Have no time for self serving people who write for reward , irrespective if the piece is actually factually correct.
or people who nurture hatred by enticement or others who just make it up as they go along, that's just lazy writers, they are no better than the local press hack. People with no moral compass of right and wrong, it's only a choice.
It is published. If you think any changes to be made, let me know right away.
And please spread / market the link: You are co-author.
Can you elaborate on this a bit, please: "The only negative, it’s probably harder to kill off a friend’s dream than it is a tennis colleague, who, if any will be affected by sentiment"?
On the condition that I keep the substance (with grammatical and syntactical changes), do I have your legal permission to use in my article everything you said and your B/R name?
It will be countered by Djoko-fan perspective that I will play. I will also add a few arguments on your behalf.
Casper, Do you have time to give me some tips on what strategies Murray will employ to beat Djoko, esp. besides mixing up his shots what else he will bring to the table tomorrow.
If he loses, he will lose by failing to do what?
@ casper thankyou for your reply to my comment .
I have missed you for a long. Seriously. How have you been?
Here is one unorthodox piece. Grand Slam Finals without Federer and Nadal.
I am hoping you have time to read my new piece.
Thank you so much,
Title: 2010 US Open Semifinal: 2nd Best Novak Djokovic To Topple Roger Federer
You gotta look at this one, please.
Title: Nadal Poised to Go Romanian Ill Nasty at Federer: A Vampire Tale
I owe you one on Murray.
Here is my latest piece. If you get a chance to read, let me hear what you think:
Federer's Open Challenge to Nadal: Bring 'em on to DecoTurf
Couldn't help but notice your change of picture...