TENNIS: Aussie men's final
Feb. 2nd, 2009 07:51 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllThe mammoth final rather took up my day, yesterday. I caught most of the build-up on Eurosport. The stats were mind-boggling, but educational: I did keep an eye out for Nadal's length. My main thought was wondering if Rusedski had put money on Federer, he was that vehement in his support. But that would be unethical. So would an office sweep, so I should stop assuming that Rod Laver and commentators had put money down.
Going in, I hoped that this would be five high-quality sets. I thought that Federer had the edge, as he'd moved up a gear after Bedrych, had a better record on hard courts and hadn't had a gruelling semi just behing him. They started playing, and I realised I was supporting Nadal. What I also realised, and I always forget this, because I tend to see him on court, which lends no context but ballkids and couching line judges, but he's quite tall, just taller than Federer. Maybe it's the outfits that make him look squatter than he is.
Let's deal with the outfits: Federer won with ease in his deceptively simple top; I loved the coloyr. The more I looked, the more I found wrong with Nadal's get up - five colours? Plumping for the charcoal grey OR the black and the green OR the blue would have been better, but all together, they were far, far too busy. And, as I thought from the end of the semis, he needs to rething the hair and bandana, because it gets very messy towards the end of matches.
To more substantial matters, I watched the first two games, and the second, when Federer broke back, showed that the contest we'd hoped for was on. Unfortunately, I couldn't stay to watch it. I had to make do with waiting for the BBC to replay it on BBCi. This meant I saw their predictions: Lloyd got it right.
Then followed a feast of tennis. I sat and watched rally after rally, shot after shot, punishing in weight and angle. As was said later, making a highlights clip would be difficult. If you wanted to do what could really be considered excellent tennis justice, you would have a selection that was longer than the women's final. (Speaking of, well, we know who the women's number 1 player s when she puts her mind to it now.) It almost reached the point where I wanted every point to be won by a winner, and Roger and Rafa nearly obliged.
One of the notable things is that several of the longer points contained a shot that would be a winner against most players, and yet the other (usually Nadal) somehow got it back and the point went on to end, perhaps, on an outrageous, stupendous shot. Of course, ther were ups and downs, but mainly they were so well matched, playing up to all expectations. When Nadal called on the trainer, I did think he needed to win that set to win the match, more than Federer, because, of course, I believed that the semi was affecting him.
In the fourth set, as the 2-2 game was locked at deuce - which could mean the game would last another five minutes - I had to leave. I was hoping that the match would be available on iPlayer and I could fast forward to that point and watch the rest. Somehow I managed not to be spoiled until I came back home and discovered that it wasn't available online and if I wanted to watch the whole match, which I did, I really did, because at times you just laughed slightly hysterically at the tennis. But I had time to see from the headlines that Nadal had won, although I didn't know the hows of it. And so, BBCi replayed the match for the second time, and I waited, doing stuff with the TV on in the background.
The fourth set was as good (though there was the drop shot to the same spot and serve and volley game from Federer that suggested weariness) but the fifth, oh Federer, how your standard dropped, while Nadal's was still up there. But Nadal deserved it, He's improved again, his serve was sounder (though Federer's first is better). Apart from the retrieving, the angles he pulled off...All the bracketng of Fed with Sampras made me think that Nadal has the potential to be Agassi, and win slams on all four surfaces (if the young guns and his body allow). I wish, but understand why, Federer hadn't broken down, because it damped down Nadal's deserved glee and celebration) but first Spaniard to win the Aussie! and the media jumped on that, when it should have been the quality of the match, which was epic for four sets.
Going in, I hoped that this would be five high-quality sets. I thought that Federer had the edge, as he'd moved up a gear after Bedrych, had a better record on hard courts and hadn't had a gruelling semi just behing him. They started playing, and I realised I was supporting Nadal. What I also realised, and I always forget this, because I tend to see him on court, which lends no context but ballkids and couching line judges, but he's quite tall, just taller than Federer. Maybe it's the outfits that make him look squatter than he is.
Let's deal with the outfits: Federer won with ease in his deceptively simple top; I loved the coloyr. The more I looked, the more I found wrong with Nadal's get up - five colours? Plumping for the charcoal grey OR the black and the green OR the blue would have been better, but all together, they were far, far too busy. And, as I thought from the end of the semis, he needs to rething the hair and bandana, because it gets very messy towards the end of matches.
To more substantial matters, I watched the first two games, and the second, when Federer broke back, showed that the contest we'd hoped for was on. Unfortunately, I couldn't stay to watch it. I had to make do with waiting for the BBC to replay it on BBCi. This meant I saw their predictions: Lloyd got it right.
Then followed a feast of tennis. I sat and watched rally after rally, shot after shot, punishing in weight and angle. As was said later, making a highlights clip would be difficult. If you wanted to do what could really be considered excellent tennis justice, you would have a selection that was longer than the women's final. (Speaking of, well, we know who the women's number 1 player s when she puts her mind to it now.) It almost reached the point where I wanted every point to be won by a winner, and Roger and Rafa nearly obliged.
One of the notable things is that several of the longer points contained a shot that would be a winner against most players, and yet the other (usually Nadal) somehow got it back and the point went on to end, perhaps, on an outrageous, stupendous shot. Of course, ther were ups and downs, but mainly they were so well matched, playing up to all expectations. When Nadal called on the trainer, I did think he needed to win that set to win the match, more than Federer, because, of course, I believed that the semi was affecting him.
In the fourth set, as the 2-2 game was locked at deuce - which could mean the game would last another five minutes - I had to leave. I was hoping that the match would be available on iPlayer and I could fast forward to that point and watch the rest. Somehow I managed not to be spoiled until I came back home and discovered that it wasn't available online and if I wanted to watch the whole match, which I did, I really did, because at times you just laughed slightly hysterically at the tennis. But I had time to see from the headlines that Nadal had won, although I didn't know the hows of it. And so, BBCi replayed the match for the second time, and I waited, doing stuff with the TV on in the background.
The fourth set was as good (though there was the drop shot to the same spot and serve and volley game from Federer that suggested weariness) but the fifth, oh Federer, how your standard dropped, while Nadal's was still up there. But Nadal deserved it, He's improved again, his serve was sounder (though Federer's first is better). Apart from the retrieving, the angles he pulled off...All the bracketng of Fed with Sampras made me think that Nadal has the potential to be Agassi, and win slams on all four surfaces (if the young guns and his body allow). I wish, but understand why, Federer hadn't broken down, because it damped down Nadal's deserved glee and celebration) but first Spaniard to win the Aussie! and the media jumped on that, when it should have been the quality of the match, which was epic for four sets.
