For a man walking around the park in his sport of expertise, Roger Federer was again denied of the Sportsman of the Year award by the Sports Illustrated (SI) magazine. The award by the way was won by Dwyane Wade of NBA's Miami Heat. For a man who lost only 15 matches over the past three years, do you agree that Roger does not get the honor and recognition he deserves? Is it because he is not American?
2006-12-06 13:50:09 · 16 answers · asked by alan agrao 2 in Sports ➔ Tennis
Thanks for the quick reply Luke B.... but what was that? Maybe you were trying to answer another question?
2006-12-06 13:55:14 · update #1
Arguably sad commentary that Wade stands out in part because he's not getting in trouble.... No question he is a tremendous player, played superbly in the finals and does good things away from the game. Much as Federer's excellence is exceptional, there is at least a perception that he is not doing much outside of that.... Of course, people could probably argue that the same can be said other winners in past years. In any given year, though, they're going to look at a bunch of people and compare them not to people in years before, but to the others. Right or wrong, by their general standards, Wade probably fits their ideals more than Federer.
2006-12-06 14:06:01 · answer #1 · answered by rghsanjose 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would say so. He has dominated the sport over the past 3-3 1/2 years in a way that few ever have. In that time, he has twice won three Majors in a single season. With 9 Majors to his name at only 25 years of age, he is on pace to potentially break Sampras' career record of 14. He is also closing in on Connors' record for consecutive weeks at the top of the rankings.
In the last season alone. he came within one match (the French Open final) of completing the "Grand Slam", and set the all-time record for consecutive grass-court wins. He even managed to turn the tide against his nemesis Rafael Nadal, who had beaten him in 6 of their previous 7 meetings. He is, without doubt, far and away the best in his sport. Sadly, for all his greatness, there are still many (at least in the U.S) who don't even know who he is.
I'm sure the fact that he is not American hasn't helped his chances. A magazine is more likely to hand out awrds to home-grown talent than foreigners. It may sound cynical but, if it had been Andy Roddick, his acheivements would have been accompanied by a bit more fanfare. But there are other factors involved. Most people (and the media) tend to prefer team-sports to individual competition. Roger Federer is also well-mannered and doesn't court controversy and, to some, this may make him "boring". It's unfortunate but most sports fans want their stars to be more "extrovert" (or obnoxious, depending on your opinion), a-la John McEnroe or Dennis Rodman. Tennis' relatively low-profile and stuffy image can't help either. Even though many attempts have been made to increase the sport's popularity, it remains a lesser known and somewhat elitest sport. Consequently, it's greatest stars rarely get the recognition they so rightly deserve.
2006-12-08 11:07:24 · answer #2 · answered by rammsteinfan-1 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They are different because the MVP is what you earn in the league play hard and being a sportsmanship non selfish and another good things that make a player a superstar.SI Sport man of the year is award more for the image like Dwayne because if u remember he was one of the 2006 Peoples 50 sexiest man and finally he ended winning the NBA Finals MVP. I think the MVP is better because the MVP is for the best player that had the numbers on everything and played harder not for the image.
2016-03-13 04:11:50 · answer #3 · answered by Nedra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, because he had a GREAT year, much better than Wade's in my opinion, I mean he's got a 92-5 record (I think) and reached the finals of all four majors!! And he is a great guy off the court too, so Federer REALLY deserves it. He probably didn't get it because he's not American and tennis is thought of as a "who-cares" sport, which I think is really unfair.
2006-12-06 21:27:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
he doesnt get much publiity because he is a stand up guy. He just plays tennis and that's what a person is supposed to do. He's not very ENTERTAINING to most people because he has no personality. He definitely deserved the award more than anybody. He's the best tennis player there ever lived.
2006-12-06 13:58:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Federer should've got the award. He is the best tennis player in the world beside no other sportsmen has come even closer to what he has achived in the year.
I think it was the step to save the pride of America in sports. Beause they are loosing their dominance on the sports.
2006-12-06 16:16:52 · answer #6 · answered by DX 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The rest of the world does not really care about what SI thinks. The rest of the world KNOWS that Roger Federer is the best there is, thank you very much; and we expect Roger to collect his third Laureus soon.
2006-12-08 14:07:47 · answer #7 · answered by roseahmad2206 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, I don't think much consideration was given to him because he's not american or tennis is not an "american" sport like american football, baseball, basketball.
he's gotten sportsman of the year awards (2-3 years straight) from other entities who look more globally.
don't think he really cares what SI thinks anyway; to him it's just an "american sports" magazine, and giving out best "__whatever__" of the year is a very "american" thing in the first place.
2006-12-07 02:49:20 · answer #8 · answered by ATR999 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Personally i think Andre Agassi should be the sportsman of the year hes just such a great guy.
2006-12-06 14:55:27 · answer #9 · answered by mrfame1017 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think Roger does not get the honor he deserves because I think he is currently the most impressive athlete in all of sports.
2006-12-06 18:38:05 · answer #10 · answered by redblue 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋