2034 replies to this topic

[wwww]

https://www.patreon.com/posts/16973130

[alcesta]

Moram za divno čudo da pohvalim komentatora koje je prenosio meč Krunićeve i Stricove. Nisam sigurna, mislim da je bio Džankić, u svakom slučaju zvuči slično. Strašno me je nervirao u prvim gemovima jer je non stop govorio Štricova (valjda svi Česi moraju da počinju sa Š ako imamo Šafar(ž)ovu i Štepaneka  ) a onda se usred prenosa izvinio i rekao da je pogrešio jer nije Štricova nego Stricova, i svojski se trudio da više ne pogreši do kraja 

Naravno da to jeste greška i nije baš za pohvalu ovako na prvu loptu, ali ne pamtim kad sam čula da se komentator izvinjava u prenosu što je pogrešio ime sportiste, po pravilu teraju po svome i ne pada im na pamet da se sami isprave, valjda je to veća sramota a ionako gledaoci pojma nemaju ni o čemu pa neće niko primetiti 

[nighthawk387]

Obicno korektni Pralica , ovoga puta je bas preterao sa podcenjivanjem Ferrera

[nighthawk387]

Viskovic je sramotan teniski komentator

[ciao]

Dobro je malo su se promenili tekstovi na fr portalima, poslednjih meseci od kad Rafe nije bilo pisali su stvarno kao da poslednjih 15 godina nikad niko nista nije osvojio sem Fekija - sad se vec pominje kako Fekijeva dominacija u poslednje vreme izgleda nije zato sto on dominira nego zato sto je stara garda ili odsutna ili nije u formi i da je dovoljno da se pojavi neko iz stare garde a u pravoj formi i Feki gubi itd itd, vec se predvidja da ce sada Feki tesko osvojiti bilo koji drugi turnir jer su na putu ka povratku Novak, Rafa, Wawa, Endi ... DelPo je vec tu... (eh da kucnem u drvo za povratak onog jednog ostali kako hoce )

[wwww]

"iako Shapovalov odaje veliko strahopostovanje, ipak Damir ima sansu..." tako nekako je sad komentator (Viskovic?) izjavio.

[zoe Bg]

Kokinakis ili Kirijos isto Visku dodje

[nighthawk387]

U jednom trenutku kaze Argentinac  Kokkinakis. zanese se valjda kako mnogo prica, izgubi misli od kojih je krenuo ..

 

Evo opet , FH Kyrgiosa pobedjuje Verdaskov

Edited by nighthawk387, 26 March 2018 - 17:06.

[zoe Bg]

Za Argentinca nisam cula

[nighthawk387]

Argentinac Kokkinakis ... a oni nisu osvajali Miami ,Coria i Canas gubili finala,  Spanci , oni su jos gori.. Nadal 5 puta gubio....

[wwww]

 

Mark Nixon‏ @markalannixon 20h20 hours ago

Is the emphasis on slams good or bad for tennis? Is the star emphasis good or bad? The NFL and the NBA have thrived on evening things out. Is tennis journalism to star-focused while missing the bigger picture? Has it become too click-oriented?

Is tennis journalism, because it's a niche, too willing to compromise journalistic integrity? Are tennis journalists really fans with typewriters? Why do we need to go outside tennis journalists to unmask conflicts of interest? Why did the New York Times need to admit that it was conflicted when it did a research piece about all the USTA conflicts of interest? And do tennis writers care that players pay them zero attention. I want to know

[wwww]

https://tennisaccent...nable-about-it/

 

 

Yes, that is a purposefully provocative story title. Yes, titles of stories — fresh or stale — often determine whether readers click on links and ultimately read written content. However, I don’t apologize for that story title for one reason: Using titles with emotionally rich push-button terms are okay as long as they mesh with the content of the story. 

 

As a veteran of the sports content industry (side note: I just got released as a copy editor for a media company last week, meaning I have now cycled through three different media companies in addition to various freelance positions in my career), I can tell you this: A lot of companies will create incendiary or eye-popping titles when, in fact, they do not reflect the content, tone or trajectory of the articles attached to them. Plenty of companies and editors are shameless in driving the reader to a link which promises one thing but delivers another.

 

I therefore feel that as long as the title of a story I write is consistent with — and reflective of — the subsequent text I produce, I have not misled my readers or sold them a false bill of goods. Believe me when I say: “It’s okay to hate John Isner.”

[alcesta]

Guglala sad da nađem neku finu sliku Rafe sa trofejem i iskočila mi gomila linkova sa naslovom "Rafael Nadal throws shade at Roger Federer for 'missing tournaments on purpose'.

 

A evo šta je zapravo rekao:

"There (are) tournaments that I can't imagine missing on purpose, because (they are) tournaments that I love to play," Nadal said on Wednesday. "I don't see myself missing Monte Carlo on purpose. I don't see myself missing Wimbledon on purpose, or the U.S. Open, or Australian, or Rome. These kind of events, I don't see missing (them)."

 

"Of course, when you get older, you need to adjust a little bit more the efforts and the calendar. But for me (it) is difficult to say I don't play, for example, grass, or I don't play hard (courts)," Nadal said. "(It) is not in my plan, but I can't say 'never' because I cannot predict what's going to be in the future."

 

 

I stave onakav naslov

[steva8lfc]

Roger je bas bio brutalno iskren sa tom izjavom... jedno je sigurno, niko ozbiljan ne moze da ga smatra za GOAT-a posle onakve izjave.   

IMO, lik se bukvalno popisao na svoj legacy... but that's just me 

[alcesta]

Ti samo dolaziš na pecanje, svratiš, baciš udicu pa te nema ko zna koliko