Tennis Commentary and why it stinks

[Jono]

I hate that attitude.

Criticise women for hitting more unforced errors per winner if you like, as that is a controllable aspect of their tennis. But if you have a crack at them because they don't hit as hard or run as fast, then you've missed the point.

Additionally a lot of players in men's tennis could learn a thing or two from a few women's players with regards to how to fight when the pressure is on and you look gone in a match. Novak, Tsonga, Ferrer and Blake, among others, are not even as close to as mentally tough as Serena is, or Martina and Graf used to be.

[Bobisback]

Originally Posted by Jono

Additionally a lot of players in men's tennis could learn a thing or two from a few women's players with regards to how to fight when the pressure is on and you look gone in a match. Novak, Tsonga, Ferrer and Blake, among others, are not even as close to as mentally tough as Serena is, or Martina and Graf used to be.

So could the whole of the Womens circuit other than Serena Williams (and Venus I guess).

[Johnners]

Thing is Jono, outside of Fed, Nadal and Serena & Venus themselves, there's hardly a player on both circuits who couldn't learn a great deal from them re: mental strength.

Note, I'm not having a go at womens tennis, but I don't think that argument holds much strength as a reason to why it's a good spectacle.

[Uppercut]

Originally Posted by Jono

I hate that attitude.

Criticise women for hitting more unforced errors per winner if you like, as that is a controllable aspect of their tennis. But if you have a crack at them because they don't hit as hard or run as fast, then you've missed the point.

Additionally a lot of players in men's tennis could learn a thing or two from a few women's players with regards to how to fight when the pressure is on and you look gone in a match. Novak, Tsonga, Ferrer and Blake, among others, are not even as close to as mentally tough as Serena is, or Martina and Graf used to be.

It's just shocking to watch. A really, really poor spectacle. I don't see why people are interested in watching a game that's just like the men's circuit apart from the fact that it:

1. is half as fast
2. contains no attacking strokeplay whatsoever as noone will come anywhere near the net
3. features horrific glass-piercing screams every time someone hits a shot
4. is of a lower quality in pretty much every conceivable way- more unforced errors, less winners, matches only last three sets.

If you tell me "ooh but women are all dainty, you couldn't expect little girls to run as fast as big strong men!!!!" then you're missing the point. Because none of the qualifying you feel you have to give to the ****ness of the game makes it any less painfully bad to watch. I have plenty of respect for some women's tennis players, they've taken up a hobby and got to the very top of it. But in terms of a spectacle, it's like sticking pins in my eyes.

[Isolator]

I liked Mats Wilander's commentary stint at the US open last year. Navratilova too is pretty interesting. Neither of them bother with the usual descriptive commentary stuff.

[garage flower]

Originally Posted by Isolator

I liked Mats Wilander's commentary stint at the US open last year. Navratilova too is pretty interesting. Neither of them bother with the usual descriptive commentary stuff.

Yeah, I quite like Wilander and most of the Eurosport and Sky tennis commentary teams. Wilander's understated delivery is a welcome antidote to the (contractual?) hyperbole and unremitting inanity of - say - 95% of football (soccer) commentators.

Tottenham were 2-0 down to Bolton halfway through the 2nd half on Saturday when - in a sudden flash of inspiration - the excited commentator suggested that "the next goal will be crucial".

And they pay these people!

[The Sean]

Originally Posted by Uppercut

It's just shocking to watch. A really, really poor spectacle. I don't see why people are interested in watching a game that's just like the men's circuit apart from the fact that it:

1. is half as fast
2. contains no attacking strokeplay whatsoever as noone will come anywhere near the net
3. features horrific glass-piercing screams every time someone hits a shot
4. is of a lower quality in pretty much every conceivable way- more unforced errors, less winners, matches only last three sets.

If you tell me "ooh but women are all dainty, you couldn't expect little girls to run as fast as big strong men!!!!" then you're missing the point. Because none of the qualifying you feel you have to give to the ****ness of the game makes it any less painfully bad to watch. I have plenty of respect for some women's tennis players, they've taken up a hobby and got to the very top of it. But in terms of a spectacle, it's like sticking pins in my eyes.

On this topic - how many more Fed/Rafa classics need to come 24 hours after a women's final that's over in 58 ****ing minutes before it stops being funny that they get equal prizemoney?

[PhoenixFire]

Yeah it's a deadset disgrace that they get paid the same. I'd like to see what justification whatever the tennis ruling board gives for it.

[ripper868]

Some appeal based on discrimination or something....equal pay for equal work i say...i mean in the slams the shortest a mens match can be is 3 sets whereas that is the longest a womens can be....it does not make sense. [wookie howl]

[pasag]

So should we start paying the blacks and hispanics less as well?









jk ftr

[Johnners]

[duffer]

Originally Posted by pasag

So should we start paying the blacks and hispanics less as well?









jk ftr

Disgrace we're paying them at all tbh.

[ripper868]

Originally Posted by duffer

Disgrace we're paying them at all tbh.

I wasn't aware you are the C.E.O. of tennis Australia

[duffer]

I'm full of surprises.

[ripper868]

no doubt...