tennis-forum.net
Promoting tennis discussion.

Main
Date: 21 Jan 2009 10:45:47
From: Pedro Dias
Subject: Order Of Play, 1/21
I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
broadcast viewership.

But...

Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
incomprehensible. To me, anyway.

Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?




 
Date: 22 Jan 2009 09:15:53
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
Pedro Dias wrote:

I think you mean 1/22 (or, better, 22/1)

> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
> broadcast viewership.

That's true up to a point. I'm sure there's a degree of variety and fairness to
players involved too.

> But...
>
> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
> incomprehensible.

A mixed bag is forecast today: hot, humid, windy, cloudy, and maybe
rainy/thundery. Nadal likes sun and heat, but he might have a closed roof. I
think it was 2007 when Nadal never saw daylight in his three or four matches
due to scheduling and rain.





 
Date: 22 Jan 2009 07:33:44
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
Pedro Dias wrote:
> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
> broadcast viewership.
>
> But...
>
> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>
> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?


We haven't had a good look at Murray yet this yr & Rafa already played a
night match.



 
Date: 21 Jan 2009 20:02:25
From: Dr. GroundAxe
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
"Pedro Dias" <pedrodias@snip.net > wrote in message
news:09381cb6-0854-45bd-a3e8-5e79fcfce0e9@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
> broadcast viewership.
>
> But...
>
> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>
> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?



More like the presence of a massive expat British population in Australia.



  
Date: 22 Jan 2009 09:02:49
From: DavidW
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
Dr. GroundAxe wrote:
> "Pedro Dias" <pedrodias@snip.net> wrote in message
> news:09381cb6-0854-45bd-a3e8-5e79fcfce0e9@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
>> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
>> broadcast viewership.
>>
>> But...
>>
>> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
>> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise,
>> scheduling Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
>> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>>
>> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?
>
> More like the presence of a massive expat British population in
> Australia.

That's true, but I doubt it was a consideration. Nadal has already had a night
match.





 
Date: 21 Jan 2009 21:28:18
From: Sakari Lund
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:45:47 -0800 (PST), Pedro Dias
<pedrodias@snip.net > wrote:

>I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
>perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
>broadcast viewership.
>
>But...
>
>Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
>substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
>Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
>incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>
>Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?

No, they just don't want to give the night matches to the same players
all the time. First round, it was Federer and Nadal. Second round,
logically it would have been Djokovic and Murray, but as it happens,
it is Tomic and Murray. And now that I think about it, they will
certainly put Federer - Safin at night, so Djokovic will get a day
match again.


  
Date: 22 Jan 2009 07:39:30
From: Whisper
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
Sakari Lund wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 10:45:47 -0800 (PST), Pedro Dias
> <pedrodias@snip.net> wrote:
>
>> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
>> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
>> broadcast viewership.
>>
>> But...
>>
>> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
>> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
>> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
>> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>>
>> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?
>
> No, they just don't want to give the night matches to the same players
> all the time. First round, it was Federer and Nadal. Second round,
> logically it would have been Djokovic and Murray, but as it happens,
> it is Tomic and Murray. And now that I think about it, they will
> certainly put Federer - Safin at night, so Djokovic will get a day
> match again.


Yes, we always like to have the match most interesting to us on Prime
time to boost ratings. Djoke will get his turn when there are no really
interesting matches at same time.





 
Date: 21 Jan 2009 11:25:33
From: Professor X
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
On Jan 21, 6:45=A0pm, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net > wrote:
> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
> broadcast viewership.
>
> But...
>
> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>
> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?

1) Maybe it's because Granollers is ranked over 50 places higher than
Karanusic?
2) As aboce poster said, maybe they are trying to be fair by
alternating night sessions between nadal/murray djoker/fed e.t.c ---
Having said that, that isn't very fair on anyone who isn't part of the
so-called "big four" no?
3) Maybe they are pressurised by the BBC, because the night session
slot means the match will be on about 10.30 AM here instead of anytime
between Midnight and 7 AM.
4) And yes, whatever they might say, the Aussies love us Brits really.
After all, all Australians are is just the brits who were no longer
socially acceptable here, so we sent them over there ;-)
Of course, we are far superior at sport to australia, you only have to
look at

1) The Beijing olympics medals table, I think we were above them then,
no?
2) Tennis - we have a slam contender, they don't.
3) Cricket - we will win back ashes this year.
4) Football - They completely suck at that
5) Snooker - That's our sport that is.
6) Darts - 14 time world champion Phil Taylor
7) Rugby Union, England have been in last 2 RWC finals, where were
Australia?
8) Golf - We have about 9/10 players in world top 50, they only have
one i think.
9) Boxing - Hatton, Calzaghe, Haye e.t.c
10) F1 - Lewis Hamilton world champion.

Yup. aus are a pretty sub-standard sporting nation.

They even still have our flag on their's! lol.


 
Date: 21 Jan 2009 10:59:28
From: Lax
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
On Jan 21, 1:45=A0pm, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net > wrote:
> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
> broadcast viewership.
>
> But...
>
> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>
> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?

They're trying to be fair by alternating Murray/Nadal.


  
Date: 21 Jan 2009 21:20:00
From:
Subject: Re: Order Of Play, 1/21
Lax <Lax.Clarke@gmail.com > writes:

> On Jan 21, 1:45 pm, Pedro Dias <pedrod...@snip.net> wrote:
>> I understand that scheduling has nothing to do with merit, it's about
>> perceived public interest, in terms of butts in the seats, and of
>> broadcast viewership.
>>
>> But...
>>
>> Is the Australian tennis fans' interest in Andy Murray really
>> substantially higher than the interest in Nadal? Otherwise, scheduling
>> Nadal in the hottest slot of the afternoon is just about
>> incomprehensible. To me, anyway.
>>
>> Is it some kind of Anglophone/Commonwealth solidarity thing?
>
> They're trying to be fair by alternating Murray/Nadal.

Ya, seems so. Still, I would have put González-Cañas in the night
slot. They both have done their share of running in the 1st R and look
to have a lot of work ahead.