Davis Cup 2015 - World Group Semi-Final - 18th-20th September

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

RE: Davis Cup 2015 - World Group Semi-Final - 18th-20th September

wolf · Tennis legend

nicofrance wrote:
A surprising decision, perhaps Kyle Edmunds injury was worse than what's been reported. If not then this is a risk, at some point Kyle has to make his debut so why not now. In terms of James Ward I think it would have been difficult to justify his inclusion regardless of his previous good efforts. Am I right in thinking that Leon Smith could still change his players for the second singles matches?

-- Edited by nicofrance on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:32:41 PM

He can only change from his nominated four which includes Jamie and Dom so his singles players are now set for both days.

bigboyjumbo · Lower Club Player

i dont know how it can be controversial leaving out a player who hasnt won a match in god knows how long and lost to player ranked lower than Evo. If they were to play a match i would not be putting my money on ward

nicofrance · Strong Club Player

wolf wrote:
nicofrance wrote:
A surprising decision, perhaps Kyle Edmunds injury was worse than what's been reported. If not then this is a risk, at some point Kyle has to make his debut so why not now. In terms of James Ward I think it would have been difficult to justify his inclusion regardless of his previous good efforts. Am I right in thinking that Leon Smith could still change his players for the second singles matches?

-- Edited by nicofrance on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:32:41 PM
He can only change from his nominated four which includes Jamie and Dom so his singles players are now set for both days.

Thanks, well if that's the case then it's more of a risk! if Kyle was fit to play then I would have thought that would have been a better pick. Personally I find this DC rule strange, why not allow teams to be free to pick from 5.

Spaced · Lower Club Player

Coup Droit wrote:
I think it's controversial to not pick your regular number 2 player, who is not injured, present, training and ranked miles higher than Dan.

Doesn;t mean it's the wrong decision (even if Dan loses both and we lose the tie). But it's certainly controversial.

I see what you mean, but what you've said there doesn't take all factors into account. You could also argue it's controversial to pick a player on an 11 match losing streak with one (or two) others in considerably better form ready to step in. There was no obvious choice here but I think he's made the right one.

Rustie · Junior player

C'mon it makes perfect sense. The only doubt is whether Evans will have the fitness to play opponents of a high level over the course of 5 sets.

James Ward is on a horrendous losing streak and I think most people agree that choosing him would be a mistake. Kyle has had an excellent 12 months or so but even without the rumours of injury, his biggest win to date came in a 5 setter at Roland Garros to veteran qualifier Stephane Robert and he was cramping towards the end of that.

Evans is in great form and has beat Nishikori & Tomic in his career, it's a ballsy move but it's the right one.

-- Edited by Rustie on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:44:26 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

Rustie wrote:
C'mon it makes perfect sense. The only doubt is whether Evans will have the fitness to play opponents of a high level over the course of 5 sets.

James Ward is on a horrendous losing streak and I think most people agree that choosing him would be a mistake. Kyle has had an excellent 12 months or so but even without the rumours of injury, his biggest win to date came in a 5 setter at Roland Garros to veteran qualifier Stephane Robert and he was cramping towards the end of that.

Evans is in great form and has beat Nishikori & Tomic in his career, it's a ballsy move but it's the right one.

-- Edited by Rustie on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:44:26 PM

It's an outcome I'm personally not unhappy about it, but I respect different opinions on who seemed best.

But something has gone wrong when a player not originally even in Glasgow ends up in the team ahead of both Kyle and James.

I hope whatever the result, however well Evo plays, that there is a review of how that came about.

Even if we take it that there are remaining concerns over Kyle regarding his accident then that still leaves Evo usurping James ( if Kyle's accident is not an issue in the final selection it's much worse not having had Evo in Glasgow from the start ).

I understand James being here because of his past, but if Evo is now the man then not having originally had him here too is clearly a mistake, an error, a balls up ! No way has Evo found unheralded qualities in the last few days or it been unfathomable that James would actually not magically find Davis Cup form again, having been in poor form lately.

They always could have had Kyle, James and Evo here ( with James past record but poor form, it made all the more sense ) so whatever the result, however much praise Leon gets for balls, admitting to a mistake, the question that he needs to answer to his bosses ( and I'm sure we'd like to know too ) is how on earth was that mistake made.

Anyway, questions for after, but questions indeed. For now, c'mon GB !

Jaffa · Challenger level

indiana wrote:
Rustie wrote:
C'mon it makes perfect sense. The only doubt is whether Evans will have the fitness to play opponents of a high level over the course of 5 sets.

James Ward is on a horrendous losing streak and I think most people agree that choosing him would be a mistake. Kyle has had an excellent 12 months or so but even without the rumours of injury, his biggest win to date came in a 5 setter at Roland Garros to veteran qualifier Stephane Robert and he was cramping towards the end of that.

Evans is in great form and has beat Nishikori & Tomic in his career, it's a ballsy move but it's the right one.

-- Edited by Rustie on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:44:26 PM

It's an outcome I'm personally not unhappy about it, but I respect different opinions on who seemed best.
But something has gone wrong when a player not originally even in Glasgow ends up in the team ahead of both Kyle and James.
I hope whatever the result, however well Evo plays, that there is a review of how that came about.
Even if we take it that there are remaining concerns over Kyle regarding his accident then that still leaves Evo usurping James ( if Kyle's accident is not an issue in the final selection it's much worse not having had Evo in Glasgow from the start ).
I understand James being here because of his past, but if Evo is now the man then not having originally had him here too is clearly a mistake, an error, a balls up ! No way has Evo found unheralded qualities in the last few days or it been unfathomable that James would actually not magically find Davis Cup form again, having been in poor form lately.
They always could have had Kyle, James and Evo here ( with James past record but poor form, it made all the more sense ) so whatever the result, however much praise Leon gets for balls, admitting to a mistake, the question that he needs to answer to his bosses ( and I'm sure we'd like to know too ) is how on earth was that mistake made.
Anyway, questions for after, but questions indeed. For now, c'mon GB !

Why is this? He wasn't mentioned in the 5 until Kyle hurt himself.

Even if Dan had been there from the start, as you can only have 5 nominations one of them wouldn't have been nominated anyway.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Coup Droit · Tennis legend

Let's not bash Leon too much though - there's always this !!!!

www.sportinglife.com/tennis/news/article/553/9993400/greg-rusedski-wants-to-become-great-britain-davis-cup-captain

wolf · Tennis legend

Jaffa wrote:
Why is this? He wasn't mentioned in the 5 until Kyle hurt himself.

Even if Dan had been there from the start, as you can only have 5 nominations one of them wouldn't have been nominated anyway.

Maybe I'm missing something?

Your not really missing anything. Teams have to nominate four players ten days before the tie. Leon nominated Andy, Jamie, Dom and Kyle but made it clear it was a five man squad which included James. You can change up to two of your four nominations on draw day.

spud · Challenger qualifying

indiana wrote:
Rustie wrote:
C'mon it makes perfect sense. The only doubt is whether Evans will have the fitness to play opponents of a high level over the course of 5 sets.

James Ward is on a horrendous losing streak and I think most people agree that choosing him would be a mistake. Kyle has had an excellent 12 months or so but even without the rumours of injury, his biggest win to date came in a 5 setter at Roland Garros to veteran qualifier Stephane Robert and he was cramping towards the end of that.

Evans is in great form and has beat Nishikori & Tomic in his career, it's a ballsy move but it's the right one.

-- Edited by Rustie on Thursday 17th of September 2015 12:44:26 PM

It's an outcome I'm personally not unhappy about it, but I respect different opinions on who seemed best.
But something has gone wrong when a player not originally even in Glasgow ends up in the team ahead of both Kyle and James.
I hope whatever the result, however well Evo plays, that there is a review of how that came about.
Even if we take it that there are remaining concerns over Kyle regarding his accident then that still leaves Evo usurping James ( if Kyle's accident is not an issue in the final selection it's much worse not having had Evo in Glasgow from the start ).
I understand James being here because of his past, but if Evo is now the man then not having originally had him here too is clearly a mistake, an error, a balls up ! No way has Evo found unheralded qualities in the last few days or it been unfathomable that James would actually not magically find Davis Cup form again, having been in poor form lately.
They always could have had Kyle, James and Evo here ( with James past record but poor form, it made all the more sense ) so whatever the result, however much praise Leon gets for balls, admitting to a mistake, the question that he needs to answer to his bosses ( and I'm sure we'd like to know too ) is how on earth was that mistake made.
Anyway, questions for after, but questions indeed. For now, c'mon GB !

People are reading way too much into this!

- Kyle and James were initially picked which is fair

- Kyle injures himself so Evans comes up as a back-up

- Evans is found to be hitting/playing the best out of the 3 of them when practicing... Leon picks who he thinks is the best to play in the second singles spot ... And thats it!

Why are people so concerned about the initial 5 players? It isn't set in stone whatsoever when they are picked

-- Edited by spud on Thursday 17th of September 2015 01:41:03 PM

indiana · Tennis legend

BeefyDeedz wrote:
bigboyjumbo wrote:
Yes coup completely agree. If Andy didnt feel as if Evo was up to it etc etc then i dont think he would be playing. Nothing to lose, his months of hard work and good results have been rewarded
Whilst Kyle's more impressive (in the past 12 months) and consistent efforts have been ignored?

Leaving aside Kyle's accident and even if he is fit enough, do you really believe that ?!

Of course Kyle's consistently good form and higher ranking compared to the other two is a factor, a big factor, and to me it's ridiculous to suggest that's been ignored when all involved want to win the tie.

But so is Kyle's really big match experience, including at Davis Cup, a factor. For this tie, for the 3 of them there were quite a number of factors.

Selection is not some prize for good consistency ( although I repeat of course a big factor ) it's about selecting who you believe is the best man at the time and place.

Anyway, Kyle's accident and possible repercussions may have been more of a factor than has been made out especially when going with two doubles specialists ( and that in itself may have needed some weighing up ).

indiana · Tennis legend

wolf wrote:
Jaffa wrote:
Why is this? He wasn't mentioned in the 5 until Kyle hurt himself.

Even if Dan had been there from the start, as you can only have 5 nominations one of them wouldn't have been nominated anyway.

Maybe I'm missing something?
Your not really missing anything. Teams have to nominate four players ten days before the tie. Leon nominated Andy, Jamie, Dom and Kyle but made it clear it was a five man squad which included James. You can change up to two of your four nominations on draw day.

Can you really have only 5 nominations ?!

My ongoing point has been that it could and in this case should have been six, and no one had said before that it couldn't be.

Whatever, surely Evo could always have been in Glasgow, more ready to step in than dashing up later. He wasn't, so less prepared than he could have been. Mistake.

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 17th of September 2015 01:57:25 PM

airsmashers · County player

Seems we're having similar conversations to when Leon picked Evo over Jamie Baker.

wolf · Tennis legend

indiana wrote:
wolf wrote:
Jaffa wrote:
Why is this? He wasn't mentioned in the 5 until Kyle hurt himself.

Even if Dan had been there from the start, as you can only have 5 nominations one of them wouldn't have been nominated anyway.

Maybe I'm missing something?
Your not really missing anything. Teams have to nominate four players ten days before the tie. Leon nominated Andy, Jamie, Dom and Kyle but made it clear it was a five man squad which included James. You can change up to two of your four nominations on draw day.
Can you really have only 5 nominations ?!
My ongoing point has been that it could and in this case should have been six, and no one had said before that it couldn't be.
Whatever, surely Evo could always have been in Glasgow, more ready to step in than dashing up later. He wasn't, so less prepared than he could have been. Mistake.

-- Edited by indiana on Thursday 17th of September 2015 01:57:25 PM

No, as I said you have to make four nominations ten days before the tie, but you can change two of these on draw day.