Tennis

[kingfox]

Using menstennisforums as a source

That forum makes foxestalk contributors look like Shakespeare. All they know is to call players "mugs" at every opportunity.

 

You go on there then?

 

 

I'm not calling you an idiot for saying that! My god, you got worse!

You weren't complimenting over the last few days you were taking him down and calling us for saying he could reach the top hundred. Now you've gone full circle on that and claimed you said it all along! Secondly I said he'd improved his attitude, not his game. Got that? You understand? Case in point about his attitude is the post you quoted the other day by MattP about him necking drinks in Birmingham, something according to interviews I've seen of late he has stop doing. Obviously now if he can get to more slams hell improve as a player, all we said is we'd seen glimpses of him be able to do this in the past" but things like getting wasted in Birmingham have held him back, and you shot all down on that.

So please either shut up or admit you were wrong as you've completely changed your stance. Otherwise your going to give me a ****ing migraine!

 

Every post you have used the word idiot. 

 

Posted 29 August 2013 - 09:30 PM

Showing good aggression, ripping it off the forehand, pretty old school as well in terms of going to the net. Two things though, he has missed some easy balls, and he needs to hold serve better.

 

So Facecloth, is that not complimenting him no?

 

He has obviously improved his game as well, and maybe his attitude in some aspects, but last night in my opinion he was getting himself down too much, and he was rushing which showed nerves, he should of handled himself better that's all, when we have seen underdogs play against better players and have chances to win, they have been able to hide their emotions better, but with Evans his emotions stuck out like a sore thumb, and you could see him rushing, you could see the nerves.

 

You wound me up over Jerzy, so why can't I give it back a bit with Evans? 

 

Everyone has different opinions, and my opinion is he can get into the top 100 and beat more players around Tomic's ranking and maybe the odd 32 player, I said that two days ago, when he was playing Tomic. But I haven't been impressed with some things either.

 

Let's leave it at that lad, if you are getting a migraine. 

[Facecloth]

You go on there then?

 

 

 

Every post you have used the word idiot. 

 

Posted 29 August 2013 - 09:30 PM

Showing good aggression, ripping it off the forehand, pretty old school as well in terms of going to the net. Two things though, he has missed some easy balls, and he needs to hold serve better.

 

So Facecloth, is that not complimenting him no?

 

He has obviously improved his game as well, and maybe his attitude in some aspects, but last night in my opinion he was getting himself down too much, and he was rushing which showed nerves, he should of handled himself better that's all, when we have seen underdogs play against better players and have chances to win, they have been able to hide their emotions better, but with Evans his emotions stuck out like a sore thumb, and you could see him rushing, you could see the nerves.

 

You wound me up over Jerzy, so why can't I give it back a bit with Evans? 

 

Everyone has different opinions, and my opinion is he can get into the top 100 and beat more players around Tomic's ranking and maybe the odd 32 player, I said that two days ago, when he was playing Tomic. But I haven't been impressed with some things either.

 

Let's leave it at that lad, if you are getting a migraine.

Go back and read the bull you were spouting on pages 89 and 90. Once you've done that you can come back apologies for being wrong, and admit I'm well within my rights to use the term idiot.

[kingfox]

Go back and read the bull you were spouting on pages 89 and 90. Once you've done that you can come back apologies for being wrong, and admit I'm well within my rights to use the term idiot.

 

I know I posted bull after he played Nishikori. 

 

But you wound me up all through Wimbledon with Jerzy. You guys have been winding me up a bit since he went out in the first round of the US. 

 

So I wound you up over Evans. 

 

No need to get a migraine, I've told you my honest views now over the past 2-3 pages. He can break into the top 100, and I expect him to be able to beat more players around Tomic's ranking & maybe the odd 32 player, BUT he has flaws, that forehand is a weapon I said so on the 29th, but it tends to go wayward as well and he misses easy balls, while I don't see why he insists on rushing, because it clearly shows nerves, if he can iron that way from his game, and become more level headed and control nerves, then who knows what he can do. He will get more chances now to prove this, so let's see what happens, but like I said he has been playing challenger and future events nearly all his career, you can't really show your potential if you are stuck playing those types of matches, he has even said that himself. 

 

Leave it at that, and when Jerzy starts losing more matches, you can wind me up over that if you want.

 

But right now, let's enjoy the rest of the US Open. 

[Facecloth]

I know I posted bull after he played Nishikori. 

 

But you wound me up all through Wimbledon with Jerzy. You guys have been winding me up a bit since he went out in the first round of the US. 

 

So I wound you up over Evans. 

 

No need to get a migraine, I've told you my honest views now over the past 2-3 pages. He can break into the top 100, and I expect him to be able to beat more players around Tomic's ranking & maybe the odd 32 player, BUT he has flaws, that forehand is a weapon I said so on the 29th, but it tends to go wayward as well and he misses easy balls, while I don't see why he insists on rushing, because it clearly shows nerves, if he can iron that way from his game, and become more level headed and control nerves, then who knows what he can do. He will get more chances now to prove this, so let's see what happens, but like I said he has been playing challenger and future events nearly all his career, you can't really show your potential if you are stuck playing those types of matches, he has even said that himself. 

 

Leave it at that, and when Jerzy starts losing more matches, you can wind me up over that if you want.

 

But right now, let's enjoy the rest of the US Open.

No you were wrong and you won't admit it. You weren't just trying to wind us up at all, you were totally convinced you were right. You're just saying what everyone else was saying earlier and claiming you felt that way but were just disagreeing to wind up. Absolute bullshit. Just admit you might have got this one wrong, just like you actually admitted you might be wrong about Janowiscz a few pages back.

I will enjoy the rest if the US open thanks. I'm thinking Murray Nadal final, with Murray winning again. I'm sure you'll make a prediction after the final.

[kingfox]

No you were wrong and you won't admit it. You weren't just trying to wind us up at all, you were totally convinced you were right. You're just saying what everyone else was saying earlier and claiming you felt that way but were just disagreeing to wind up. Absolute bullshit. Just admit you might have got this one wrong, just like you actually admitted you might be wrong about Janowiscz a few pages back.

I will enjoy the rest if the US open thanks. I'm thinking Murray Nadal final, with Murray winning again. I'm sure you'll make a prediction after the final.

 

You wound me up, I wound you up. I just didn't see what the fuss was after just one win, and I said I will judge when he plays Tomic, which I did.

 

Didn't admit anything about Jerzy, he can become a top player in my opinion, and I will continue to support him, because his game is exciting yet unpredictable.

 

I said Nadal a few days ago, with Del Potro as a possibility but he has gone out, but you were so wound up with this Evans talk, you probably missed that bit. 

[Facecloth]

You wound me up, I wound you up. I just didn't see what the fuss was after just one win, and I said I will judge when he plays Tomic, which I did.

Didn't admit anything about Jerzy, he can become a top player in my opinion, and I will continue to support him, because his game is exciting yet unpredictable.

I said Nadal a few days ago, with Del Potro as a possibility but he has gone out, but you were so wound up with this Evans talk, you probably missed that bit.

There was no fuss after just one win, we were basing this on what we knew about him prior to this. You despite you claim to know a lot about the game clearly don't know much about him, and are annoyed people have shown you up.

You did admit to being wrong about Janowiscz's rise up the rankings. Go back and check.

I didn't miss your prediction, I'm just winding up, because you can't call players until they've made it. For the banter king you seem a bit slow on picking up on it.

Edited 1 September 2013 by Facecloth

[kingfox]

There was no fuss after just one win, we were basing this on what we knew about him prior to this. You despite you claim to know a lot about the game clearly don't know much about him, and are annoyed people have shown you up.

You did admit to being wrong about Janowiscz's rise up the rankings. Go back and check.

I didn't miss your prediction, I'm just winding up, because you can't call players until they've made it. For the banter king you seem a bit slow on picking up on it.

 

Like I said mate, I know more about Women's Tennis than Men's. Did I know anything about Dan Evans prior to US Open, no only from what I saw at Queens. His best performances have been in the Davis Cup, and I have never watched that, I have never watched the Fed Cup, but I watch all other tournaments when they are shown on Sky, Eurosport or BT Sport. 

 

I have gone back a few pages, agreeing wise yes I agreed points wise, not having any points to defend etc... but I still think he can be a quality player, and I like watching him play. You don't beat players like Murray, Gasquet or Tsonga if you don't have a bit about you. 

 

I watch more Women's Tennis, and if you mention anything about that, then I will happily talk my views.

 

And I wish people would stop with this banter king motto, too obsessed with it some people.

[Facecloth]

Like I said mate, I know more about Women's Tennis than Men's. Did I know anything about Dan Evans prior to US Open, no only from what I saw at Queens. His best performances have been in the Davis Cup, and I have never watched that, I have never watched the Fed Cup, but I watch all other tournaments when they are shown on Sky, Eurosport or BT Sport.

I have gone back a few pages, agreeing wise yes I agreed points wise, not having any points to defend etc... but I still think he can be a quality player, and I like watching him play. You don't beat players like Murray, Gasquet or Tsonga if you don't have a bit about you.

I watch more Women's Tennis, and if you mention anything about that, then I will happily talk my views.

And I wish people would stop with this banter king motto, too obsessed with it some people.

So basically what you're saying is your giving you opinion in an informed way on something you were less knowledgeable about than the people you were discussing it with, and when they gave you facts to back up their argument you dismissed them. I don't really watch a lot of women's tennis, certainly not until the finals really, and I wouldn't argue against you if you gave your opinion on an up coming star. I would ask why you thought what you thought and if that answer made sense I would accept it, if it it didn't I'd question it again. You don't do that, you dismiss people's opinion and when they counter argue against you, you dismiss it again, on a subject you admit yourself you're less knowledgable on. You don't know everything, it's ok to listen to people who know more about a particular thing than you sometimes, just like I would with you in the subject of women's tennis.

On the banter king thing, if you don't like the name you shouldn't talk yourself up as it. You gave yourself the name, now you get wound up when people call you it.

Edited 1 September 2013 by Facecloth

[kingfox]

So basically what you're saying is your giving you opinion in an informed way on something you were less knowledgeable about than the people you were discussing it with, and when they gave you facts to back up their argument you dismissed them. I don't really watch a lot of women's tennis, certainly not until the finals really, and I wouldn't argue against you if you gave your opinion on an up coming star. I would ask why you thought what you thought and if that answer made sense I would accept it, if it it didn't I'd question it again. You don't do that, you dismiss people's opinion and when they counter argue against you, you dismiss it again, on a subject you admit yourself you're less knowledgable on. You don't know everything, it's ok to listen to people who know more about a particular thing than you sometimes, just like I would with you in the subject of women's tennis.

On the banter king thing, if you don't like the name you shouldn't talk yourself up as it. You gave yourself the name, now you get wound up when people call you it.

 

Better.

 

BUT Banter King is all jokey didn't think it would be such a hit.

[Facecloth]

Better.

 

BUT Banter King is all jokey didn't think it would be such a hit.

What do you mean better? I'm telling you why you're bad at putting you point across, and are arguing something you know less about than others. I don't need to get better, it's you who needs to get better, and admit when you no less than others.

[kingfox]

What do you mean better? I'm telling you why you're bad at putting you point across, and are arguing something you know less about than others. I don't need to get better, it's you who needs to get better, and admit when you no less than others.

 

But I know more than others on some things.

 

Like on the Hammond signing thread, you called me an idiot again, but I was only explaining which formations he would fit in and which he wouldn't, and you treated it like I did a crime or something. 

 

I have admitted I know more on Women's Tennis than Men's, so you can stop now banging on about being wrong etc... I have admitted I didn't know much about Dan Evans until he appeared at Queens because I don't watch Davis Cup, but I get the message now, you can stop.

 

Now I will ask a proper reasonable question.

 

Berdych, has gone under the radar, and has looked impressive so far especially against Benneteau, first can he get past Wawrinka, and can he beat Murray if they meet in Quarters?

[Facecloth]

But I know more than others on some things.

 

Like on the Hammond signing thread, you called me an idiot again, but I was only explaining which formations he would fit in and which he wouldn't, and you treated it like I did a crime or something. 

 

I have admitted I know more on Women's Tennis than Men's, so you can stop now banging on about being wrong etc... I have admitted I didn't know much about Dan Evans until he appeared at Queens because I don't watch Davis Cup, but I get the message now, you can stop.

 

Now I will ask a proper reasonable question.

 

Berdych, has gone under the radar, and has looked impressive so far especially against Benneteau, first can he get past Wawrinka, and can he beat Murray if they meet in Quarters?

Again though if you read the whole Hammond thread there are about 20 people posting at the same time trying to explain about how we don't have to play the same formation all the time, how it gives us options to play different formations, and just because he's defensive doesn't make us more defensive it just lets us play more offensive player. And again you wouldn't even acknowledge those points, you just kept bleating on with some negative bullshit, about him not fitting in, dropping Dyer or being more defensive. I'm not being funny be when 99% of people are saying something and you're the other 1%, it's pretty nailed on you're wrong, and you are on the Hammond subject. I didn't treat you like you'd committed a crime, but you're just so hard to get through too, you'd argue the sky is green.

Thanks for admitting you didn't know much about Evans before now, and sort of admitting you're wrong. Maybe you should just remember in future, if you don't know about something don't pretend like you do.

Berdych on his day can beat any of the top three players, especially if they aren't quite at it. But I'd still fancy Murray, Nadal and Djokovic over 5 sets against him. I wouldn't out money on Murray winning that put it that way, but I would expect him to.

[kingfox]

And again you wouldn't even acknowledge those points, you just kept bleating on with some negative bullshit, about him not fitting in, dropping Dyer or being more defensive. I'm not being funny be when 99% of people are saying something and you're the other 1%, it's pretty nailed on you're wrong, and you are on the Hammond subject.

 

Acknowledge what points. the points you made, after I said the only way I think he would suit is in the 4-1-2-1-2 formation Essex mentioned, the formation you seemed to be agreeing with and basically saying yes Pearson will play that formation everything will be ok. I was lining up the positives and lining up the negatives, so how I'm I wrong? When you were basically saying what I was saying? And if you don't think that, look back yourself, instead of calling me wrong all the time. 

[Facecloth]

Acknowledge what points. the points you made, after I said the only way I think he would suit is in the 4-1-2-1-2 formation Essex mentioned, the formation you seemed to be agreeing with and basically saying yes Pearson will play that formation everything will be ok. I was lining up the positives and lining up the negatives, so how I'm I wrong? When you were basically saying what I was saying? And if you don't think that, look back yourself, instead of calling me wrong all the time.

You didn't say just that though, you also said he was a negative signing and would make us more defensive. Also I didn't agree with that, I pointed out he would work in a midfield 3 in a 352 formation with James, King or Drinkwater, plus Knockaert. He'd also work in a 433 with a similar combination. He'd also work in a 4231 formation like Chelsea play, but arguably we don't yet have the right players to play in that three behind the striker. I also pointed out how he would free up others to attack more or let Pearson play more attack minded player, again something you failed to grasp. I wasn't the only one saying these things either, but you failed to grasp the basics of any of it.

Anyway this isn't the Hammond thread.

[kingfox]

You didn't say just that though, you also said he was a negative signing and would make us more defensive. Also I didn't agree with that, I pointed out he would work in a midfield 3 in a 352 formation with James, King or Drinkwater, plus Knockaert. He'd also work in a 433 with a similar combination. He'd also work in a 4231 formation like Chelsea play, but arguably we don't yet have the right players to play in that three behind the striker. I also pointed out how he would free up others to attack more or let Pearson play more attack minded player, again something you failed to grasp. I wasn't the only one saying these things either, but you failed to grasp the basics of any of it.

Anyway this isn't the Hammond thread.

 

In a 3-5-2 formation in a midfield 3 plus Knockaert, how the hell does that work? I didn't mention 4-3-3 because I don't think that formation works. I wasn't reading any other comments tbh, because there wasn't much to read apart from who is he, good signing, bit negative etc...

 

But like you say this isn't the Hammond thread, but I was just saying, why was I so wrong, when I voiced pro's and con's. 

[kingfox]

Fookin hell, Sousa is sweating big time. 

 

Take off your clothes, take them off.

[kingfox]

Is his career finally coming to an end.

[shearfox]

Federer beaten by Robredo straight sets...

[leicsmac]

Perhaps people will now get the message that it's 2013 and Federer isn't the big draw/invincible player everyone still thinks he is. Did you know yesterday was the first time he'd played off the main court (Arthur Ashe) in 6 years, and it was because of a reschedule - he would have played on Ashe again had it not been for the weather? Even Murray plays off Centre Court at least once a Wimbledon, for goodness sake. 

 

Anyhow, we shall see where he goes from here.

[Guest MattP]

Time to retire surely, hard to watch him like this.

[martyn]

Why does everyone think he should retire? Yes he's struggling to reach his previously high standards but you only have to look at players like Robredo, Ferrer and Tommy Haas to realise that it isn't necessarily all over when you hit 30.

 

He's adapting to a new racket and has put in some promising displays recently, Nadal in Cinci being 1. He had chances in every single set last night but as usual for Fed, his break point conversion was utterly dismal. It's not as if he's getting wiped off the court.

 

As long as he's still enjoying his tennis and has the will to compete, what's the problem?

[kingfox]

Why does everyone think he should retire? Yes he's struggling to reach his previously high standards but you only have to look at players like Robredo, Ferrer and Tommy Haas to realise that it isn't necessarily all over when you hit 30.

 

He's adapting to a new racket and has put in some promising displays recently, Nadal in Cinci being 1. He had chances in every single set last night but as usual for Fed, his break point conversion was utterly dismal. It's not as if he's getting wiped off the court.

 

As long as he's still enjoying his tennis and has the will to compete, what's the problem?

 

He says all he can do is come back stronger and practice. 

 

But it's very strange to see Federer losing matches he wouldn't normally lose 2-3 years ago. 

 

Plus he has now dropped to 7th in the World Rankings, it's just strange to see him struggling and slipping down the rankings, especially when he has been in the top four, and been the best player in the World for so long.

 

Just hard to get your head around, especially if your a fan of his. 

 

I think he still has quite a few years left in him, but by 34-35 he might decide to call it a day.

Edited 3 September 2013 by kingfox

[Manwell Pablo]

Time to retire surely, hard to watch him like this.

 

Depends if he's still enjoying it or not, although it wouldn't suprise me to see how bow out this time next year

[leicsmac]

Quarter final time.

 

Of the big three left in Murray has by far the hardest task - Robredo and Youzhny should be no problem for Nadal and Djoko respectively. Murray on the other hand has Wawrinka, who has the potential to be a right royal pain in the arse if his backhand is firing and his game matches up well with Murrays. Berdych would have been tough too, but he blows hot and cold, unlike Stan. Expect Murray to come through but if he's not playing tip-top it may well be a real brawl, as most of his matches against Wawrinka seem to turn into.

 

Ferrer - Gasquet should be interesting...for the sake of an entertaining SF against Nadal I'm hoping Gasquet will come through. At least he'd give Rafa a match, whereas Ferrer would do his usual GS thing against Nadal and just bend over the net pre-match and ask his Spanish captain how he likes it.

[shearfox]

Quarter final time.

Of the big three left in Murray has by far the hardest task - Robredo and Youzhny should be no problem for Nadal and Djoko respectively. Murray on the other hand has Wawrinka, who has the potential to be a right royal pain in the arse if his backhand is firing and his game matches up well with Murrays. Berdych would have been tough too, but he blows hot and cold, unlike Stan. Expect Murray to come through but if he's not playing tip-top it may well be a real brawl, as most of his matches against Wawrinka seem to turn into.

Ferrer - Gasquet should be interesting...for the sake of an entertaining SF against Nadal I'm hoping Gasquet will come through. At least he'd give Rafa a match, whereas Ferrer would do his usual GS thing against Nadal and just bend over the net pre-match and ask his Spanish captain how he likes it.

Wawrinka will be tough as usual but I do expect Murray to beat him in four, Murray has changed his game a little and added aggression and power which will allow him to take control more often then in their previous meetings.