Sunday, September 07, 2008

US Open 9/7/08 Day 14

by Savannah


(...)

I usually put on an all news station when I wake up so that I can hear all the news, sports and weather. I was about to doze off when the 10:15a sports report led off blasting the USTA for it's "inexplicable", "indefensible" and in the end "unfair" decision to start the second semi - why was it the second semi anyway - a full hour and a half after the start of the Federer/Djokovic match. The sportscaster went on to say that the USTA is not commenting.

Read the rest...

7 comments:

Beth said...

Savannah, I am so glad to have read your blog on this. The scheduling on Saturday was a f'n travesty and I still cannot believe how it all panned out. It was so ridiculous. I think that Rafa was very tired, and likely may have lost to Murray today if the entire match had been played TODAY but still.....USTA and CBS....sucky call!!

Helen W said...

beth, Andy M is as much a "beneficiary" of these machinations as Rafa was. The only person to have an advantage from the scheduling is the winner of the Federer-Djokovic match: i.e Federer.

Beth said...

helen w, I was not commenting on who benefited by the scheduling...just agreed with Savannah that it was all poorly planned out and that the USTA really did not do what was in the best interest of all the players. I believe Rafa would have lost no matter when the match took place. He was obviously tired coming into this tournament and even getting to the semifinals was a great result for him.

Helen W said...

I agree with you beth, Rafa had a good chance to level the match when he was up a break in the 4th set, but Andy broke back, then broke again to win. He was playing some amazing tennis, while Rafa was unable to summon his A-game. Rafa got further than he ever has at the USO, & has had a stellar year -- no apologies required.

But the fact remains -- the scheduling decision had a clear beneficiary, which must have been very clear to those making the decision, and that beneficiary was the winner of the first match.

Savannah said...

But the fact remains -- the scheduling decision had a clear beneficiary, which must have been very clear to those making the decision, and that beneficiary was the winner of the first match.
==============================
You said it Helen.

I can't write about today's match yet. I will say this. When we were leaving, along with a lot of the crowd, Andy said it was an honor to be facing Roger in the Final. Andy will not play like he did over the last two days against Roger. Federer will win easily.

kraa said...

Why are Rafa fans so insecure seeing conspiracy whenever possible? Scheduling is not right, the draw is too hard, other players are trying too hard or not hard enough and so on and so on.

There always seems to be something either making him a hero if he wins anyway or a victim if he doesn't...

oddman said...

kraa - I don't understand your comment at all.

Let's play a game. Imagine two other names in there besides Rafa and Andy. Read what Helen wrote again. The same applies. The winner of the first match benefitted. The weather forecast was known. Make sense?