID Federer?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many has he won so far?

 

 

I am not sure what to say to this, other than FEDERER IS OLDER THAN MURRAY AND HE LOST 4 TIMES IN A SLAM FINAL AT THE SAME AGE. what part of this are you not getting? you HAVE to lose to improve, christ even SRS would understand this (where the hell is he?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure what to say to this, other than FEDERER IS OLDER THAN MURRAY AND HE LOST 4 TIMES IN A SLAM FINAL AT THE SAME AGE. what part of this are you not getting? you HAVE to lose to improve, christ even SRS would understand this (where the hell is he?)

 

Eh? Federer had won Grand Slams before he was twenty five, which is what Murray is now.

 

All the capital letters in the world don't change that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...