BS: Wimbledon 2013

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 18 Jul 13 - 07:52 AM

...as would a nice pint of sweet cider, Allan.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 07:25 PM

"when a game is bein broadcast n radio as well as TV, to turn of the TV sound and listen to the radio version while watching."

I often watch games in a local pub where the background noise drowns out the commentators. Improves it quite a bit :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:54 PM

As I said above - Date: 13 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM - "Anyone for friendly-rival republics?!"

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 08:26 AM

Something that I find it irritating is when there is some incident, and the commentators rabbit on about it, without ever saying what actually happened. I think they take that word 'commentator' too literally, and forget what should be their primary responsibility, to report what is happening.

That's one reaon why it can be better, when a game is bein broadcast n radio as well as TV, to turn of the TV sound and listen to the radio version while watching.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Gutcher
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:58 AM

Back in the old days, BBKA, when I used to watch football matches with the sound turned on I recollect a world cup game where the two "pundits" ripped the two [foreign] teams on the park to shreds and asserted that their team [England] would have the beating of both. What they did not mention, and anyone new to the competition would never have found out from their remarks, was that one of the teams, Croacia? had defeated England in the previous round.
Such is the passion aroused in small minded little englanders that they could not see the incongruity of their remarks and this from people paid mega bucks from the BBC.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:38 AM

Another funny one was after Scotland narrowly lost out in 1986 to a very dirty Uruguayan side a wee scottish fan was interviewed when he said "Oh I really hate Uruguay....I mean I really hate them....you know how much I hate Uruguay?.....if they were playing England I'd want England to win" The clip was shown repeatedly on the BBC news etc and everyone just laughed. They saw the humour in the banter. Now they'd be claiming bigotry!

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:30 AM

"I never understood how there could be a "team GB" supposed to be representing the UK"

Yeagh the branding as "Team GB" hasn't been a problem in the past but there was a wee bit of complaining about the name within Northern Ireland during the London Olympics. Your revised flag still doesn't represent Wales though :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 17 Jul 13 - 05:16 AM

"WE don't expect that support, but the F**KING stupid Media Pundits haven't yet caught on to the fact that they don't speak for US"

But to be fair you yourself are not speaking for all the English either. You are only speaking for yourself and people who think like you do. There is a definite push from the media you are right - but also some sections of the English people don't understand, take offence, or are downright abrasive if they find you are not supporting England. I get it even within my own broader family never mind blokes you meet in the pubs etc.

As to how I feel then I support any British or Irish competitor or team against foreign opposition in any sports with the two exceptions being the England football and rugby national sides. I'd further define that as the men's teams only. I do like to see the England women's team win. Not only do I not support said two international teams but I am one of those (and there are quite a few) who love to see them beaten. I suppose it is just an inbred thing do to with long standing sporting rivalry. Similar to the Man City fans who can't bring themselves to cheer on Man Utd etc. Or I have a relative from Norwich who is a Canarie through and through and loves seeing Ipswich beaten. Might not be logical but it is there.

I'd say from my experience the English public in general are more open to support Scotland than the other way around - though that is probably just a elephant in the bed thing. I remember years ago seeing a survey showing that said backing for Scotland dropped dramatically should Scotland do better than England.

Amongst fans of the national sides and maybe even the playes the feelings are pretty mutual though. The thing is that the UK media picks up on anti-England feelings like when Scotland rugby players wore Aussie shirts when England were playing the Aussies. However no-one seemed bothered when at the start of Euro 96 all the flag parachutes landing in the Wembley stadium were cheered apart from the German and Scottish flags which were mercillesly booed. Then there are the songs which have been sung from the England terraces "Poor old Craigie Brown, oh what can it mean for a sad Scottish bastard and a crap football team" and and other familiar one "Bonnie Scotland, bonnie Scotland, what's it like to be back home?"

So yes I am kind of like yourself in that I wouldn't expect support for the Scotland side from English people and to tell you the truth I kind of like it when they don't. I enjoy the banter over sporting rivalry as long as it is just banter of course.

I kind of miss the days when Denis Law could openly say on TV that he had to play golf when England were in the final as he couldn't bring himself to watch them win and the mainly English audience just roared with laughter as they knew it was just sporting rivalry. Scots used to laugh at the likes of Mick Channon and Alan Ball who detested losing to Scotland and openly showed it. Now you have all these celeb Scots getting quizzed over whether they support England or not and no doubt they are brow beaten into saying "oh yes of course" in case of media or internet reaction against them. It ain't healthy. England has about 50 odd million supporters anyway so why on earth some people think they need any more baffles me. Maybe in Denis Law's day the English public in general were more confident about themselves??

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:14 PM

I never understood how there could be a "team GB" supposed to be representing the UK, of which the island of Great Britain is only part.

This would have been the appropriate flag for "team GB"

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 08:14 PM

I never understood how there could be a "team GB" supposed to be representing the UK, of which the island of Great Britain is only part.

This would have been the appropriate flag for "team GB"

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 06:57 PM

If England failed to qualify for the World Cup, I personally would support any other home country that got through, but I don't expect anybody else to follow suit.
that seems reasonable

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 06:19 PM

""You are either competing only for England and shouldn't expect and demand support from the other British nations - or you are there competing as England but also for the UK in general.""

WE don't expect that support, but the F**KING stupid Media Pundits haven't yet caught on to the fact that they don't speak for US, only for THEMSELVES!

An England team plays for England, and a Brish team plays for Britain.

If England failed to qualify for the World Cup, I personally would support any other home country that got through, but I don't expect anybody else to follow suit.

In the Rugby Union Six Nations Cup, I would definitely cheer for any home team playing against France or Italy! What idiot let them join the Home Internationals anyway? :-)LOL

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:31 PM

I believe in the English nation and the United Nations, with eco-travel and fair-trade (and sporting competitions) between them.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 06:02 PM

"Now, don't be disingenuous, please, Allan"

I'm not. I was actually making a point though trying to do it in a light hearted way. I know very well that at football England compete as England. The fact remains though that Scots are often quizzed on TV and in the media as to if they are going to support England and if they say no then they are accused of being small minded or bigoted and we are told that we should be supporting the other British team. The English nation (I know I'm making a wide sweep) can't have it both ways. You are either competing only for England and shouldn't expect and demand support from the other British nations - or you are there competing as England but also for the UK in general.

I'm not making the above point specifically towards yourself but there is a section of the London media which routinely has witchhunts against non-english supporting scots in the lead up to World Cups etc and there is even a trawling of Scotland specifically looking for anti-English sentiment etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:13 PM

pomp and circumstance, the childishness of the owl of the remove, the pedantry and nit picking, carry on.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 04:50 PM

Now, don't be disingenuous, please, Allan. You know perfectly well it depends on which particular competition one is engaged in or referring to. In some competitions, e.g., the FIFA World Cup, the constituent countries of the UK enter separate teams; in others, e.g. the Olympic Games, a team is entered to represent Great Britain as a whole; in the recent Rugby Union test series v Australia, the team was called The British and Irish Lions.

It is the organisers of the competitions who decide on these entities, not the participating nations. So that in the first named above, the team who went furthest represented solely England, Scotland, Wales, N Ireland not having got beyond the qualifying stages.; in the others, not so.

Nothing to do with damned if do or don't; and don't pretend you didn't know all this.

It is all better, however you slice it, than the Americans calling the knockout comptition of a game that no-one else plays "The World Series"!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:57 PM

Seems we are damned if we do and damned if we don't! In the run ups to recent World Cups some Scots in public life are questioned on TV as to if they will be supporting England - after all we should seemingly be supporting the team representing Britain. You are critised as being small minded and maybe even bigoted if you don't support England. Andy Murray is reviled in some section of the press and receives personal hate male because he jokes that he isn't supporting England. Then we are told by others that England don't represent Britain - they just represent England. Which is it please?

"We're representing Britian and we've got to do or die
England cannae dae it cos they didnae qualify".....Andy Cameron :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:14 PM

""I wasn't born the day the day Alf Ramsey's British team won the FIFA World Cup,""

Alf Ramsey's ENGLISH team won the '66 FIFA World Cup.

Since there were Scots, Welsh and Irish teams entered for the competition, none of whom progressed past the group matches, there was no British or UK team.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:02 PM

""I cringed a bit when I saw Alex Salmond wave the Saltire behind Cameron but then as that flag was banned at the Olympics and Cameron ensured that Scottish winners were wrapped in the Union flag, I just smiled!""

Try blaming Cameron for what he actually controls, and not what is not his doing.

The team for the Olympics is Team GB, and the flag is the Union Flag.

That is the decision of the International Olympic Committee, not David Cameron.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 11:39 AM

""Who WAS the British Gentleman who was champion 77 years ago? His name seems quite forgotten, at least in reports I seen or read. Give him his last hurrah...name him...he will now be even more obscure (except to diehard fans of the game) than before.""

FORGOTTEN?
OBSCURE?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!

""Frederick John "Fred" Perry (18 May 1909 – 2 February 1995) was a championship-winning English tennis and table tennis player who won 10 Majors including eight Grand Slams and two Pro Slams. Perry won three consecutive Wimbledon Championships from 1934 to 1936 and was World No. 1 or Co-No. 1 for four years in total. Prior to Andy Murray in 2013, Perry was the last British player to win the men's Wimbledon championship, in 1936[2] and was the last British player to win a Men's singles Grand Slam title until Andy Murray won the 2012 US Open.""

You can still buy Fred Perry sports bags and racquet covers 77 years after his last win at Wimbledon.



I wouldn't mind being that forgotten in 77 years time.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 07:26 AM

I often have tennis on IN THE BACKGROUND as I go through my repertoire of English songs because, frankly, I rarely hear anything new; my "Tennis Tips To Try"

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 01:23 AM

Even dear old Dan Maskell, every now & then exclaiming how "remarkable" everything was, was preferable to the present unrelenting stream of drivel...

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 12:27 AM

Indeed not v radio-friendly; and the tv commentators have far too much to say. A season or two ago, a lot of the matches on the red button had no commentators, and I used to seek those out as much more enjoyable. But, alas, they seem to put two or three witterers on every court nowadays, more's the pity. It's a game where one can see perfectly well for oneself what is happening so long as there are some line close-ups and a running onscreen score. Commentary is entirely otiose, seems purely a bit of 'jobs-for-the-girls-and-boys'. Sometimes I mute the set while a point is being played; but a certain amount of atmosphere is lost if the sound of ball on racket is not present. I think it would be nice if some sort of 'commentary-free' option were available.

The same applies up to a point in other sport. Football matches are often hard to follow because the commentators will josh all the time It was the introduction of the inevitable unnecessary second commentator that screwed things up ~ more jobs for the boys! Wouldn't it be nice if they went back to just one, drawing attention to finer points but otherwise just shutting the hell up! Ah me! one can dream, I suppose!

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 07:13 PM

I used to listen to Wimbledon on Radio 5 whilst driving and the commentators chattered endlessly often just silly waffling. That was ok on radio as let's face it tennis itself isn't very radio friendly. So two points. I think they often do speak too much now treating TV as if it is radio. Secondly they often joke and make daft little remarks about each other. If a commentator did make the remark (and no-one else seems to have heard it) then it is possible that Boris or someone simply made a joke saying "you know the Queen takes the profit from this". It is absurd to suggest that something is the truth just because a TV pundit says it. So not saying that GSS made up the remark but maybe just that a little quip is being treated as gospel truth. If the monarch takes 20% of the profit from Wimbledon then surely there would be some way of proving that or backing it up on the net? As I said you can't prove a negative. The AELTC's site doesn't put disclaimer at the botton saying "the monarch does not receive profit from the championships" :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:46 PM

Simon Reed who, I think, played county cricket before becoming a commentator on several sports is also quite good; as is the ultra-enthusiastic (top 100, I think) Chris Bradman - both mainly on Eurosport but on the Beeb for Wimbledon. I mentioned McEnroe in a poem called "Serious Serving".

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:15 PM

Disagree about McEnroe being a good commentator. He is responsible for the vile habit, which is spreading among even the best of them [e.g Becker], of going on talking right thru the point. I once had a letter published in Times Sports Letters about it, which led to his being much ribbed by his colleagues on the day it appeared, denouncing his having prevented our appreciation of a match by going on&on&on&on right thru almost an entire game, about how the offside rule in soccer was impossible to understand. He often has much of intelligence to say about the play, agreed; but he really does seem to suffer from an unconquerably conceited conviction that the reason we have all switched on is for the sole & express purpose of listening to him talk.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:08 PM

...which at the moment no-one but you in the entire universe appears to have heard...

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:08 PM

"I am only repeating what i heard, mgm go and take the commentator to task"

That would appear to indicate who he or she was, not carried out.

John McEnroe is a cracking good commentator. And the game is far less enjoyable than it was when he was on the court. Though a lot of that is down to technology spoiling things.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:05 PM

No, Dick ~~ YOU take it up with them, and get them to confirm,

if you can!

that you didn't imagine, or make up, or misapprehend, or in some other strange way come up with this piece of self-evidently idiotic BUM!

At the moment, I regret to point out, you are simply persisting in making a complete fool of yourself.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 04:59 PM

it is not my problem if a commentator makes a statement that has neither been proven or unproven. perhaps he meant the queen was paid before profits , how am i to know, take it up with the BBC

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:27 PM

...also knowledgeable former top-20 Englishman Mark Cox.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:07 PM

The other presenters on the BBC TV coverage apart from Mcenroe were ex-British tennis players, Sue Barker, Andrew Castle and Tim Henman as well as Boris Becker. If you check out the All England Lawn Tennis Club website it gives the info in regard to 90% of the profits going to the LTA and the rest being retained by the AELTC itself. Really you can't expect people to prove a negative. If someone is claiming 20% of the profit is retained personally by the monarch then it is up to that person to show something to back up this claim!

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 01:55 PM

Re McEnroe, the BBC give a lot of respect and, probably, tax-payers money for someone who was so disrespectful to lines-people and ball KIDS.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:54 PM

ok who were the male commentators during this years wimbledon for the bbc, one was john mcenroe, i dont know the others.
q, comment about the queen is not proven to be incorrect.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:51 PM

Oh, dear- a bible beater enters the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:45 PM

...monarchies are blasphemies - the only one born to rule is a prophet of God - Poem 225 of 230: AFTER PSALM 118:9 AND MATTHEW 4:8-10

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:06 PM

Comment about the Queen obviously incorrect.

Unless you name sources anything you say is suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 08:02 AM

No, of course not, Dick. I was being facetious obviously. But you have not identified the commentator or the context [which match?, e.g]; and I cannot but help thinking you must have misheard, or misinterpreted, some throwaway remark or something. It is obvious that the Queen [see above citations] does not gain a single penny of personal income in any way from these championships.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 07:44 AM

Treasonous, ha ha.
I am only repeating what i heard, mgm go and take the commentator to task, you are being ridiculous, do you think they are going to extradite me for so called treason

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 06:58 AM

Further to GSS, whether for food or keeping pigeons from pooping on lawn tennis players, I think falconry functions via starvation, and is illegal in many nations.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 04:01 AM

After tax 90% of the Wimbledon profit is now given to the Lawn Tennis Association for the development in tennis throughout the country. The remaining 10% is kept by the All England Club. Seemingly this arrangement was agreed in 2008 and is to remain in place until the 2050s. In return for the 90% of the profit the LTA has given their 50% share of the Wimbledon ground and facilities back to the AELTC.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:39 AM

Which commentator, Dick? In what context? What makes you think him any sort of authority on how the All-England Club disposes of its profits? What steps have you taken to verify his accuracy in this particular, when it is well-known that the Queen refuses ever to patronise any organisation in which she has any personal financial interest? You say "I have no reason to think that what he said was not true" -- why?

You seem to me on very dodgy ground with regard to such a damaging, and perhaps treasonous, assertion.

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:31 AM

The patron of the ALL ENGLAND LAWN TENNIS AND CROQUET CLUB is Queen Elizabeth II, perhaps that is the explanation.
on a different subject, there is apparently a trained harris hawk that is employed to keep the pigeons away and thus preventing them from crapping on the tennis players

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:24 AM

guest ed, I was listening to the wimbledon commentary and one of the commentators made the following remark, the queen takes twenty per cent of wimbledon profits,I have no reason to think that what he said was not true.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 05:59 PM

The confusion over the new ‪‎Wimbledon‬ champions nationality occurs elsewhere in the sporting world, where an English boy, for example, can hope to play (perhaps managed by a citizen of a nation they may compete against) football for England/Great Britain, rugby-league for England/Great Britain, rugby-union for England/British Isles, athletics for England/U.K., golf for England/Europe, cricket for a combined England and Wales, or tennis for Great Britain - but Wimbledon is still The All England Lawn ‪Tennis‬ Championships…Anyone for friendly-rival republics?! (From http://davidfranks.blogspot.co.uk/p/messages.html)

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 05:17 PM

I don't understand the idea that Fred Perry is forgotten. The BBC rattles on about him non-stop so it would be just about impossible for British tennis fans at least to not know about him. I'd imagine that as far as athletes from the 1930s go he must be just about the best known one there is. Perhaps apart from some famous footballers.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 01:50 PM

"And Andy Murray DID used to talk like a Scottish nationalist - mentioning supporting opponents of England's football team, e.g."

In the first instance whether a Scot supports the English football team or not has nothing to do with politics. It is a sporting rivalry which long predates modern Scottish nationalism.

Murray didn't actually make anti-England statements. Both Murray and Tim Henman were being interviewed and as it was the run up to a World Cup the inteviewer asked Henman if he was looking forward to watching England. Henman joked that he was but that Andy wouldn't be looking forward to watching Scotland as they hadn't qualified. Murray laughed and said he would enjoy watching anyone who was playing England. It was just young guys having some friendly banter. Other journalists and people on the net turned it into a story where Murray was anti-English, some claiming that he'd even bought a Paraguay shirt, despite both Henman and the original journalist repeting that it was only banter. Murray received quite a bit of bad press and even hate male which resulted in him ever since being extremely guarded when being interviewed.

As to his comments re the referendum as far as I know he is a don't know as he has commented that he doesn't have enough information to make a decision. Though as he lives in Surrey he won't have a vote anyway! But reading between the lines it seems he is neither a committed nationalist nor unionist.

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: GUEST,Ed
Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:48 PM

the queen makes a lot of money out of wimbledon

Eh??? How do you work that out?

From here

"Funds generated by The Championships, less tax, are used by the LTA to develop tennis in Great Britain.
In December 2008, the Club and the LTA agreed that the LTA to benefit from receiving 90 per cent of any distributable financial surplus resulting from The Championships until at least 2053."

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: The Sandman
Date: 12 Jul 13 - 01:13 PM

mean while the queen makes a lot of money out of wimbledon

Subject: RE: BS: Wimbledon 2013
From: s&r
Date: 12 Jul 13 - 11:58 AM

I was born on the day that English cricketer Len Hutton set a world record for the highest individual Test innings of 364, during a Test match against Australia. It doesn't make me English or Australian. Andy Murray babbled as a child. What's your point? Please stop using Latin abbreviations.

Stu