Don't buy it myself. Here's the response from the Beeb:
Our television commentary team were full of respect for the five-times champion Roger Federer; however in the early part of the match, there was no doubt that Rafael Nadal was playing the better tennis as he took a two set to love lead which we reflected in our commentary.
The BBC commentary team did subsequently catch the great drama of Federer's extraordinary comeback, and duly praised him for it.
Nevertheless, Rafael Nadal was in line to become the first Spanish men's champion in over forty years and the first man since Bjorn Borg to claim both the French Open and Wimbledon titles in the same season.
It was therefore appropriate for our television commentators to discuss this remarkable achievement and the fact that Nadal had displaced the player who had dominated Wimbledon for most of this decade.
Thanks to the BBC press office for the response. Much appreciated.
3 comments:
Hey Steve!
I have a feeling there were quite a few Fedophiles tying up the BBC's phone lines. As big-time Fed fan, I'm always surprised and annoyed by how many absolutely psychotic Federer fans that there are in the world. They tend to be super sensitive to any criticism, however mild, aimed at Roger and have very little perspective in terms of tennis as a sport - the tennis court exists only as a stage for Roger's artistic performances, and all other players be damned! David Foster Wallace is their patron saint.
Seriously, there needs to be a study.
Hi Freakyfrites
I feel the same way. Some people give us Federer fans a bad name!
I don't recall any bias, and even if there was, on the day the better player (just) won,
people should get over it.
Roger will be back!
Hey, you two! I think it could almost be looked at a couple of ways:
1) When someone's so dominant, maybe there's an inclination to try to drum up some interest in the other guy.
or:
2) The fanatics are too sensitive!
Post a Comment