Daily Archives: 6 July 2008

Wimbledon 2008

Version 1.0, , , , , , , ,

After watching the Wimbledon men’s singles final today, all I have to say is WOW.  I’m left nearly speechless.  It was, hands down, one of the greatest matches I’ve ever seen, and possibly one of the greatest matches in tennis history.  The longest championship match in Wimbledon history was perahps the tournament’s greatest ever.  That takes a lot for me to say because I’m a huge Pete Sampras fan, but Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal put on a show today, hitting seemingly impossible angles with unthinkable pace.  And to compound the impeccable tennis on display on Centre Court, the players were hampered with two rain delays, which caused the total match time to exceed seven hours.  It was, in a word, unbelievable.

I hope NBC’s coverage of this event got big ratings, because tennis is an amazing sport that needs more exposure in the United States.  The top pros make the sport look so easy; however, it’s anything but.  First of all, it’s physically demanding.  A tennis player has to be able to change directions on a dime, read and react in (literally) a split-second, and deal with the elements.  Then there’s the technique involved with hitting a tennis ball.  Much like golf, where even the slightest hitch in a swing can cause the ball to drift tens of yards off target, the technique in tennis is vital to a player’s success.  Footwork, balance and weight shifting, hip and shoulder rotation, arm angle, wrist snaps, non-dominant hand movement, and follow-through, plus ball speed judgment and spin assessment all have to be considered…and that’s just to hit a simple forehand, never mind an overhead smash or a serve!  Also like golf, tennis is mentally challenging as well.  During a match, it’s just you and your opponent.  No coaches to advise you, so assistants offering aid.  It’s just player(s) vs. player(s).

Something funny happened to me watching the post-match trophy presentation.  I actually felt bad for Roger Federer.  It was weird because, being a huge Pete Sampras fan, I want his records to stand.  But Federer impressed me today with his grace in defeat.  He took it hard, as evidenced by his post-match interview with John McEnroe, but displayed at tremendous amount of poise and heart.  Coming back from two sets down only to lose a heart-breaking fifth set 9-7 in a place where he’s won five years in a row could not have been easy, and he accepted that Nadal narrowly beat him with class and style.  I think today may have even turned me into (dare I say it) a Federer fan.  Tennis players get a lot of criticism for being supposedly stoic and machine-like (Bill Simmons, for example) and not sticking around for a long time.  Not today, though.  Federer is going to win more Grand Slam titles before he’s done, eclipsing Sampras’ record of 14, and will go down as the greatest player ever.  And now, officially, Federer has a rival in Nadal, who’ll challenge Federer and push him to succeed even more than he already has, much like Agassi did to Sampras.  Contrary to what the Sports Guy says, players like Sampras and Federer ARE good for tennis.  They give us a reason to watch.  Like we do with Tiger, we tune to see if they’ll rewrite the history books.  The way I see it, tennis players’ supposed lack of longevity (which is due in no small part to the physical demands of the sport) should be all the more reason we tune it to witness amazing athletes like Sampras, Agassi, Federer, and Nadal.  Federer didn’t make history today; it was Nadal’s turn.  But Roger’s close, and that gives tennis fans–hopefully sports fans, in general–reason to watch the upcoming hardcourt season and the US Open later this summer.

Tennis is a fast-paced, elegant, captivating display of athleticism and mental fortitude, and there is hardly a better example of that display than today’s final. The match undoubtedly is an “instant classic,” so I hope ESPN Classic replays it soon and hope people tune in.  And if you don’t have that channel, check out the highlights and/or read up on the marathon between the world’s top two players.  I promise that it’ll be worth it.

Fox Sux

Version 1.0, , , , , , , , , ,

I used to respect Fox Sports and their coverage.  I had no trouble separating Fox Sports from its overtly biased and woefully inaccurate sister network, Fox “News.”  I like their football pre-game show more than CBS’, and I like the fact that there are multiple regional networks that cover specific events for particular parts of country.  But after Fox blew their baseball coverage last weekend and today, I’ll have a tough time giving the Sports division of the network viewing time in the future.  Here’s how they blew it:

Last weekend was the final weekend for interleague play, the merits of which (or lack thereof) I’ll save for another entry.  It was “proximity rival” weekend, so the Cubs were playing the White Sox, the Yankees played the Mets, the Angels played the Dodgers, etc.  Fox was broadcasting the Cubs/Sox game, and I thought everything was fine and dandy (except for the fact that the Sox were winning the series).  All of a sudden, Fox decides to switch the coverage to the Mets/Yankees game.  I sat there on my couch in disbelief at what just transpired.  First of all, they didn’t even wait ’til the inning was over; they just went to the Joe Buck (whom I like) and Tim McCarver (whom I can’t stand…more about him later) pre-game hoopla over the overrated “Subway Series.”  Secondly, the Mets were a second place team and the Yankees a third place team, while the Cubs and Sox both held the top spots in their respective divisions.  I was appalled that Fox would switch to the New York game just because it’s The Big Apple, in order to broadcast the game between two middle-of-the-pack teams when they were in the middle of covering a drama-filled contest between two first-place teams in The Windy City.

Then, today at 4PM, the second game of the Cubs/Cardinals series started, a battle between the top two teams in the NL Central.  It just so happened that the Yankees/Red Sox game started at the that time, too.  I was hoping Fox wouldn’t do it to me again, but they did.  They chose to showcase the fourth-place Yankees and second-place Red Sox, while there was a nail-biter going on in St. Louis.  WHAT?!?  The Cubs/Cards game today actually affects the standings in a meaningful way, with only 2.5 games now separating the first-place Cubs from the second-place Cardinals.  The Yankees won day, cutting their deficit in the division to a scant NINE games.  Again: WHAT?!?  Thanks Fox Sports, for perpetuating the no longer so-called “East Coast” bias.  No one cares about Yankees/Red Sox any more: it’s overdone.  Plus, the Yankees stink right now.  The way I see it, had it been a game between top two teams in the AL East, then it would have been more understandable.  But that was not the case.  Wake up, Fox.  The Cubs and Cardinals have just as intense a rivalry as New York and Boston, and the rest of the country just might be able to appreciate that if your choice of game coverage wasn’t so poor.

Oh, and speaking of poor, please let Tim McCarver go.  He’s a terrible broadcaster whose glaring lack of analytical talent only brings down Joe Buck.  McCarver’s analyses are wrong more times than they’re right, especially when it comes to replays, commentating as if he’s blind.  I’m reminded of Joe Morgan of ESPN’s “Sunday Night Baseball.”  They’re both know-it-alls who really don’t know much, or at least can’t express what they know on TV.  They talk way too much and often either say the wrong thing or dwell on the obvious.  Steve Stone’s a know-it-all, but I can tolerate him because he, indeed, does know it all.  McCarver and Morgan may have been great players, but they’re awful announcers.  They should take notes from the “Smartest Man in Baseball.”