Toronto Masters 2008 Semi-final: Murray v Nadal

Madeline · Admin:Moderator + Tennis Legend

RE: Toronto Masters 2008 Semi-final: Murray v Nadal

Salmon · Tennis legend

I guess it's just there to prevent time wasting? And the umpires/ATP are scared of Nadal so they don't do anything about him. It's disgusting... he gets the towel for half a minute from the second game of a set.

Anyway, great performance from Murray and once again he's looking like the player he was before the wrist injury.

-- Edited by Kung Fu Panda at 17:06, 2008-07-27

kundalini · Specialist Reporter + Intermediate Club Player

Post match interview transcript here:

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=51135

-- Edited by kundalini at 18:28, 2008-07-27

indiana · Tennis legend

Madeline wrote:

So many people mentioning the "poor" tiebreak. He was very obviously upset that he was not allowed the trainer when he requested one, it's a longstanding problem with his knee and he probably knew very well that his movement would be back to normal if it was treated (as happened). In my opinion the frustration, and the inability to move at his best, caused that "poor" tiebreak.

Is this a new rule, anyway? I can remember many instances of players having the trainer on just before their opponent's serve, both justified and apparently unjustified.

I'm not quite clear what the position is. The ATPMS TV commentators suggested that if Andy insisted on a trainer at that time, the umpre had to aceed. He could only basically suggest that it was better when Andy was due to serve. The umpire was on the phone to someone at the 6-5 break about the situation but is wasn't clear to me if Andy was acually told that no way could he have a trainer then. I presume if he literally couldn't play on at the time, it would have been allowed.

If he really has the right to a tranier, it si maybe a lesson learned that he should have stood his ground.

indiana · Tennis legend

kundalini wrote:

Post match interview transcript here:

http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=51135

-- Edited by kundalini at 18:28, 2008-07-27

Looks as if he intends to stay stubborn about playing defensively in some matches and more attackingly in others, rather than shift to a constantly more attacking game as some folk ( one in particular ) would like.

I guess someone told him afterwards that the out call that put him 5-3 down in the second set was a correct call, hence no longer the big deal that he certainly made out at the time.

I did get the impression that Andy went for at least one challenge without any great conviction that he was going to win it. If he hadn't done this, he would still have been able to challenge that point, and as the commentators said, when Hawkeye has confirmed the call, it is probably easier to move on. That said, he did play a pretty good final game.

steven · Tennis legend

I heard most of the exchange with the umpire. Andy asked for the trainer, the ump asked if it was for his knee and when Andy said yes, the umpire suggested that it would be better if the trainer came out at the set break (maybe thinking that if Andy could survive with it sore for two games, he could survive for another two), and Andy seemed to accede to that request but then threw in a peeved-sounding "so it's ok if we wait to the set break and it gets worse, is it?"

Instead of doing that, he should simply have insisted on the trainer coming out there and then (I'm sure the umpire wouldn't have refused had Andy pressed) or at least after his service game and before the tiebreak.

Of course, there may have been more to the exchange that I didn't catch and that might throw a different complexion on things, but to me it seemed like Andy went a bit into victim mode there rather than simply asserting his rights.