Prologue:
All the characters and events in this blog are not fictitious. The
perspective brought forward throughout this blog is solely mine and I am purely
responsible for it. However, I mean or intend no negative or disparaging
opinions or views on any one or any event.
Ever since I watched the youtube video of Roger pulling off the impossible and
unthinkable exploits in the game of Tennis for one of the matches in
Cincinatti, 2015, I wanted to write this blog.
But, due to unforeseeable events like my nasty accident and full bed
rest, I completely forgot about Roger's magnificent red hot shot. The spark was
ignited again when we were having a conversation in office during our lunch
hours where the spotlight turned on Fedex's highlight tactic.
I am not going to delve deep into the achievements and laurels that this
master genius has passionately accomplished in this wonderful sport. Everyone
knows that he is surely going down in tennis history as one of the best in the
business. So, instead of tiring and boring you with his undisputed and
unparalleled records and feats, this blog is going to be exclusively focused
and dedicated on his new addition to his demolition arsenal - Sneak Attack By
Roger (SABR).
SABR, to put it simply, is when the server tosses the ball and looks up
in the air, Roger advances aggressively towards the service box and half
volleys deep in the court during the serve itself..The server is caught off
guard completely as they are still in the process of recovering their balance
from the serve. Then, it is a matter of time before the Swiss Maestro volleys
and dispatches it for a winner. Sound very simple on paper. Isn't it? But, the
implementation and execution of this nimble shot is highly tricky, massively
risky and has a lot of uncertainty enveloping the point to be a potential
winner. This is the salient technical and background of SABR.
During my lunchtime conversation, one of my friend brought in an analogy
that SABR is equivalent to the abhorrent underarm delivery bowled by Trevor
Chappel (TC) against New Zealand and that SABR should be banned from Tennis as
it gives Roger an undue advantage over his opponent.
I felt both the situations are mutually exclusive events
and cannot be compared at all under any circumstances. If that delivery were
bowled in the right manner then the batsman may have hit or may not have hit
the ball for a six to be on the winning side or losing side. But, it still gave
the batsman an equal opportunity to win, a level playing field to compete
rightfully. However, on captain Greg Chappel's deceitful and dishonorable advice, TCs'
abominable delivery simply killed and butchered the spirit of the gentleman's
game. IMHO, it was morally wrong.
In fact, I had a similar incident in my childhood. When I was in 4th
standard where I did not understand right and wrong, I came up with the bright
idea that as soon as I deliver the ball, I start appealing
vociferously thereby absolutely distracting and confusing the batsman and then
making him out without even striking the ball. I implemented this strategy very
selectively and effectively when I used to play with my friends and won many
matches. But, as days progressed, I realized that its better to lose honorably
than win by unscrupulous and deceitful means. I understood what I did was very
wrong then and that I had played unfairly for a mere victory during my innocent
and carefree childhood days.
Unlike Greg Chappel's incident or my own personal experience, Fedex's
SABR involves a very high degree of risk and uncertainty when he has to really
step up and half-volley a 110 mph serve. His reaction time is extremely minimal
and the chances of the success of the tactic is only touch and go. On the other
hand, TC's underarm delivery, though it is also within the rules of the game,
but ethically, morally and rightfully, it gives no scope at all for the batsman
to hit a boundary. It is exactly similar to the way I made the batsman out
by simply shouting and screaming in their faces. The equality for a
competitive win is comprehensively nullified and the balance is inordinately
tilted only in Aussie's favor or my favor.
If a comparison has to be established with Cricket then SWITCH HIT would
be an ideal example. Kevin Pietersen (KP) was deplored and denounced by the
cricketing fraternity for executing the shot. I think it was against some ODI
vs NZ when he played it for the 1st time. Switch hit involves a considerable
amount of risk to the batsman and the result can go either way. Likewise,
SABR's result can also go either way unless properly executed by the player.
Federer was not only creative but also morally right when he is
employing the SABR tactic. It is well within the rules and most importantly, it
does not demean or destroy but upholds majestically the spirit and integrity of
the game.
Epilogue:
Fedex shows no signs of relenting and his improvisations keep his
repertoire rich and flexible. Being a very traditional player in his early
days, it is really heart warming to see this aging yet agile superstar to play
so exciting because of his innate natural ability to think spontaneously and
creatively thus showing to classes of all masses that age is just a mere
number.
The master proves his genius...yet again!
No comments:
Post a Comment