Andy Murray

[AndyM]

So, the dream is over. But how many were really dreaming ? And about what ?

[Des]

Perhaps if you'd spent a little less time on the forum and a bit more time practising, you would have won.

Come on, Tim!

[AndyM]

I think most would agree that the attempt by some newspapers to call the irredeemably stolid and charisma-evacuated Mr Henman 'Tiger Tim' ranks as the most risible such attempt ever made.

In our house we called him Tadpole Tim.

[Con Murphy]

No Federer or Nadal. It's like Man Utd did a Devon Loch, taking Chelsea out in the process. The dream's back on.

[Des]

Whooooooooooooo! Come on Tim!

[Philellinas]

Not so fast, gentlemen. There are still two considerable opponents in Murray's way: David Ferrer and Novak Djokovic, who may have peaked a little early against Roger Federer. [I wonder why Djokovic is called a Serbian by the BBC. Surely he's a Serb. Likewise Carlos Tevez of Manchester City is often referred to by BBC footie commentators as "the Argentine". No, that's the country. Don't get me started on misuse of modal verbs (might/may especially)]. Rant over. Back to the tennis...If Murray does win this major it will put an end to all those tedious discussions speculating on when or if he'll do it.

[Hugh Weldon]

Phil

misuse of modal verbs (might/may especially)

I thought these were subjunctives - 'may have peaked' indicates doubt or uncertainty whether he has, and the mood is thus subjunctive. Your more confident assertion 'it will put an end to...' is on the other hand indicative. Aren't modals things like should, could, would etc. I merely ask as a non-tennis fan but ever curious about language, you appear to have a firmer grasp on these matters.

[AndyM]

Djokovic looks like Beaker from The Muppets.

[Philellinas]

Phil

misuse of modal verbs (might/may especially)

I thought these were subjunctives - 'may have peaked' indicates doubt or uncertainty whether he has, and the mood is thus subjunctive. Your more confident assertion 'it will put an end to...' is on the other hand indicative. Aren't modals things like should, could, would etc. I merely ask as a non-tennis fan but ever curious about language, you appear to have a firmer grasp on these matters.

At the risk of hijacking another thread, Hugh...My terminology may (uncertainty thereby implied) not be correct. My TEFL bible, Michael Swan's "Practical English Usage", is not to hand and my halcyon daze of teaching English in Thessaloniki is but a distant memory. What I have in mind is the confusion between may, might and could. John Murray and Alan Green, whose commentaries on Radio 5 I otherwise enjoy, are the worst offenders. For example:-
"Gary Lineacre may have scored " suggests uncertainty (did the ball cross the line?) or we are waiting for some adjudication.
What John and Alan meant to say was "Gary Lineacre could have scored", i.e. he had the opportunity to score but fluffed it (I know how he feels). This is the burden of my message. I now hand you back to Melbourne and some inconsequential tennis match.

[AndyM]

Lineker, not Linacre, if we're talking about precision.

And go Murray!!

[AndyM]

Once again - go Murray!!!

[AndyM]

Buggeration.

[David Flower]

from what I saw Murray was never at the races today. But surely it's unfair that one finalist gets a full 24 hours more recuperation time than the other before the final. TV scheduling is no doubt to blame

[AndyM]

Something definitely in that, David. Mind you, Djokovic was so on fire today he'd have beaten Nadal, Federer, Sampras, Borg.......

[Des]

Ridiculous how this crimps my day a bit. I'm not even a big tennis fan.