Charlie Brooker on Andy Murray

[Mellotron]

kind of agree with this

Loved him before. Then got lent two of his books (collections of articles) and read them back to back and started to weary a little of his style. But, as you say, he really does get it spot on sometimes.

Sometimes it all feels a little forced, and the relentless cynicism and negativity does grate after a while.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

Forget all this bollocks about ' on court persona and champion mentality ' The bare facts are, that overall, his play wasn't good enough to lift the trophy. His first serve let him down badly ( at times running below 50% ), he missed straightforward opportunities to break and should have been two sets to the good before Federer even started to play. Federer was nervous and was making twice as many unforced errors as Murray. Federer will never play as poorly again as he did in the first set and a half.
IMHO Murray will never have a better chance of winning Wimbledon and he has missed it.
He knew it, we all knew it. Hence the tears at the end. It was anger and frustration at his golden chance gone begging. Nadal blown away by an unknown, Djokavic, subdued and below par. Federer riddled with nerves at the thought of no.7 and equalling his hero.
It was all set up for Andy. If he had played to the best of his ability, he would now be Wimbledon champion.

 

[El Presidente]

The fact it is in a completely liberal rag says it all. Murray has proclaimed himself as Scottish and Anti-English, I will never like him.

But you're a dim bigot, so should anyone care?

 

[Mellotron]

Forget all this bollocks about ' on court persona and champion mentality ' The bare facts are, that overall, his play wasn't good enough to lift the trophy. His first serve let him down badly ( at times running below 50% ), he missed straightforward opportunities to break and should have been two sets to the good before Federer even started to play. Federer was nervous and was making twice as many unforced errors as Murray. Federer will never play as poorly again as he did in the first set and a half.
IMHO Murray will never have a better chance of winning Wimbledon and he has missed it.
He knew it, we all knew it. Hence the tears at the end. It was anger and frustration at his golden chance gone begging. Nadal blown away by an unknown, Djokavic, subdued and below par. Federer riddled with nerves at the thought of no.7 and equalling his hero.
It was all set up for Andy. If he had played to the best of his ability, he would now be Wimbledon champion.

Bizarre post, unrelated entirely to the thread topic.

 

[Fungus]

All this would be less important if "journalists" had more training in interviewing techninques than "How did it feel ...?", to which the only acceptable answer is usually "Amazing" (a word I would love to ban). Long live Murray. And Brooker.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I am not a great tennis fan. I spend most of the last fortnight avoiding the television. I have never particularly liked Andy Murray because of the "miserable git" stuff, but having read that article, I actually feel a lot better disposed to him. Charlie Brooker is quite right about our expectations about other people.

And his emotional interview after the match actually showed he is human - not the false, put on Public Relations emotion that Brooker was writing about before the match, but real raw emotion.

 

[Motogull]

I reviewed my thoughts on Murray when I learnt about him being at the Dunblane massacre. Stuff knows how I'd have turned out if I'd been there.

 

[looney]

charlie booker is a leftwing alf garnet who attaches as much rhetoric and hyperbole as possible to factless, opinion issues like this.

He is not even in the same league as the likes of christopher hitchens of auberon waugh, who's knowledge base was evident in any debate.

He produces shallow mush for tepid minds. He also misses the irony that a lot of neo-emotionalism is driven by the left.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

charlie booker is a leftwing alf garnet who attaches as much rhetoric and hyperbole as possible to factless, opinion issues like this.

He is not even in the same league as the likes of christopher hitchens of auberon waugh, who's knowledge base was evident in any debate.

He produces shallow mush for tepid minds. He also misses the irony that a lot of neo-emotionalism is driven by the left.

Who rattled your cage? I don't think Charlie Brooker is claiming to be an uber-intellectual when writing something like this.

And just because someone has an extensive knowledge base doesn't mean that they can use that knowledge and interpret things sensibly. Charlie Brooker is far more entertaining and human than Christopher Hitchens.

 

[Pavilionaire]

I'll be the 4th person out of 4 to say that's utter bollocks.

Brilliant riposte! So whats your take on Murrays 0 for 4 grand slam status?

A journalist says Murray shouldn't have to smile. Whatever. The fact is Murray's lost another major and had a mini-meltdown in the interview on-court. He has the playing ability, but its now down to his mental state. If he keeps on a downer and thinks desperately pointless Hawkeye reviews will keep him in the game the only way he's winning a major is if Fed, Nadal and Djokovic are downed in a plane crash.

 

[clapham_gull]

The fact it is in a completely liberal rag says it all. Murray has proclaimed himself as Scottish and Anti-English, I will never like him.

I can't stand tennis but know the above to be bollocks except the fact that he is Scottish because er... he is is.

He was deliberately wound up in an interview, asked if he would be supporting "Scotland in the World Cup" the interviewer knowing that they hadn't qualified.

He (in jest) responded "no, but anyone but England".

The story took a life of it's own, with some of the papers you obviously read reporting that he wore a Portugal Shirt during the competition.

All compete bollocks, but since Murray doesn't play the media game his "representatives" probably don't ring up the papers trading stories for good headlines.

These stories persist because simply Murray keeps his mouth shut. The void being filled by.........

"Proclaimed himself as Scottish..." Brilliant

 

[Don Quixote]

If you ask me he's a very good writer.

 

[Mellotron]

Brilliant riposte! So whats your take on Murrays 0 for 4 grand slam status?

A journalist says Murray shouldn't have to smile. Whatever. The fact is Murray's lost another major and had a mini-meltdown in the interview on-court. He has the playing ability, but its now down to his mental state. If he keeps on a downer and thinks desperately pointless Hawkeye reviews will keep him in the game the only way he's winning a major is if Fed, Nadal and Djokovic are downed in a plane crash.

Do you think Fergie would've won more if he'd smiled more?

Also, regarding the Murray not gonna win any grand slams, wanna make a bet?

 

[mikeyjh]

I think it's bizarre that some many people INSIST we have to like Andy Murray. We don't all like the same people, that's a fact of life. I don't particularly like Andy Murray, I can't put my finger on it, I just don't. I'm comfortable with that and don't feel the need to shout it from the roof tops, but I can't stand is the insinuation that I'm missing the point or that in fact I'm WRONG. I don't care how much the BBC tell me how much the whole country now loves him because he cried (they don't). I don't like Andy Murray.

 

[Mellotron]

I think it's bizarre that some many people INSIST we have to like Andy Murray. We don't all like the same people, that's a fact of life. I don't particularly like Andy Murray, I can't put my finger on it, I just don't. I'm comfortable with that and don't feel the need to shout it from the roof tops, but I can't stand is the insinuation that I'm missing the point or that in fact I'm WRONG. I don't care how much the BBC tell me how much the whole country now loves him because he cried (they don't). I don't like Andy Murray.

I would argue this whole debate is about the exact opposite. SO many people dislike Andy Murray when the reasons are flimsy or made up in their own heads. No one HAS to like him, but he is a lot more likeable than plenty give him credit for.

 

[mikeyjh]

I would argue this whole debate is about the exact opposite. SO many people dislike Andy Murray when the reasons are flimsy or made up in their own heads. No one HAS to like him, but he is a lot more likeable than plenty give him credit for.

That's my point though, you're kind of telling me that I'm not seeing the 'inner Andy', ("he is a lot more likeable than plenty give him credit for"). I'm not sure anyone can say that a reason for not liking someone is 'flimsy', it's just personal.

 

[Mellotron]

That's my point though, you're kind of telling me that I'm not seeing the 'inner Andy', ("he is a lot more likeable than plenty give him credit for"). I'm not sure anyone can say that a reason for not liking someone is 'flimsy', it's just personal.

But it's usually entirely baseless - "I just don't like him, I don't know why".

That comment he made regarding his parents was absolute gold.

 

[Southy]

Brilliant riposte! So whats your take on Murrays 0 for 4 grand slam status?

A journalist says Murray shouldn't have to smile. Whatever. The fact is Murray's lost another major and had a mini-meltdown in the interview on-court. He has the playing ability, but its now down to his mental state. If he keeps on a downer and thinks desperately pointless Hawkeye reviews will keep him in the game the only way he's winning a major is if Fed, Nadal and Djokovic are downed in a plane crash.

To be fair to Murray once the roof was shut Federer played almost perfect tennis and I dont think anyone inc Djokovic and Nadal would have beaten him in those last 2 sets. Apparently he has a smaller racquet than all the other players which means his margin for error is higher but gives him pinpoint accuracy if he hits the ball in the centre of the racquet. The roof closing gave him near perfect conditions for that and he played at an extraordinary high level. Murray had him beaten for the first set and half and was the best hes ever played, so if the roof hadn't shut it could have gone either way. Its bad luck for Murray he's playing in the greatest ever ra of mens tennis as he would have won more than one gram slam in any other era. I do think he will win one soon, as he is definitely improving and as Federer gets older, I think he can compete with Djokovic and Nadal and win in next 2 years.

And Prok Pie read this by the journo who wrote the original story. It was in the Mail ffs DES KELLY: For the last time... Scot Andy Murray is no traitor | Mail Online

 

[Kumquat]

The fact it is in a completely liberal rag says it all. Murray has proclaimed himself as Scottish and Anti-English, I will never like him.

No he hasn't. And you can have that from a Tory rag.

Wimbledon 2009: Andy Murray sets record straight on 'anti-England' reputation - Telegraph

 

[looney]

Who rattled your cage? I don't think Charlie Brooker is claiming to be an uber-intellectual when writing something like this.

And just because someone has an extensive knowledge base doesn't mean that they can use that knowledge and interpret things sensibly. Charlie Brooker is far more entertaining and human than Christopher Hitchens.

Who rattled your cage? these are opinions we are both entitled to express.