I just read this article:Federer wins uglyWithout producing anywhere near his best tennis, world No.1
Roger Federer dispatched 14th seed Novak Djokovic 6-2 7-5 6-3 on centre court at
Melbourne Park to reach the quarter finals.After closing out the first set in typical fashion, Federer
seemingly became distracted, making uncharacteristic unforced errors and
relinquishing the momentum to his young opponent.At a set and a break up, Federer was careless, spiking a high
ball into the net giving Djokovic the break back.The set was evenly poised at 6-5 before Federer turned it on
to secure the break and the set.The respite from the Federer A-game was brief for the 19
year-old-Serb as the Swiss master regained his composure to close the third out
in just 36 minutes.Federer made 23 unforced errors for the match and while he
still managed the cruise to victory, he will need to be at his best when he
faces number seven seed Tommy Robredo in the quarter finals.
.........................................................................................................................................................................
I think the Tennis Fraternity knows it well but we can not expect all journalists to be equally clever. They are there to report and not to give opinions, that's the job of the Experts (I mean really expert Experts)
Let whatever a few mediamasters say, Most of the people agree that Roger is a Great Player in Great Form, He doesn't need to proove it all the time, although he does it everytime with his inborne genius. Saying that Roger won it "ugly", means dishonouring the Talent of the youngesters and for that matter, many other opponents of Roger.
It's something like this: Roddic (or Nadal or Safin or....) is a good player of caliber, but he would have been a great one if it's not The Roger Era. This Man, Roger is of so high quality that he really makes all look less good. Agreed, Roger was slightly sluggish during first round.
Agreed, he himself has reached a level that's not easy to achieve for others even for himself sometimes. Not all days and all wins are of equal even for Roger.
And My question to all those (Journalists ) whoe still doubt Roger's form, Do you still think a straight victory is an ugly performance?
Oh, Please, Please, Please Don't forget, Champions win even when they are not at their Best and Roger is a True Champion. So stop 'worrying' about him in that manner.
Let whatever a few mediamasters say, Most of the people agree that Roger is a Great Player in Great Form, He doesn't need to proove it all the time, although he does it everytime with his inborne genius. Saying that Roger won it "ugly", means dishonouring the Talent of the youngesters and for that matter, many other opponents of Roger.
It's something like this: Roddic (or Nadal or Safin or....) is a good player of caliber, but he would have been a great one if it's not The Roger Era. This Man, Roger is of so high quality that he really makes all look less good. Agreed, Roger was slightly sluggish during first round.
Agreed, he himself has reached a level that's not easy to achieve for others even for himself sometimes. Not all days and all wins are of equal even for Roger.
And My question to all those (Journalists ) whoe still doubt Roger's form, Do you still think a straight victory is an ugly performance?
Oh, Please, Please, Please Don't forget, Champions win even when they are not at their Best and Roger is a True Champion. So stop 'worrying' about him in that manner.
No comments:
Post a Comment