![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
TENNIS: Wimbledons days three to five
Jun. 26th, 2009 03:25 pmThe fourth set of Federer's third round match against Kohlschreiber is on in the background. I would be watching, but I have Freeview and it doesn't seem to like playing live tennis on BBC channels today - we had thunderstorms last night. Anyway, I'd be enjoying the tennis if it the sound and visuals weren't stuttering and skipping. This was the first Federer match I'd seen live this Wimbledon.
On day 3 (Wednesday), I more or less only saw the highlights programme. I'd kept an eye on the score of the Sharapova-Dulko match as it happened. Although things like 'Gruntwatch' make me giggle, I don't love the narrative or the tone of the BBC. I do feel that it panders to the 'Brit' Wimbledon Fan (Wimbledon fans being a different breed to tennis fans). The talk about British players, Murray and favourites and even grunting feels a bit like pandering. They'd been making out that Sharapova was a realistic favourite to win. She wasn't (it's either going to be a Williams or another Russian). I expected her to last longer, but not much, as she was obviously lacking match practice and needed to get used to her serve and build up consistency, among other things. But because she won that one time and has name recognition and is blonde and purty, she was touted as a favourite. Yes, the British results were disappointing, Baltacha shouldn't have been the only woman through to the second round and we should be comparing ourselves to France and asking why, but not going through this mean flagellation. And, TRULY, I didn't need to see Keovathong break down with simpering sympathy from the presenters as they showed the clip (she lost a match she should have won, it's not a death in the family and the media is being disingenuous to draw attention to the clip while offering that sympathy). Basically, I don't like most of the discussion, it seems beside the point or talking about the right things in the wrong way.
So on Day 4, I just watched the tennis. Murray was good, demolishing Gulbis in the first set and managing to show the difference in class between them from then on. I'd come home to be surprised by Hewitt winning against Del Potro, which means that Andies Roddick and Murray and Fernando Gonzales will be pleased and grateful in as much as they're looking that far forward. I also saw Jankovic play well; I'd like to see Kusnetsova play at some point.
So, back to the match, with Tim Henman and Petchey having been reduced to snickering at how good some of Federer's shots have been, although the German has really been playing well.
On day 3 (Wednesday), I more or less only saw the highlights programme. I'd kept an eye on the score of the Sharapova-Dulko match as it happened. Although things like 'Gruntwatch' make me giggle, I don't love the narrative or the tone of the BBC. I do feel that it panders to the 'Brit' Wimbledon Fan (Wimbledon fans being a different breed to tennis fans). The talk about British players, Murray and favourites and even grunting feels a bit like pandering. They'd been making out that Sharapova was a realistic favourite to win. She wasn't (it's either going to be a Williams or another Russian). I expected her to last longer, but not much, as she was obviously lacking match practice and needed to get used to her serve and build up consistency, among other things. But because she won that one time and has name recognition and is blonde and purty, she was touted as a favourite. Yes, the British results were disappointing, Baltacha shouldn't have been the only woman through to the second round and we should be comparing ourselves to France and asking why, but not going through this mean flagellation. And, TRULY, I didn't need to see Keovathong break down with simpering sympathy from the presenters as they showed the clip (she lost a match she should have won, it's not a death in the family and the media is being disingenuous to draw attention to the clip while offering that sympathy). Basically, I don't like most of the discussion, it seems beside the point or talking about the right things in the wrong way.
So on Day 4, I just watched the tennis. Murray was good, demolishing Gulbis in the first set and managing to show the difference in class between them from then on. I'd come home to be surprised by Hewitt winning against Del Potro, which means that Andies Roddick and Murray and Fernando Gonzales will be pleased and grateful in as much as they're looking that far forward. I also saw Jankovic play well; I'd like to see Kusnetsova play at some point.
So, back to the match, with Tim Henman and Petchey having been reduced to snickering at how good some of Federer's shots have been, although the German has really been playing well.
