Friday, 26 November 2010

Fedtards Furious Over New SW19 Statue Debuting at O2

Statue of Nadal Holding Slain Head of Fed - A Monument to Anti-Doping

"Cheaters Never Prosper" by Takashi Murakami
London (November 26, 2010)
By Nicola Hebden

A statue that is due to be showcased at Wimbledon in 2011, is causing an uproar at its unveiling at the O2 in London this past week. The statue of Rafael Nadal, who defeated Roger Federer at SW19 once again this year, is a modern take of a 16th century work by Benvenuto Cellini depicting Perseus holding the head of Medusa. The statue is reportedly "a Monument and tribute to a clean player defeating a notorious doper in recent years after first dealing with adversity and close defeats during his first few years at Wimbledon", according to Japanese artist Takashi Murakami. The sculpture is sardonically entitled "Cheaters Never Prosper".

Nadal won three Grand Slams this year, including Wimbledon for the 2nd straight time he has played it. Although he skipped Wimbledon in 2009 due to a major injury, he also defeated Federer at SW19 in 2008;  completely outclassing a doped up Roger Federer intent on winning on the sacred Tennis grass by any means necessary. The tournament that Federer once claimed as "my tournament" is now dominated by Rafael Nadal. Good has finally defeated evil.

However, outraged Fedtards are due to demonstrate outside the O2 arena tonight blindly defending Roger Federer, the most juiced up doper to ever play at Wimbledon; and this year's astonishing success out of nowhere at the World Tour Finals in London proves the 29 year old star is still doping more than ever for the Year End Championships (YEC). Once again, it is up to Rafael Nadal to save the sport and defeat Federer in the Finals, probably in a much anticipated match on Sunday.

Nadal has cleaned up the sport and has taken out the controversial "juicer and doper" Federer on the big stage time and again, but Fedtard advocate Jenny stated: "Nadal has never looked match sharp! He has never been a skilled player. His yesterday's win is typical of how he wins almost every tournament, every slam! Always struggles but gets through despite his loopy BH and FHs. It was Djoko's job to hit pass him."

"For the second time in two years, the management of the O2 has caused uproar by displaying garish modern art – this time by the Japanese artist Takashi Murakami – in the ornate halls and gardens of the O2." A petition appealing to Chris Kermode, the director of the O2, has been made not to "shatter the image of Roger Federer in Tennis", and has almost 2,000 signatures.

However, a counter movement in support of the statue currently has 50,000 signatures. "The fans are tired of doping cheats like Fed who stick around for decades disgracing the support", Kermode matter of factly stated. "Rafael Nadal is a Champion to the people who are crying out for a clean sport and who have been crying out for this over the hill doper from Switzerland to be out of the game as soon as possible."


  1. Federer is being humiliated by Murakami! Where is the link to the petition to take down the statue?

  2. ballerina is long overdue receiving a spanking at the hands of his nightmare's looking like the spartan is destined to win this WTF shit by beating ballerina.......

  3. Murray will destroy Rafa!


  4. Admittedly Federer is worse than 3 years ago, this court is slower than Shanghai's (though also low-bouncing), & Nadal seems more comfortable on hard courts now, AND Federer's mental issues with Nadal have got worse since he started declining & losing to him everywhere, but even so, it would not surprise me in the least if Federer beat him comfortably.

    As for Murray, I would expect him to beat Nadal here; the only thing giving me pause is his habitual inconsistency from match to match.

  5. Will Fed tank to avoid being embarrassed by Nadal once again despite all the doping Roger is doing? Or does Roger think his doping regime is good enough to win like he did at RG in 2007 when he gave out betting tips?

  6. The IMG betting scandal is linked to the fact that Federer was doing EPO and high altitude training and thought that he slaughter Nadal the way Lance Armstrong was slaughtering the field at the Tour de France.

    Roger's tips on him winning to IMG were based on him being certain that his doping regime was invincible. Regardless, Roger still could not beat the King of Clay. Fed may tank tomorrow.

  7. @Anonymous at 20:10

    Gambling and doping have gone hand in hand forever. Thanks for putting the dots together on why Roger's tips to IMG for RG 2007 are directly connected to his doping regime. People seem to be not seeing the bigger implications of the connection between gambling--->doping.

    Lance Armstrong couldn't lose the TdF because he knew his doping program with Dr. Ferrari was unbeatable. Fed thought the same thing about his game in 2007. He never realized until after that match that NO DOPING PROGRAM was going to give him enough talent to beat Rafa Nadal on clay.

  8. Fed is 2-0 vs. Nadal playing indoors. Fed won both matches in straights. Nadal lost his last 2 finals playing indoors: Paris 2007 vs Nalbandian and Rotterdam 2009 vs. Murray.

    This isn't clay. Fed is going to win.

  9. @Fedtard

    Fed's doping program wasn't strong enough to beat Rafa in 2007 when he told his IMG buddies he was going to win. What makes you think those Super Dope suppositories Stan gave him are going to make him invincible now, Fedtard?

  10. @8======D,

    Mugray is a bad doper. Not even doping and telling the Press he is doping has made him a factor in any of the slams or the WTFs. He is a non-factor even if he is in the Semis.

    GO ANDYY!!!


    Do you want 8=======D???
    stop telling shit about murray he is the greatest tennis player alive!
    and if you disagree come here and suck my dick! BITCHES!!! 8==================D

  13. Rulebook, page 111:

    6) To challenge a line call or overrule, the player must state clearly to the chair umpire his intent to challenge. The chair umpire will (a) reconfirm with the player his intent to challenge; (b) confirm that the player has challenges remaining; and (c) proceed with the electronic review.

    The point should have been replayed, as umpire never sent Nadal's request for a challenge for review. Rafa also hit the ball back in play.

  14. they have soiled the Edberg award forever, Roddick may as well win it next year.

  15. If Bernardes doesn't open his big mouth, Rafa challenges and loses the point, right?

    So why exactly should he be upset that he wasn't allowed to replay it? Someone please explain this to me. He should be stripped of the Stefan Edberg award and it should be given to Roger.

  16. The entire situation is unprecedented. I can Nadal's point of view and I can see Berdych's point of view too. The thing that happened that has never happened before to my recollection, is that Nadal appeared ready to challenge, but didn't challenge because the Umpire called the ball out (not a linesman). So Berdych challenged, and Rafa DID have a play on the ball as he returned the ball in play and Berdych didn't return his ball because the Umpire had called the ball out by that point. I've never seen that sequence of actions before, and either player was apt to throw a fit depending on what the Umpire finally determined it a replay or a winner. Berdych would have surely protested if the Umpire had told them to replay the point. The ATP may need to make a new rule for that scenario.

    Anyway, no point in calling an argument over an unprecedented set of sequences "bad sportsmanship". There is NO rule that says "if a player is about to challenge on a ball they hit back in play, but then the Umpire calls it out before they challenge and then the other player challenges, and it turns out it is in...." lol

    Here is the transcript on the point of views:

    Berdych popped up a backhand that the line judge didn't call out, and Nadal put the ball back into play before raising his hand to signal the shot had been long. At about the same time, chair umpire Carlos Bernardes stepped in to rule the ball out, giving Nadal the point.

    But Berdych challenged the call, and the replay showed the ball to be good, just nicking the baseline. Rather than replaying the point, however, the Brazilian chair umpire gave the point to Berdych, making it 15-30 instead of 30-15.

    When Nadal heard that, he immediately started to argue.

    The normally calm Spaniard first complained to Bernardes, who refused to change his mind. He then approached tournament supervisor Tom Barnes, who was sitting in the front row. Barnes got out of his seat to listen to Nadal's appeal, but still did not reverse the call.

    "I told him he's wrong, I think. He's wrong. That's something unbelievable," Nadal said of his conversation with Barnes. "The point is still playing, and I understand the rule. I understand the challenge, the ball was good. But if I put the ball inside, it's impossible to lose the point."

    The entire episode lasted a couple of minutes, and Berdych blamed Bernardes for the disruption after he announced the score.

    "It just shows how the referee is probably scared of him and just let him to talk with him too long," Berdych said. "I mean, it's not the mistake of Rafa. It's the mistake of the referee. He just needs to show him that it's not like he can do whatever he wants on the court."

    Berdych then missed a pair of forehands to allow Nadal back into the lead, and after the first one Nadal celebrated almost like never before in the middle of a match.

    After going to deuce, Nadal hit a forehand winner down the line and won the game when Berdych returned a backhand wide.

    Berdych, who was making his debut at the season-ending tournament, lost all three of his matches in London. But he was sure he deserved that particular point because he said Nadal challenged the original shot that had been allowed to stand by the line judge.

    "It's pretty simple. He was able to play (it)," Berdych said. "But every time when you just raise your hand, that means that you stop the play. That's the reason why I was just challenging the ball, because he stopped the play, and that's it."

    Nadal said instinct made him raise his hand, but that he never actually asked for the call to be challenged.

    "If I don't see the umpire saying 'out,'" Nadal said, "I'm going to continue the point for sure because it's a big risk for me to say the ball is out."

  17. Truly abominable...disgusting.

    Behold the sportsman of the year!

  18. Hey Fedtard,

    Guess who won the Stefan Edberg award in 2009?

    And Rafa didn't even swear at the umpire. He just disagreed with the call.

    Fedtard, you are just another boring little prat.

  19. This stupid little incident has nothing to do with "sportsmanship". This blown up issue is definitely about Fedtards seething in rage over Nadal's success, and winning the sportsmanship award as voted by his fellow players, and if analyzed beyond reason, it has more to do with bad umpiring.

    GO ANDYY!!!

  21. Tennis is dead. :(

  22. I'm not one to make a "Mark my words" prediction, but I have this bad feeling with the well developed doping programs that exist today, Fed is going to be around for at least another 5 years.

    Agree. Tennis is dead. :(

  23. I love Roger. We fans have to help him. I think someone should set up a site selling miniatures of this statue. All the profits should go to the "Help Get Roger Off The Drugs" foundation. I'll buy ten of them.

    1. arrogant gamesmanship Nadal is doping and cheater.

      sucks nadal

  24. Roger won all the slams by taking drugs
    Federer = The Lance Armstrong of Tennis