Novak Djokovic is a great tennis champion: gracious, personable, funny, polyglot. Exuberant in victory (ripped shirt, bared torso), he is never pouty in defeat. After a loss he is much more Kiplingesque than Roger Federer, despite the latter’s numerous “sportsman” awards.
I just wish I liked watching Djokovic play.
Off the court he’s a prince, on it a robot. An extremely elastic robot, but still a robot. This is the curse of many two-handed backhanders (the reckless Nadal being an exception). But the rest of them just look so mechanical. Murray comes across as mechanical and dense, but what do you expect from a man who claims he never reads? If tennis players received points, like figure skaters, for degree of difficulty, execution, and overall grace, Federer would still be an untouchable #1.
The BCS poster that hung for weeks on the building in downtown Miami told you who was going to win, for it displayed images, several stories high, of the two teams' stars: Alabama's quarterback and Notre Dame's linebacker.
A quarterback, because he passes, has far greater range and thus influence on a game. All a linebacker can do is run. He may be great, but his presence is limited. It's like, in chess, pitting a queen against a pawn.
I haven't been a Giants fan since Willie Mays left San Francisco to return to New York, but I do like having them in the playoffs, if only for the thrill of seeing who they'll bring out onto the field to sing.
Is it possible to sustain a concussion from watching too much football?