Football » English » Open Discussion

This Andy Murray debate?

By jamiescfc2010 - 06-07-2013 09:46

[World]

I know for some of us we don't like tennis but it is a sport after all BUT I'm debating whether you think we should support Andy Murray after what he reported he'd said about not like English people and that. I think he's British and we should back him whether he said it intentionally well if I was Murray I'd tune out the haters and be proud to be British.I know for some of us we don't like tennis but it is a sport after all BUT I'm debating whether you think we should support Andy Murray after what he reported he'd said about not like English people and that. I think he's British and we should back him whether he said it intentionally well if I was Murray I'd tune out the haters and be proud to be British.

 

Page 1

 

Reply

Last Message

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By kingjaime - 06-07-2013 12:48

[BVB]

I like the fact he distinguishes Scottish, and more importantly English, from "British". Think I'm right in saying all he's ever done was joke, once, about the football team. He was being ribbed about Scotland not being at the 2006 World Cup, in a joint interview with Englishman Tim Henman, and when asked who he'd be supporting he said basically "Whoever England are playing". Shock. Whereas obviously all us English types have only ever been complimentary about the Scottish football team, and always wish them well... I'd understand people disliking him for this or that other reason, but if anyone does because "He hates the English"... well they just pretty dumb, that is all.I like the fact he distinguishes Scottish, and more importantly English, from "British". Think I'm right in saying all he's ever done was joke, once, about the football team. He was being ribbed about Scotland not being at the 2006 World Cup, in a joint interview with Englishman Tim Henman, and when asked who he'd be supporting he said basically "Whoever England are playing". Shock. Whereas obviously all us English types have only ever been complimentary about the Scottish football team, and always wish them well...

I'd understand people disliking him for this or that other reason, but if anyone does because "He hates the English"... well they just pretty dumb, that is all.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By mosmosmos - 06-07-2013 13:39

[ENG]

Murray has a great personality, very funny, very dry. Got to hear a lot of him at the US Open last year which is far less reported over here so you get to see a lot better side of him.Murray has a great personality, very funny, very dry. Got to hear a lot of him at the US Open last year which is far less reported over here so you get to see a lot better side of him.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By jamiescfc2010 - 06-07-2013 16:28

[World]

Just don't get why most English people get so worked up over nothing? seriously he's playing for Britain (but if he loses he's Scottish but if he wins but highly unlikely unless Djokovic pulls up for some reason). I think we'll be waiting a long time for a British winner in the tennis [:S].Just don't get why most English people get so worked up over nothing? seriously he's playing for Britain (but if he loses he's Scottish but if he wins but highly unlikely unless Djokovic pulls up for some reason). I think we'll be waiting a long time for a British winner in the tennis :S.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By ivorylegend - 08-07-2013 09:30

[MZ UKI]

By long time did you mean more than 24 hours?

jamiescfc2010 wrote:

I think we'll be waiting a long time for a British winner in the tennis :S.

By long time did you mean more than 24 hours?

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By julenfer - 08-07-2013 10:25

[MZ]

Maybe I should not step in as a foreigner into this debate, but been born in the Bask Country and living in Belgium I think I could drop a phew lines from the outside. First of all, for the purposes of tennis history it not matter how he feels...it's "legally" a UK champ winning Wimblendon after that many years. Well done and congratulations!! Then there is a second layer, behind what is "legal", which is about feelings. If it is true -and not irony- that he supports "whatever or whoever" plays against England I find it poor, just like kingjaime said. But not supporting him in return, would put me or anyone at the same level of hate. Would be poor too, would'nt it?? Where I disagree is on the fact that all English are complimentary to the Scotts whilst they are not towards the English... I think the reading is more subtile. People have to deserve and cherish each other's appreciation. The incapacity to humanly understand smaller national feelings is part of the problem in our countries. The other part comes from populist & shortsighted politicians and the lame messages in which they educate lay people. On the whole, there are more reasons than reunite Flemish and Walloons, Basks-Catalonians and Spaniards or Scottish and English than what separes them and, in any case, it is even more true there is more to loose than to win in any split. But if people on all sides let themselves be driven by the guts, we'll get the worse future we deserve. Should Scotland be independent? Mmm...who asked that question? Perhaps a married man?? :PMaybe I should not step in as a foreigner into this debate, but been born in the Bask Country and living in Belgium I think I could drop a phew lines from the outside. First of all, for the purposes of tennis history it not matter how he feels...it's "legally" a UK champ winning Wimblendon after that many years. Well done and congratulations!!

Then there is a second layer, behind what is "legal", which is about feelings. If it is true -and not irony- that he supports "whatever or whoever" plays against England I find it poor, just like kingjaime said. But not supporting him in return, would put me or anyone at the same level of hate. Would be poor too, would'nt it??

Where I disagree is on the fact that all English are complimentary to the Scotts whilst they are not towards the English... I think the reading is more subtile. People have to deserve and cherish each other's appreciation. The incapacity to humanly understand smaller national feelings is part of the problem in our countries. The other part comes from populist & shortsighted politicians and the lame messages in which they educate lay people.

On the whole, there are more reasons than reunite Flemish and Walloons, Basks-Catalonians and Spaniards or Scottish and English than what separes them and, in any case, it is even more true there is more to loose than to win in any split. But if people on all sides let themselves be driven by the guts, we'll get the worse future we deserve. Should Scotland be independent? Mmm...who asked that question? Perhaps a married man?? :P

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By tosspot - 08-07-2013 10:52

[AUSNZ]

What I think is that the UK have made this into a big deal. Who cares if it's 77 years since the last UK winner? It's only been 12 months since the last tennis player won Wimbledon. I don't understand why in some sports, the UK compete separately, then in others they decide to combine... does it have to do with England being rubbish on their own? Cricket, it's called England, but it's actually England and Wales. Rugby, they compete as individuals sometimes and British Lions others Tennis, they compete individually, but for some reason feel the need to claim them as UK if they are not English Waiting for the day Britain is in the World Cup :)What I think is that the UK have made this into a big deal. Who cares if it's 77 years since the last UK winner? It's only been 12 months since the last tennis player won Wimbledon.

I don't understand why in some sports, the UK compete separately, then in others they decide to combine... does it have to do with England being rubbish on their own?

Cricket, it's called England, but it's actually England and Wales.
Rugby, they compete as individuals sometimes and British Lions others
Tennis, they compete individually, but for some reason feel the need to claim them as UK if they are not English

Waiting for the day Britain is in the World Cup :)

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By julenfer - 08-07-2013 11:10

[MZ]

That's a good point tosspot. Back in Sports, it's difficult to understand outside of the UK that they compete as "nations" instead of doing so on behalf of the same country. Having said that the fact that a country "A" does not win the tournament that it organizes makes quite some debate in Europe (the French for example have that same issue with Le Tour de France and Roland Garros). Would be interesting to know where Spain would have been without Catalan players (this is Puyol, Pique, Busquets & Xavi) or where Barcelona would be today if it played in the "Catalonian league"...That's a good point tosspot. Back in Sports, it's difficult to understand outside of the UK that they compete as "nations" instead of doing so on behalf of the same country. Having said that the fact that a country "A" does not win the tournament that it organizes makes quite some debate in Europe (the French for example have that same issue with Le Tour de France and Roland Garros). Would be interesting to know where Spain would have been without Catalan players (this is Puyol, Pique, Busquets & Xavi) or where Barcelona would be today if it played in the "Catalonian league"...

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By tosspot - 08-07-2013 11:27

[AUSNZ]

I understand the appeal of having a local winner and Australia want to win on home soil too... but I guess the issue is, that it takes over the actual tennis... and the event (while hosted in London) is a worldwide event. I streamed it online and there was talk of 'making history' and '77 years' after almost every point.I understand the appeal of having a local winner and Australia want to win on home soil too... but I guess the issue is, that it takes over the actual tennis... and the event (while hosted in London) is a worldwide event. I streamed it online and there was talk of 'making history' and '77 years' after almost every point.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By kingjaime - 09-07-2013 02:16

[BVB]

*"Cricket, it's called England, but it's actually England, South Africa, Wales and Ireland's Eoin Morgan" ...Just to clarify. I suppose it's a question of funding for some less popular sports, who the governing body might be, undoubtedly issues of whether the individual countries have the strength to be competitive individually in some sports... Or is it part of the general homogenisation that sometimes feels on the agenda? To erode the reference to or acknowledgement of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as individual countries. Maybe in some cases, perhaps not so much in sport where the factors already mentioned are the decisive ones.*"Cricket, it's called England, but it's actually England, South Africa, Wales and Ireland's Eoin Morgan"
...Just to clarify.

I suppose it's a question of funding for some less popular sports, who the governing body might be, undoubtedly issues of whether the individual countries have the strength to be competitive individually in some sports... Or is it part of the general homogenisation that sometimes feels on the agenda? To erode the reference to or acknowledgement of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland as individual countries. Maybe in some cases, perhaps not so much in sport where the factors already mentioned are the decisive ones.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By zefrenchy - 09-07-2013 03:32

I'll throw my two cents in but I'm somewhat handcuffed by what I say here as I'm Scottish and about to be sponsored by the same company as Murray in just over a month. Until he broke down at Wimbledon last year, I absolutely hated him. His attitude and vulgar language on court annoyed me to the point I would actively support his opponent. The last few months have given me an appreciation but I wouldn't actively support him unless I specifically disliked his opponent. I think his mother is over the top at times - which again I understand but I don't see Nadal or Federer's parents living and dying with every point their son plays. I couldn't care less if he's Scottish, British, Swiss or Spanish. He doesn't have the flair of a Federer or the watchability (in my opinion) of a Djokovic or even a Del Potro. He's just really consistant, which is why he wins so much but doesn't make many fans in the process. Which I suppose can be said of Djokovic but there's a personality on show at least. I don't particularly like to watch Murray play, so I don't have an issue with the English/Australians/Belgians not support him but as a Scot I don't support him. For the record, I hated that "77 years for a British winner" garbage, Virginia Wade won the ladies singles in '77, Jamie Murray won the mixed doubles in 2007 and Jonny Marray won the men's doubles last year. Until two days ago, he had the same amount of Grand Slam titles as his brother. I will say this, his half volley into Lendl's stomach at Queens was pretty sensational and I'd like to see more of that side of him because I think he could be a really good guy to be around, he just needs to show it more. Eddie.I'll throw my two cents in but I'm somewhat handcuffed by what I say here as I'm Scottish and about to be sponsored by the same company as Murray in just over a month.

Until he broke down at Wimbledon last year, I absolutely hated him. His attitude and vulgar language on court annoyed me to the point I would actively support his opponent. The last few months have given me an appreciation but I wouldn't actively support him unless I specifically disliked his opponent. I think his mother is over the top at times - which again I understand but I don't see Nadal or Federer's parents living and dying with every point their son plays.

I couldn't care less if he's Scottish, British, Swiss or Spanish. He doesn't have the flair of a Federer or the watchability (in my opinion) of a Djokovic or even a Del Potro. He's just really consistant, which is why he wins so much but doesn't make many fans in the process. Which I suppose can be said of Djokovic but there's a personality on show at least. I don't particularly like to watch Murray play, so I don't have an issue with the English/Australians/Belgians not support him but as a Scot I don't support him.

For the record, I hated that "77 years for a British winner" garbage, Virginia Wade won the ladies singles in '77, Jamie Murray won the mixed doubles in 2007 and Jonny Marray won the men's doubles last year.

Until two days ago, he had the same amount of Grand Slam titles as his brother. I will say this, his half volley into Lendl's stomach at Queens was pretty sensational and I'd like to see more of that side of him because I think he could be a really good guy to be around, he just needs to show it more.

Eddie.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By heddo - 09-07-2013 04:31

history does not matter to those who have no history, or no historical values, the same people will try to rebuke anything that makes them feel stepped upon, downgraded, shadow casted, the aboriginals and brazilian tribesfolk will be bloody good at blow football, but there comes a time when the patentors get an inkling that it would be kinda nice if some one down the bloodline can give a - where it was born - signal out, it was nice to see a picture of Fred Perry in the papers, next to Murray, he looked a good athlete, there are too many bums on the streets these days, being hand fed an easy life, that is why the history does not matter, that is why nothing matters, simply because nothing needs to matter, because nothing has any importance, and nothing needs to have any importance, when your life is so easy. I just have one question, is Alex Salmond a nationlist ? , it jolly well looks so to me..history does not matter to those who have no history, or no historical values, the same people will try to rebuke anything that makes them feel stepped upon, downgraded, shadow casted, the aboriginals and brazilian tribesfolk will be bloody good at blow football, but there comes a time when the patentors get an inkling that it would be kinda nice if some one down the bloodline can give a - where it was born - signal out, it was nice to see a picture of Fred Perry in the papers, next to Murray, he looked a good athlete, there are too many bums on the streets these days, being hand fed an easy life, that is why the history does not matter, that is why nothing matters, simply because nothing needs to matter, because nothing has any importance, and nothing needs to have any importance, when your life is so easy. I just have one question, is Alex Salmond a nationlist ? , it jolly well looks so to me..

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By heddo - 09-07-2013 04:32

nationalist (correction)nationalist (correction)

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By julenfer - 09-07-2013 09:28

[MZ]

I took it that the 77 years obviously counted for the main competition. In other words, the merits lie where the good rackets play. P.S. I take the chance to apologize for the wrong use of the word "country" in English hereabove. In my first and second languages country means state+nation(s)... Not wanting to underrate the home nations / countries of the UK at any rate.I took it that the 77 years obviously counted for the main competition. In other words, the merits lie where the good rackets play.

P.S. I take the chance to apologize for the wrong use of the word "country" in English hereabove. In my first and second languages country means state+nation(s)... Not wanting to underrate the home nations / countries of the UK at any rate.

Re: This Andy Murray debate?

By mosmosmos - 09-07-2013 13:33

[ENG]

To be fair, pretty much everywhere has stated, or at least implied 'Men's singles' with that stat/

zefrenchy wrote:

For the record, I hated that "77 years for a British winner" garbage, Virginia Wade won the ladies singles in '77, Jamie Murray won the mixed doubles in 2007 and Jonny Marray won the men's doubles last year.

To be fair, pretty much everywhere has stated, or at least implied 'Men's singles' with that stat/

 

Page 1