Utter nonsense. They didn't arrange for Nadal to lose or Wawrinka.

Thinking Nadal and Wawrinka are big threats on grass is the mistake you are making.If it was the French it would be an awful draw for Andy

Wawrinka has never even reached one semi final at Wimbledon in his entire career.

if you were wanting to manipulate an easy Wimbledon draw then you stick those in with him and keep him away from Federer and Djokovic

He was kept away from them via the seedlings which I thought were based on rankings?

 

Thinking Nadal and Wawrinka are big threats on grass is the mistake you are making.If it was the French it would be an awful draw for Andy

Wawrinka has never even reached one semi final at Wimbledon in his entire career.

if you were wanting to manipulate an easy Wimbledon draw then you stick those in with him and keep him away from Federer and Djokovic

 

 

Many tipped Nadal to win it. End of the day I don't think it matters if the draw works out you have to beat two of those 4 anyway. In this case he'll likely still have to beat 1 to win it.

 

It is only this year, in recent times that you'd see Federer as a threat. Murray isn't playing well enough to win anyway. 

Seedings are at the discretion of the organisers. Murray and Nadal are 1 and 2 in the world rankings so would have been kept apart but thats not how it was done.

Murray and Djoko as 1 and 2 seeds is the right call. I don't think there can be any argument there.

 

So then it is just a question of which of Rafa or Roger ends up in Murray's half. Not some grand conspiracy or anything. Especially when you consider the only other man on tour to have won multiple majors was also in Murray's half.

Murray and Djoko as 1 and 2 seeds is the right call. I don't think there can be any argument there.

 

So then it is just a question of which of Rafa or Roger ends up in Murray's half. Not some grand conspiracy or anything. Especially when you consider the only other man on tour to have won multiple majors was also in Murray's half.

The bookies don't think so, they still have have Federer favourite and Djokovic second favourite despite having to meet in the semis.

 

Murray's number one world ranking is based on achievements 9 months ago, he has been poor this year.

 

Given Federer's win at the Australian Open this year, his great record at Wimbledon and Djokovic and Murray's poor form I think Federer should have been the number one seed with the favourable draw.

Seedings are at the discretion of the organisers. Murray and Nadal are 1 and 2 in the world rankings so would have been kept apart but thats not how it was done.

Nadal has won Wimbledon as many times as murray, so he's hardly shite on grass.

Seedings are made on current form and past performances.

To suggest somehow its rigged is utter bollocks. Fognini caused Murray a spot of bother- if he'd won would it therefore have been a fix to favour Nadal?

I would expect nothing less than the crowd to applaud and be respectful, but it was still a partizan crowd.

At 2-2 couldn't see anything but a Rafa win, pundits were saying he'd win because of his athleticism and experience in five setters.

Muller was incredibly controlled though in the last set, and I know we feel differently, but watching Rafa with his tics and stomping around with that angry expression "you made me spill my pint" on his face does my head in.

You watched a different game to me

 

The crowd was mixed and nothing like partisan

 

As for likelihood to win - Muller was imperious with serve and rarely looked in danger final set whereas Rafa clung on and on and on

 

Amazing how you can see games so differently

You watched a different game to me

The crowd was mixed and nothing like partisan

As for likelihood to win - Muller was imperious with serve and rarely looked in danger final set whereas Rafa clung on and on and on

Amazing how you can see games so differently

Not how I saw it, but how it sounded. When nadal won a point the levels went through the roof.

Maybe sounds different when you're there- not like there's an away end.

Don't disagree with muller looking ace last set, but before they started the last set the experts all had nadal to win, given what had happened it seemed likely. Once it got underway, it was a different matter.

 

As it happens, it apparently makes no difference as Murray has already been handed the title.

 

The bookies don't think so, they still have have Federer favourite and Djokovic second favourite despite having to meet in the semis.

 

Murray's number one world ranking is based on achievements 9 months ago, he has been poor this year.

 

Given Federer's win at the Australian Open this year, his great record at Wimbledon and Djokovic and Murray's poor form I think Federer should have been the number one seed with the favourable draw.

 

 

Eh? But that isn't how they seed. It is based on world rankings plus form at Wimbledon over recent tournaments.

 

Think you have a chip on your shoulder for some reason. Whatever way you slice it, the big four were split into 2. Plus Murray's side got Wawrinka - an actual major winner. 

thing about wimbledon crowds is that theyll support one bloke til he gets 2 sets up then back the other bloike

 

and every chance theyll switch again if it goes to 5

 

 

and mr turner is at best strange and at worst a certifiable loon

Not how I saw it, but how it sounded. When nadal won a point the levels went through the roof.

Maybe sounds different when you're there- not like there's an away end.

Don't disagree with muller looking ace last set, but before they started the last set the experts all had nadal to win, given what had happened it seemed likely. Once it got underway, it was a different matter.

 

As it happens, it apparently makes no difference as Murray has already been handed the title.

There was more support for Nadal but not ridiculously; he was also 2 down don't forget so folk were also cheering for the comeback and for "the match" as neutrals too - that always happens

 

I'd say at 2-2 Nadal was in the ascendancy, again because he was 2 down and had then won the last 2 sets - that's just logic though, not bias

Agree. Logic, form, experience. Muller was like Alistair Cook in that last set- hardly seemed to be sweating; one cool customer.

Seedings are at the discretion of the organisers. Murray and Nadal are 1 and 2 in the world rankings so would have been kept apart but thats not how it was done.

You said earlier in the thread that grass is not his best surface and that he hasn't reached the quarters in the last 7 years. Probably why he isn't 2nd seed and as a result has ended up in Murray's half of the draw.

Nadal was the form player coming into the tournament so I think in that sense it seemed like Murray had a bad draw. Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Tip top 2.

Nadal was the form player coming into the tournament so I think in that sense it seemed like Murray had a bad draw. Hindsight is a wonderful thing

Exactly. Everyone felt Nadal was playing his best tennis ever. And he's won Wimbledon before, he was many peoples tip.

The top of this page makes great reading having them both on ignore

Murrays fixed draw not looking too rosey here.

 

Injured it seems.

Edited July 12, 20179 yr by Escobarp

Murrays fixed draw not looking too rosey here.

 

Injured it seems.

 

Clearly the organisers have fixed it so his hip went to make life easier for Federer. 

I see the Organisers plan of ensuring a yank gets through to the semis has come to fruitation.

So Konta remains British for now but Murray reverts to being a Scotch.

Djokovic out (retired one set down).

Djokovic out (retired one set down).

Steroids worn off?

Steroids worn off?

 

Tennis elbow.

Only man who had to play full matches on successive days.