I can't figure out the fascination revolving around Roger Federer. He's a guy who used to be better than anyone at an activity that consists of placing a ball in rectangles traced on the ground, without hitting it into the net ? brilliant idea, the net ? and so that his opponent (who didn't have anything better to do that day either ) fails to retrieve it. Even though ? no one knows why ? he really wants to.
Let's note the fact that, at times when he's helplessly confronted with the determination of his opponent ? who is equally determined to spend his day in this manner ? he sometimes cries.
One must salute the inventers of tennis, who didn't align the game along soccer rules, and who decided that to score points, one had to at least hit the ball over the net, and not in the net. Although the excitement in soccer comes from the perspective that a leather ball might go through the goalie's net, so to speak, transposing that kind of goal to tennis might leave the public doubtful.
When I was young, I myself tried the following experiment along with some witty and non-conformists friends : Standing proudly on either side of the tennis court, equipped with racquets, my opponent and I had to do everything to land the ball in the net, and reverse the rules of this bourgeois sport. At the time, we already had strong scientific minds.
I must recognize that to begin with, it was no easy business ? as I failed on my first serve. Indeed, to my great disappointment, I made a magnificent ace. My friends had the tactfulness to not laugh at me, and encouraged me to try the exercise again. However, nature didn't show as much consideration, because the wolves howled with scorn in the smoky mountain where no one ventured , while the winds and waves intensified in vitality to show me their mocking. Above all, the look of Master Owl said a lot.
Overwhelmed, my older sister slit her throat.
