Quotable Quotes: Pat Cash is no compatriot to me.
Don’t get me wrong – you can trash talk Roger all you like. Most likely, I’ll hit you with a diplomatic “we must agree to disagree” claptrap while thinking you’re so full of hate that it’s made you blind.
But this coming from a former player, commentator and one-slam wonder induced manic laughter in me.
Read here: that pile of turd
I’ve heard the “weak era” theory often enough. But for Cash to propose that we judge Federer’s “quality” by what he accomplishes in the next 3 years – between the ages of 28 to 31 – rather than what he achieved during his peak is just a whole new level of idiocy.
But before you all explode with anger and spam him on twitter, you might want to read what Cash wrote on Serena Williams before the 2007 Australian Open. Clickey and count it as a blessing in disguise that he decided to unleash the voodoo on Fed this time.
Having said that, I hope Roger kicks all these so-called experts’ ass all the way into outer space in 2 weeks’ time.
13 responses to “Quotable Quotes: Pat Cash is no compatriot to me.”
Leave a reply to Mia Cancel reply
Who the hell is dootsiez?
Melbournian lawyer. Blogger. Unapologetic Federer tragic.
Need to contact me? Pop me a comment here, or find me on twitter or through the contact form above the header.
Go on, I don't bite. =)
All I need is a picket fence ... 
Eeek! What an idiot 😦
Like you said doots, complete pile of turd!!
Always found Cash annoying when he does commentary for BBC around WImby. It opinion doesn’t really count much for me, after all this is the guy who coached Rusedski and Phillypoo.
I am suprised though how hardly anyone has picked Roger for AO but a lot have picked Novak!!
I don’t know who’s worse – Cash, or Simon Reed?!?!?!? !
Mats Wilander, perhaps, should be an addition to the two you mentioned.
Thanks for the post doots. It has to be Simon Reed who is worse. He pretends he knows so much about the game when sometimes he is really off with his facts and he is such an annoying commentator!! Mats Wilander comes close, he is especially annoying when he goes from acting like Federer’s biggest fan to completely criticising him in a really short space of time. Pat Cash’s comments were uncalled for too, I sometimes think these guys are jealous that they didn’t achieve half of what Federer has done and they are determined to put him down at every available opportunity. We’ll wait and see what happens, I think this AO is going to be the most exciting for a while. Roger all the way! 🙂
Yep, they’re just green with envy that they’re not even a fourth of the player that Fed is. In demonizing Fed’s accomplishments, they are also completely dissing a lot of the other players, especially Fed’s generation — Cash has the gall to say Hewitt, Safin, Roddick, Ferreo, Nalbandian et al are not top-shelf.
Mr. One-Slam Wonder, shut up and shove your single slam up your ass!
<>
Isn’t being of a higher standard than the other players part of what makes someone great at what they do? It’s not like Fed was 25 years old winning Jr. Wimbledon.
Pat Cash never struck me as being endowed with enough brains to qualify as being of average intelligence and the fact that people pay him to voice his opinions only speaks volumes of their IQ. If it hadn’t been for a brain cramp by Lendl in the finals or even Edberg in the semis(losing to Lendl on grass?) he wouldn’t even have that one slam which he can dangle everytime his expertise is questioned. From what I read and what I see I believe that I know enough to understand the game in my own way and form my opinions. Ithink everyone who posts here does as well.I don’t need to know what Pat Cash thinks and Isuspect many fans share my view. BS is right most of the experts don’t get even the basic statistics right, considering the fact that it is their job I think it is downright callous and an insult to the fans’ intellect…can you imagine any other professional getting his facts wrong, talking crap and then keeping his job? sorry about the rant guys but some things just tick me off.
I could care less what Cash thinks ergo his opinion doesn’t matter. Really is it Roger’s fault if there aren’t enough players of his standard? He stands apart because he set his own high standards, and won when it mattered despite the players who came and went, the injuries, the doubting, and the criticizing.
Its a pity why some ex-champs likes to mouth on tennis and Federer. Its tough to respect them if they continue to BS 😦
Another idiotic (to me at least!) opinion…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/sport/australian-opens-hyped-up-fortnight-cannot-hide-ugly-truth/story-e6frg7t6-1225820591801
Whether it’s true is probably something the Aussies here could answer better,but I just REALLY didn’t like the tone of the article!
It seems that any massively dominant player is in a Catch-22 situation. If they start to beat everyone, or almost everyone, for a few years, then the rest of the field don’t win anything of note. So they look like they are no good. And then claims that the dominant player has ‘no strong opposition’ start to emerge.
I suspect that if Mr. Cash had had to face the players Federer has had to face, his record would be pretty miserable. And, accordingly, he would be singing the praises of that group, rather than dissing them, and Federer, now.
Well, three years later and with the benefit of hindsight, Pat’s rather caustic comments don’t look so ridiculous. Roger has been going down slowly but surely ever since, and he is currently experiencing his worst season for the last ten years. Old age or new competion? Probably both. Nor is the “weak era” argument entirely unfounded, for it took some years for Rafa to become something more than a “clay specialist” and for Nole to emerge as a first-rate rival. Roger was indeed lucky that during his best years (2004-7), his greatest enemy was the never-better-than-just-good Andy Roddick whom he could beat handsomely. That said, it is unfair to degrade Roger’s genius for that. His unprecedented domination may have been at least partly due to the lack of opponents, but he has nevertheless shown some of the most perfect playing in tennis history. There is no such thing as “the greatest ever”, because times change profoundly and so does the game, hence comparisons between different players from different eras are futile. Still, Roger would have become one of the all-time greats in any era, that’s for sure.