[Slumpy]

(Original post by goape)
I know this is an old thread...but LMAO at the people who think success is an excuse for arrogance.

Success is certainly an excuse for confidence. And false modesty is no better than arrogance.

(Original post by tufc)
He's about as arrogant as Wayne Rooney having sex with Cheryl Cole.
What other sportsman would wear a jacket with the number of grand slams he'd won out onto the court, before the match that would actually win him the final one of that number? I think he's a disgrace, and I can't wait until Nadal beats his grand slam record.

As I recall, the jacket with that number was in the bag, in case he won. Although I seem to remember that being a sponsor thing, though I guess he probably had some input. Bit of a dick move though.

[goape]

(Original post by Slumpy)
Success is certainly an excuse for confidence. And false modesty is no better than arrogance.



As I recall, the jacket with that number was in the bag, in case he won. Although I seem to remember that being a sponsor thing, though I guess he probably had some input. Bit of a dick move though.

Confidence...absolutely. Arrogance...no.

[tehFrance]

(Original post by MC armani)
'Brace yourself for this Federer quote: "It's always me who's going to dictate play & decide how the outcome is going to be. If I play well I will most likely win in the score or beat [Nadal]; if I'm not playing so well, that's when he wins."'

Anyway what do you guys think about this comment?

I think it is what a confident person says, he even admits at the end if he does not play well he will most likely lose, how is that arrogance? arrogance is saying he would win no matter what.

Edit: I would also like to point out that the majority the British call arrogant are intact non-British or Non-European... outside of this island we like to big ourselves up slightly, it is not arrogance but confidence.

[Sagacious]

Does it matter if he's arrogant? He's not trying to win a personality contest, he's trying to win a grand slam.

Look at the absolute greats;

Floyd Mayweather, Muhammad Ali, Cristiano Ronaldo, Michael Schumacher etc...

The truth is, they couldn't care less how people think of them, they just want to win.

(Original post by tehFrance)
arrogance is saying he would win no matter what.

I would disagree with this to be honest. Look at Floyd Mayweather, he says he's unstoppable and too right. He's flawless.

[Chief Wiggum]

(Original post by tufc)
What other sportsman would wear a jacket with the number of grand slams he'd won out onto the court, before the match that would actually win him the final one of that number? .

That didn't happen. He wore the jacket after he won the match.

[green.tea]

Wishes he was ronnie o'sullivan.

[tufc]

(Original post by Slumpy)
Success is certainly an excuse for confidence. And false modesty is no better than arrogance.

False modesty is always better than arrogance, simply because it displays an element of magnanimity. It's a mark of respect - like staying silent during a period of silence, even if you don't care about whomever's died


As I recall, the jacket with that number was in the bag, in case he won. Although I seem to remember that being a sponsor thing, though I guess he probably had some input. Bit of a dick move though.[/QUOTE]

Actually, you might be right. But at the end of the day, he still had it made before the game, specifically for that match. That kind of behaviour is just distasteful, and it demonstrates that he expected to win. There's a big difference between confidence and plain arrogance.

This is a very good article on his arrogance.

[Chief Wiggum]

(Original post by tufc)

Actually, you might be right. But at the end of the day, he still had it made before the game, specifically for that match. That kind of behaviour is just distasteful, and it demonstrates that he expected to win. There's a big difference between confidence and plain arrogance.

This is a very good article on his arrogance.

Federer didn't personally "have it made" before the game. Nike made it and it was handed to him on court after he won. He said in an interview afterwards that it was a surprise from Nike.

[tufc]

(Original post by Chief Wiggum)
Federer didn't personally "have it made" before the game. Nike made it and it was handed to him on court after he won. He said in an interview afterwards that it was a surprise from Nike.

And? What's more important is that he wore it in front of Andy Roddick after beating him, before making an acceptance speech that made almost no mention of how well Roddick had played, and instead focused on making excuses for his loss to Nadal the year before.

[Chief Wiggum]

(Original post by tufc)
And? What's more important is that he wore it in front of Andy Roddick after beating him, before making an acceptance speech that made almost no mention of how well Roddick had played, and instead focused on making excuses for his loss to Nadal the year before.

I don't recall him saying any excuses for his 2008 loss in the 2009 post-final speech. Did he not just say something like "I know how you feel, I've had some tough losses here myself such as last year."?

Perhaps I'm forgetting something though.

[konvictz0007]

Regardless if Nadal beats Federer's amount of grand slams, he will always be regarded as a clay court specialist as he has only won 4 grand slams outside Roland Garos.

And I strongly agree with Roger's quote there. He has the best game play in the history of tennis, his ability to work his opponent in the rallies, draw him in, hit the correct right flatter winner at the right time is why he is what he is.

If you look at murray, nadal and djokovic's game, it is just intense base line rallies with a lot of top spin, it looks impressive to the amateur but one must consider their games are high margin so you are going to get longer rallies.

This is further evident by examining performances indoors like in the world tour finals in east london. Indoors there exists no extra factors like wind, rain so it is only pure tennis. The high topspin game has been showed to be ineffective as Federer has dominated that in the past few years, shows his game under the right conditions is absolutely unsurpassable.

[beepbeeprichie]

Federer is an annoying ****. Also ' Roger' is the worst first name ever.

[Student2806]

Federer in full flow probably is going to beat anyone on the other side of the net. He's the best all-round player the sport has ever seen.
I don't see how stating fact is arrogance.

[Alkain1607]

(Original post by Student2806)
Federer in full flow probably is going to beat anyone on the other side of the net. He's the best all-round player the sport has ever seen.
I don't see how stating fact is arrogance.

Federer was in full flow 2008- yet lost to Nadal. Never won a French open? He clearluy is not the greatest player the game has ever seen. Nadal is a much better player, as is Djokovic.

[EffieFlowers]

(Original post by turbocharged)
The guy is pure arrogance, have you seen those white jackets he wears as he walks onto the court?

What's wrong with the jackets? If he wants to look nice then there's nothing wrong with that..

I think Federer actually has a lot of humility about him in interviews, yes he hasn't got that ridiculous British modesty where you have to deny your talent even if you are the greatest and anyone who is confident is 'up themselves' and arrogant, I think that kin
d of attitude is ridiculous.

[Slumpy]

(Original post by Alkain1607)
Federer was in full flow 2008- yet lost to Nadal. Never won a French open? He clearluy is not the greatest player the game has ever seen. Nadal is a much better player, as is Djokovic.

I'd rate Djok as not as good as Fed on grass for sure, maybe on hard, probably not on clay. Rafa is clearly unbelievably good also, but I think his game matches quite neatly vs Federer for him.

[silent ninja]

Federer's attire coming on court tells you a lot about him. It exudes a lack of humility and he just looks like a nob. More importantly, he is totally unaware as though everything revolves around him. That shot of Roddick and Federer going on court is classic. What a douche lol

[Alkain1607]

I think it's interesting because the style of Nadal and Federer are so different. Nadal is about his unique forehand, physique. But Federer has an amazing backhand with his slices. So for forehand I'd say Nadal, back hand Fed. Skill probably Roger- but for sheer determination and strength- Raffa. I think that's the nice part about the rivalry, they're so contrasting. i.e. Fed likes fast court game- Nadal doesn't.

[419]

No doubt he is an arrogant prick. But I've got no problem with that. You can't be a top sport man nor have achieve what he has without been arrogant.

What annoys me though is when his fans try to say otherwise or come out with whatever he can be arrogant cos his won so much balh blah blah and then accuse Murray of been arrogant and not smile. Hypocracy.

[Chief Wiggum]

(Original post by Alkain1607)
Federer was in full flow 2008- yet lost to Nadal. Never won a French open? He clearluy is not the greatest player the game has ever seen. Nadal is a much better player, as is Djokovic.

If you don't even know that Federer has won the French Open, I'm not sure how you expect anyone to take you seriously...