TENNIS: French Open - men's semi finals
Jun. 8th, 2013 07:40 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
feather_ghyllI was determined to get home in time to catch some tennis yesterday, especially as I do not think I’ll get to see either final live, but more on that after.
I succeeded switching on my telly during the second game of the fifth set, which sounded like the best set in some ways. Points became massive, with big hitting, some extraordinary winners – mainly by Nadal, I think – and some points that were extraordinary for other reasons. I gasped as loudly as anyone at the net touching and then there was the point where Nadal hit the shot between his legs, which it became apparent was his only play as he reached a certain point on the court, and yet Djokovic muffed an overhead. His overheads went at that point.
My sympathies did vary throughout, although basically I am more of a Nadal fan. It clearly meant so much to both, and both gave so much. After a certain point, it felt that it would go to the last man standing. It was a shame that it was his footing on the court and the state of the court that got into Djokovic's head and lost him the game, and Nadal was there, contesting every point. Quite something to behold.
It was something of a relief to be amused by how strong Nadal's accent is when he speaks French too.
Now, unlike the schedulers, I wasn't entirely surprised that the first match (the final by proxy as everyone has been arguing since the draw) ran on to five. Would the next, thus meaning there was a risk it wouldn't be completed, putting the winner at a disadvantage? As a neutral, who could see that Ferrer's consistency and Tsonga's flashes of brilliance could make for a good match, if I doubted it would be as intense as the Nadal-Djokovic clash unless if the crowd got really involved, I did think that Tsonga winning would make for a better challenge in the final.
Unfortunately, Tsonga barely turned up for the first set, or rather he didn't settle and Ferrer went about his business. Then Tsonga was up 3-0 in the second set, but by this point my attention was distracted somewhat. I kept being surprised by the score in the second set. The repeated motif was coming back, until the tie-breaker, which Tsonga played badle and Ferrer played well. Trsonga wasn't aggressive, wasn't able to string enough points together, and Ferrer kept on doing what he'd been ready to do since stepping on the court - he probably handled the whole occasion better.
Now, had good Tsonga turned up for this match and turned up on Sunday, things might be different, but as it is, even thought Ferrer did win some points in brilliant ways and has obviously stepped up to a new level, I think Nadal has too much, unless he is injured of which I saw no sign. As I said, I probably won't watch the finals live - I might catch up on the highlights programmes if it sounds like they're good matches - but I'll be hugely surprised if Sharapova and Ferrer, especially him, win the French Open.
I succeeded switching on my telly during the second game of the fifth set, which sounded like the best set in some ways. Points became massive, with big hitting, some extraordinary winners – mainly by Nadal, I think – and some points that were extraordinary for other reasons. I gasped as loudly as anyone at the net touching and then there was the point where Nadal hit the shot between his legs, which it became apparent was his only play as he reached a certain point on the court, and yet Djokovic muffed an overhead. His overheads went at that point.
My sympathies did vary throughout, although basically I am more of a Nadal fan. It clearly meant so much to both, and both gave so much. After a certain point, it felt that it would go to the last man standing. It was a shame that it was his footing on the court and the state of the court that got into Djokovic's head and lost him the game, and Nadal was there, contesting every point. Quite something to behold.
It was something of a relief to be amused by how strong Nadal's accent is when he speaks French too.
Now, unlike the schedulers, I wasn't entirely surprised that the first match (the final by proxy as everyone has been arguing since the draw) ran on to five. Would the next, thus meaning there was a risk it wouldn't be completed, putting the winner at a disadvantage? As a neutral, who could see that Ferrer's consistency and Tsonga's flashes of brilliance could make for a good match, if I doubted it would be as intense as the Nadal-Djokovic clash unless if the crowd got really involved, I did think that Tsonga winning would make for a better challenge in the final.
Unfortunately, Tsonga barely turned up for the first set, or rather he didn't settle and Ferrer went about his business. Then Tsonga was up 3-0 in the second set, but by this point my attention was distracted somewhat. I kept being surprised by the score in the second set. The repeated motif was coming back, until the tie-breaker, which Tsonga played badle and Ferrer played well. Trsonga wasn't aggressive, wasn't able to string enough points together, and Ferrer kept on doing what he'd been ready to do since stepping on the court - he probably handled the whole occasion better.
Now, had good Tsonga turned up for this match and turned up on Sunday, things might be different, but as it is, even thought Ferrer did win some points in brilliant ways and has obviously stepped up to a new level, I think Nadal has too much, unless he is injured of which I saw no sign. As I said, I probably won't watch the finals live - I might catch up on the highlights programmes if it sounds like they're good matches - but I'll be hugely surprised if Sharapova and Ferrer, especially him, win the French Open.
