>> charlie: welcome to the program. it's world cup time and we begin this evening with a conversation about the world cup with tommy smyth. >> the first games that just the players didn't have the potential, look at england. and england has a star-studded team and look what happened to emthis. they can't score goals. they have played, at this stage they played 90 and 90, 180 minutes and win really very few touches on the ball. in my opinion one of the best players in the world and they haven't been able to get the done. there's some little thing missing but i think it's going to catch fire now, charlie. the world cup is now starting. we're at the spot where this thing is all going to change. >> charlie: with b.p. executives meeting with the president in the oval office, we talk about presidential power against croatians. >against -- corporations. >> he has very clear moments

taking on these corporations. and in corporate america, you're beginning to hear the push back from this. a concern that this president is fundamentally anti-corporate. the whitehouse denies that but it's interesting to hear it. >> charlie: with wimbledon around the corner, we talk about tennis and its players with patrick mcenroe. >> i always tell people watch roger federer when he's not hitting the ball. watch him when the other player's hitting the ball. that's a good lesson because you can kind of see, tennis is about expectation and where is the ball going to go, what are the chances it's going over herement i'm on the court what are the chances it's going to go here and preparing yourself to make those moves and then to hit while they're on the run. that's where tennis has become more and more of an athletic game about hitting when you're moving. >> charlie: the world cup, the president and tennis coming up.

>> charlie: we begin this evening with what everybody is watching and talking about, the world cup in south africa. the weekended today with a series of dramatic games. the united states tied slovenia. it was the second straight draw from the united states who wil face algeria next wednesday in a must win game. in other action, germany was upset by serbia, 1-0 after a key player received two yellow cards early in the game.

in the final game of the day england struggled win resulting in a 0-0 tie against algeria. joining me now to break all the action down is my hero tommy smyth of espn, i'm pleased to have him as we get together every four years to talk about this. >> charlie it's very nice to be back. we've been i think it's 16 years, that's right, that's right. and soccer's popularity of football as they say everywhere else grows like crazy. it's continuing to grow, there is no question bit. you travel the streets of any major city in the united states and you will find kids wearing the jerseys of barcelona. >> charlie: >> charlie: every bar's got a turn on along with baseball. >> everybody's watching it now the ratings on esp have been tremendous, through the roof. >> charlie: hi definition television, unbelievable. >> it's almost like you're on the team, charlie. you have to look out or somebody will kick you. >> charlie: this is something i do not know until you sat at this table it's 35 degrees

fahrenheit in south africa. it's there winter. >> it's a different hemispherement one of the games the other night was 35 almost down to freezing by the time the game was over and it's strange to see a world cup. we generally associate a world cup as being hot and very humid and everybody's complaining that the players can't play. this one is the complete complete opposite. >> assess for me what's happened so far. >> there's been a couple of very very big results for small teams. a lot of the bigger teams have not lived up to their potential or at least what their manager and their fans had with a potential going in. we're not sure how much some of them there. there's been problem with the ball. the ball hasn't done the right thing. once you get it up in the air there's a problem with it. we've seen very very few good kicks. >> charlie: talk about that for a moment because it's a new ball. >> it's a brand new ball. the germans use this all season. that's probably why they look so comfortable on the first day because they do not have a sponsorship for the ball in the

league which is the local league in germany. so awso adidas being a germany company, it didn't work for them today charlie sniemple they thought there would be more scoring with this ball. >> they thought there would be more scoarg. but in theory what's happening with the ball charlie is this. when you try to complete the pass for 25 or 30 yards the first 10 or 15 yards the ball does what it's suppose to do. after that it's like somebody's up in the stand with a remote control going okay i'll make it do what it wants to do and it just hasn't been true. >> charlie: what do they call it jubilani. >> yes. >> charlie: there's this noise coming out of the stadium. >> you mean you don't like the vuvuzelas. >> charlie: no, i don't like. do you. >> no. i'm not taking away from the south african culture, i realize every culture, who am i talk to talk, we have the bag pipes, so who am i to talk about noise.

the one thing if you go out as an international football player wearing a jersey of your country in world cup final the most starring moment of the whole thing is when you stand there and put your arms by your stand and you stand to attention the little hairs on the back of your neck come up. if you can't hear the anthem it's taking something away and i think they should do something about them. >> charlie: will they. >> it doesn't look like it. except this is his legacy you brought the world cup finals to africa, he wanted it to go to the african nation and i don't think he's going to make any changes now. >> charlie: we're all proud of the fact it's happening in south africa, you know, because of nelson mandela who loves football. >> right. >> charlie: can't attend because of the tragic death of his granddaughter. so far he hasn't been able to attend. so tell me what's happened on the field. germany's your favorite, argentina, spain, united states, england. >> okay, we start with germany probably. i think germany got jobbed today as they say in the business. >> charlie: jobbed meaning? >> meaning two yellow flags

equal a red i don't think he should have gotten the second yellow. the referee was calling it one way in the first half and called it differently in the second player. they were down a man and even at that it still created a penalty kick which he should have scored, he didn't score. it was a very very good save by the keeper. i think the two big story lines charlie is spain had the motion brints players in the world -- brilliant players in the world but not a good team. they do not have a good record and world cup finals. won the european championship last time around, everybody said there should be favorites. the swiss did a job on them. >> charlie: you're saying spain has as good a team as anybody else if you go player by player. >> oh better than most. i mean individually players like in yestest, sergio ramos, these are players that play with barcelona, the best team in the world at a club level. but the problem is that when you get to work the fin this is not

just an individual game. okay, there are over the years individuals like pele who can lift a game and do it on his own, most players can't do that. spain never blended. they had so many opportunities collectively the swiss don't measure up for them at all. but when it came to a team effort, the swiss were very good. >> charlie: winning the world cup you have to have a team effort. >> without a doubt. you need 11 players and you need the players coming off the bench. you're allowed three mayors of substitutes. you need every player to play the role. the big story charlie coming into this world cup everybody talked about maridona, the best player in the world, crazy as a coot as a manager but i tell you, he has got the job done. he was under a lot of pressure after the first day because he played with madrid. he missed an awful lot of chances. he had diego on the bench and was playing very well. but diego said i'm going to go

with egwin and he scored three goals. it doesn't get much better. there are questions do argentina, he's got a beard now he's going crazy. all of a sudden he looks like a businessman on the side like. peace got double earrings. >> charlie: we talked about germany who you think will still win notwithstanding they had a bad dad. >> right. >> charlie: we talked about spain which you don't think is going to win because they don't have a team spirit. there is argentina. >> argentina have a very legitimate shot at winning, there's no question about it. they have done what they needed to do. they got the monkey off the back, one near the first day to come out and now they score goals like they're going out of style. this is big for maridona. >> charlie: the united states. >> the united states find themselves in a very difficult weird group. i mean who would believe at this stage four teams are left with a chance to qualify as we go to the last round of games. i mean everybody in this group can still go to the next round of the world cup. >> charlie: but they didn't lose now. >> no.

the u.s. can't lose. that doesn't factor. they have two ties, two points they need more than that to get out of the group. >> charlie: they've got a great scorch. >> bob bradley has done a fantastic job. in fact the coach of the swiss said he got his inspiration from the way bob bradley spade in the confederation cup against spain. so that's high praise. >> charlie: what about his keeper. >> tim howard is one of the best goal keepers of the world, young had from new jersey, very brave goal keeper. i was announcing the metro stars, tim was number two. he was bought by manchester. he had a first year that was brilliant in manchester united. fell off a little bit and he was sent to evertown where he plays now. he's been england seven, eight years and he is a fantastic goal keeper. >> charlie: when you look forward to this action, is this going to go down as a great world cup.

>> not so far. >> charlie: because it lacks what? >> it lacks, it lacks a lot of good play. the first games that just the players didn't play the potential. look at england. and england has a star studded team, and look at what's happened to them. they can't score goals, they have played at this stage, they've played 90 and 90. 180 minutes and win really very few touches on the ball. in my opinion one of the best players in the world and they haven't been able to get it done. there's some little thing missing but it's going to catch fire now charlie. the word cup is now starting. we're at the spot where this thing is all going to change now. >> charlie: mr. smith will want to be playing soon. >> without a doubt. i'm going to enjoy the end of it. >> charlie: how many have you seen. >> too many. but i start, i suppose i go back, well i have announced in the last five and i have seen four or five before that. >> charlie: so about 10. >> yes, easily. >> charlie: 40 years.

>> yes and maybe a little more. i'm cheating a little here charlie, i'm just cheating a little bit. >> charlie: has the game changed during those years in a way that's good or bad? >> oh, it's incredible how the game has changed. the speed of the players, the ball itself, the footwear that they use. everything has changed about the ball but i was playing charlie, we had what we used to call -- it was made of lottery an of li. the one thing they have to do is make it official to keep up with the players. the officials you have a bank manager comes out and they stand on the field with guys training five days a week, how is he supposed to even california up with them. he can't. he needs some kind of technology. >> charlie: technology use of television cameras as well as better trained. >> without a doubt, yes. these guys are part time officials, i mean you know some of them are dentists, some of

themmor whatever and they are expected to go out there. this is a difficult game to keep up with nowadays. >> charlie: the finals, you believe germany versus. >> probably argentina the way it's going. i mean, i'm probably ruling out brazil. brazil had a very very difficult position because they're playing ivory coast next and portugal next. remember folks the tie breaker in the world cup is the goal differential. so the goal differential counts and then the second tie breaker is the amount of goals scored and the third tie breaker is the head to head competition. so you have brazil now who gives up a goal against north korea which could be a priceless goal as far as ivory coast and, you know, because this is a situation where, you know, goal differential, that one goal, if they lose by two the next time around when north korea go out to play and you start toughening up the goal. why did brazil go out, because of goal differential because of

porridge annual. that is provided they can hold brazil to a drawment some people say they can't. >> charlie: in american sports especially football and basketball, they say defense wins over offense. basketball and pro football. in foot ball, soccer, does offense win or defense win? >> yes, i think you need a combination of both. i mean obviously you can't win a game without scoring a goal. so you have to figure out how to score but you have to figure out how to keep it tight at the back. i mean, we talked about it earlier, it is a team game in every sense of the word. where you can have a good offensive player or attacking player but if you put defendsers on, you can take them out of the game. you watch a player like messy and times for argentina is a trouble team and he can still get away but he's an exception. as a rule, good defenders can take good awe architect attackef

you have a mid field with a supply of the ball and spreading it out wide. the key thing i always believe in soccer and this is my theory you pair the ball down and get the ball across into the middle. by playing it down the wings you pull the full backs out you separate the two central defenders and you create spares for the players coming out the middle. the key is to get into the accurate crosses when the player runs down the middle. i think you saw a brilliant example of it with the united states when bradley scored his goal. out the door was standing with his back to the goal. he knocked the ball down. brandly came from 25, nobody even seen him coming and he stuffedded the ball in the back of the net. a simple game, charlie. a very simple game. >> charlie: when you look at argentina and you look at brazil and the tradition and spain as well, is it possible the united states can catch up to them. >> it's very possible and people say to me how can you say that.

i always relate to the olympics. you look at track and field or even the tour de frawns. how often do you see a bicycle race in the united states. yes these guys can go and win the tour de france. track and field is not that big of a sport in the united states but when it comes for the olympics united states is some of the best athletes in the world. and i think that they k it's just a matter of an attitude. when you talk about brazil or you talk about argentina or you talk about spain, there's probably a little difference there. argentina, brazil have an attitude that they're going to win every time they go out. brazillians feel the world cup is their own. he take an extra care just so they can poof the cup in and take it home. that's a winning attitude charlie. until you get that in the united states you won't have the success that was there. >> charlie: got you. so what's the greatest soccer world cup final you've ever seen? probably the greatest one was the one where england won. i mean, you know, wins the world

cup that has to be the greatest world cup final. but there's been many of them. i've enjoyed the last world cup final because i was very high, i really loved -- >> charlie: let the record show on this program you said it was going to win. >> they did win. and we had all that drama, then. you know, what is soccer without controversy, you know. we had -- >> charlie: yes, yes, right. >> though ar those are the thin. >> charlie: what happened to france. >> they cheated ireland by a handball and the karma went against them and they can't do anything sense. they don't want to play for the manager. dominic should have been fired because of the way france had so many problems. france is a great team, man for man the french team make a lot of money as football players. they have the great players in the world. rumored to have the best players in the world. you can't tell in this world cup final. >> charlie: what do you

attribute that to. >> i attribute it to a lack of leadership. there was obviously problems nfort stressing room for france. they just didn't get along. it's something that the dutch have had a problem with and we also probably should touch in the in dutch charlie because they have a very good team. and they're uniquely around, you know, people are kind of overlooking them. they could be one of the teams. >> charlie: final four. >> they could be in the final four, yes. >> charlie: all right. saturday we have netherlands versus japan. >> there you go. that's the one. japan already with a huge surprise to beat cameroon. they are one of the best strikers in the world but the japanese got a result which is all that counts. >> charlie: ghana versus australia. >> that's a big one, a huge one for gime because australia were beaten by germany. ghana have a win up. if they get another win here they're going to be heaven in this group. >> charlie: cameroon versus denmark. >> cameroon needs to pull their socks up or they'll be out of there. they'll be home before the postcards charlie.

>> charlie: slovakia versus paraguay. >> that's a tough one. maybe paraguay can get a result there. >> charlie: italy versus new zealand. >> italy better get a result. new zealand has been very brave. they've got a goal and extra time for the draw but italy against new zealand. >> charlie: limit messy for example from argentina. they get along well, father, son, what are they? >> well i think maridona has them all on one page because he has a son on that team and he has a baby by maridona's daughter. there are rumors there's a little friction there but i watched them coming off the last game and maridona had an arm around messy's shoastled which makes me think he was acting or having a good relationship. you can pick it yourself. >> charlie: either he does or wants you to believe he does. there's brazil versus the ivory cup.

>> yes, i'm looking at a draw on this one. if it is a draw brazil can be in a lot of trouble because the ivory coast can do what i'm saying. if they beat north korea they have a tie breaker or brazil because brazil has 2-1. >> charlie: how many people on the planet will be watching the world cup final. >> an awful lot. >> charlie: you have no idea. >> i have no idea but it goes into the billions. it's incredible. i mean when ireland won a game at the world cup, there are countries that have won a game in the world cup and they declare a national holiday. you could rob every bank in ireland when they won the world cup final and nobody would see it because there's nobody on the streets. >> charlie: thank you, tom. >> thank you charlie. >> charlie: tommy smyth with an assessment of the world cup. more of this next week. back in a empt mo. stay with us. >> charlie: we continue this evening with a conversation about the use of presidential power or presidential pressure.

this week as you know, b.p. agreed dividends and create a $20 billion compensation fund to cover claims from the gulf coast oil spill. the fund will be administered independently from b.p. the company will set aside another $100 million to compensate oil workers laid off because of this. they were announced after extended negotiations with the obama administration which will pay for the damage cause. the tough stance against b.p. and other corporations have renewed questions about the obama relationship with big business and also about the reach of government. david sanger explored these issues in "the new york times" today. he joins me now from washington. this is "the new york times" friday june 18 above the full right hand column. news analysis. strong steps or over steps. b.p. the latest example of president obama. with that display of arm twisting president obama inviggered a debate upon the new reach of government power,

alternativity the power of government overreached. it is an argument that has come to defined mr. obama's first 18 months in office and one that mr. obama clearly hopes to make a central issue in november's midterm elections. tell me more different. >> well charlie, as we said before on your show and many times, one of the really interesting characteristics about president obama's time has been these been willing to go out and name the names of individual companies and basically put the four of these companies against the power of the presidency. and that's particularly fast noting because over the past 20 years we have come to view many of the world's multinational and sort of mini states unto themselves. you know, operating in 50 or a hundred different countries, subject in many ways the law of all of them but the law of none of them. what president obama has tried

to show, i think, first in his confantatioconfrontation with gl motors where he fired the chief executive and had the united states take a major stake in the company. then in his face-off with chrysler which he forced into a merger and then with well point, the insurer which he accused of trying to get out ahead of the healthcare bill and raised premiums in ways which would not be allowed after the bill goes into force. he has a very clear moment taking on these corporations. and in corporate america you're beginning to hear the push back from this. a tenor that this president is fundamentally anti-corporate. the whitehouse against that but it's interesting to hear it. >> charlie: why will this play well in the midterm elections, because there's popularrism especially in play?

>> yes, because if you think about the past two years, it has been a recession that was claimed in large part rightly or wrongly on banks, on wall street on a culture of two little regulations and then of course this disastrous oil spill which is being claimed again rightly or wrongly on a corporate desire to put profits ahead of safety and again on a lack of regulation. so i think the president believes that he has a winning theme here. and in some ways you can see the confusion that the republicans have had a good deal with this in what happened with joe barten yesterday, who of course initially apologized, he's a representative from texas, initially apologized. >> charlie: the ranking republican on the energy committee. >> that's right and a man who of course like many on that comoat and many in congress has taken his fair share of contributions

from the energy industry but he started off by apologizing to b.p. for what he indicated was a shakedown of the company by the whitehouse and the creation of this $20 billion fund. it didn't take very long for the republican leadership to force him by the time the lunch break had happened to raw paul gize for his apology and retract it. of course the whitehouse was over him saying he was much more concerned about b.p. than he was about the thousands, tens of thousands of people in the gulf who were affected by the spill. >> charlie: i guess his defense was he was only talking about what happens when people have powers are leaning on companies and whether that's fair. >> that's right but it again goes beyond that in the creation of this fund. there was no legal basis under which president obama could have

forced b.p. to create the fund. i think you could argue that it may have been in b.p.'s interest to put this funding aside. clearly the claims against b.p. are going to go well above 20 billion, whether they're all adjudicated to go above that level who knows but their exposure is so great by putting the fund out there it could look like they were acting proactively. but nonetheless when i asked rahm emanuel the president's chief of staff on what basis the president took this action he was very clear. this is job boning. this is what presidents do when they need to exercise their power. there's a long history of that. teddy roosevelt, franklin roosevelt, truman against the steel companies, kennedy against u.s. steel. this is not the first time a president has used his office in order to force a corporation to change directions.

>> charlie: here is what concerns some people reflected by a quote in your piece from jeffrey garden, in trade and finances at the yale school of management. he says the president is walking a very fine line. he's taking each case on the merits as he sees it but he runs the risk of sewing a level of mistrust about all big companies and if those companies not small businesses that he will need to invest and innovate for the kind of economic recovery the country needs. >> that's right. you know i think professor garden was making the point that while presidents love to get out and talk about small businesses and the investments they make and you see the president as you saw president bush go to visit small enterprises all the time. in the end, the big money that is poured into r&d in the united states, whether it's in computer technology or software or oil driller or the environment or

medicine is poured in by and large by multinationals. and i think that one of the long term concerns here is if the united states is perceived to have a sort of anti-business sensibility about it, other nations largely the move in and say maybe you want to operate in an environment more like ours. maybe it's singapore, maybe it's canada or mexico. >> charlie: let m let me turno iranian. we have sanctions now. will sanctions work. >> i don't believe anybody that sanctions resolution that passed last week by the united nations by it sell will force iranian to do the one thing which the sanctions are intended to do which is give up enrichment. if you go to the whitehouse and say this has been tried three

different times before, since 2006. what makes you think the fourth time will be different. here's their answer. i'm not telling you i endoris this, i'm just reporting their answer. their answer is first now going to be enforced under the supervision of a man who has done this for a living in the past, robert ironhorn at the state department. the man that the chinese once nick named the dentist for his ability to drill down on sanctions sense them on proliferation. the second reason europe has announced and the unite u.s. wil follow suit, three not much more we can do to iran, they seized on the resolution and you now beginning to go into sanctions against iran's energy sector. the one that the government will not discuss and one you and i have talked about before, there are other actions that the u.s., european and israel are taking.

there's a covert program under way which is accelerated in the obama administration to try to undermine the iranian nuclear program and the computer system's ability to enrich. there are a number of programs to try to draw a dissonance or scientists who might be dissonant out of the country and we saw on yew tube tw youtube oe scientists show up in two confusing youtube videos but he was clear that he had been taken out by the united states. so there are other forms of pressure. you've got to count on those because the sanctions alone won't do them. >> charlie: this is a ticking clock and at some point benjamin netanyahu will say time's up. >> we assume so. now prime minister netanyahu has used that threat very carefully. so far all he has said is that israel supports the sanctions

and homes that they work and homes that the international community solves this problem. the unspoken part of that is that israel could go off and do what it did in iraq 30 years ago and in syria 3 years ago which is an attack on nuclear facilities. in iran it's a much more complex process and there's no confidence that the israelis have the reach or the technology to set back the iranian program more than a year or two. >> charlie: so there is this question. and you probably know at least you have phrased it, i'm sure, ask it. will netanyahu ask the permission of the obama administration, and if the obama administration is known to oppose it, will he go ahead? >> well, if the obama administration is known to oppose it, i mean there's no secret about this, you've heard defense secretary gates, you've heard the chairman of the joint chiefs, admiral mullen all say

that they believe that an attack on iran would be a disaster and the response by the iranians would not be containable or controllable. >> charlie: i also know that people use nuance behind the scenes as well. >> they do. and president obama has used the israeli threat quite skillfully i think in the diplomatic effort as if to say, for example for the chinese, you ought to get behind the sangions because if you don't and the israelis act by themselves, there will be far more disruption of oil from the middle east to china than it would be to do this in an orderly and diplomatic way. the president's on both sides of this. he used the israeli threat when it's suited him and at the same time i think he's trying to restrain the israelis. how realistic is the threat? well, the israelis did not tell president bush that they were going to conduct the attack on syria until it was already just

about to happen. and same thing, they didn't ask for permission when they attacked the osa reactor in 1981 and were formally criticized by the un and the united states by the reagan administration. i would doubt they would ask permission but they know exactly where the administration is on this issue. i doubt that the obama administration would want them to ask permission because they would want to be able to say publicly they acted without u.s. knowledge. >> charlie: david, thank you very much. pleasure to have you. >> thank you charlie. >> charlie: have a great weekend. >> you too. >> charlie: we'll be back. stay with us. >> charlie: with wimbledon around the corner we conclude this evening with a conversation about tennis with patrick mcenroe. his new book is called hard core confidential. we talked about the people who played the game and the game itself. welcome. >> good to see you. >> charlie: hard core

confidential. when you put the word confidential in there. >> it kind of says -- >> charlie: what is this? >> well it was more all my years in tennis which started at three years old picking up a racket and playing against the wall in queens new york and then going in to playing junior tennis in college at stanford and the pro tour and making it somewhat as a player, obviously being the brother of john and seeing all that he went through, getting into broadcasting which i've been in now for over ten years. becoming the davis cup captain. now more of an administrative role in running this whole program for u.s. tennis. i think i've seen the game in a lot of different ways. and i thought it was a good time to tell some of those stories, really give an overview of tennis. and the way i've seen it transform in the last 25 years really in the modern era of tennis. >> charlie: the development program. what's that about this. >> well that's about trying to manage this what i call 300pound

cell yeah with the usga which gets all of its money running the u.s. open which it does incredibly. and putting resources which is getting people to play tennis at the recreational level in clubs and parks all over the country. but also they realized a number of years ago it's also important to have great american players playing in the u.s. open and make in other majors to help continue to grow the u.s. open and the tv money and the sponsors etcetera. so when they kind of looked to me a couple years ago, i actually spoke to them about this position for ten years really since i became the davis cup captain. the powers that be at the usta to put more resource into the program, they turned to me and now is as good a time as any for me to give this a shot. to try to get a group of people together that i respect. i hired jose iguerra who is one

of the great coaches of all time to run the actual coaching program. i believe a couple things, charlie. i believe that our kids are no different than the kids in serbia and in russia and all over the world, particularly in europe where most of the great tennis players coming from. what they need is they obviously need to be found, the talent needs to be identified as early as possible. and more importantly they need to be coached. they need to be coached well and i think it's a country overall, obviously there's a lot of great coaches out there doing the day in and day out. but i think it's a country over all. we've fallen behind the eight ball on developing these talented players. >> charlie: because we didn't have the institutional structure to do it. >> that's part of it. obviously the part of the success of many of these great programs and great coaches, they did it on their in, they did it their way. institutionally we could do a better job. when i turned to jose and i looked at the overall landscape, we thought we could actually make a difference in changing

the way we coach. and stip b step by step we're to do that. you're trying to deal with kids and coaches all over the country but i think we're making pretty good inroads. i looked at a lot of different ways, a three year plan with kids on the crust of becoming really good professionals. it's a five year and really more like a ten year plan. so that the kids were touching now that were 10, 11, 12 and hopefully teaching the right way to play tennis with the help of a lot of people because it's usually the individual coach or the parent that's driving that particular kid to get started and to get interested. >> charlie: what's wroar brotheyourbrother do. >> my brother just started to open his own academy here in new york. this is what's great about john. he wants to do it his way, exactly. he wants to do it his way. he doesn't necessarily think that the way to ufj -- and in some ways he's right.

but we're brothers and we have the same interests at hard which is to try to help them. >> charlie: but he says you're not supporting him. >> no, that's not true. >> charlie: he doesn't say that or you say that. >> i'm saying we will support that. >> charlie: has he said that. >> he said he would like to get more love, let's put it that way. >> charlie: does he need a lot of love. >> we all do. he realizes that first of all, it's going to take a lot of time and it's a long term plan for both his program, our program. the bottom line is we're trying to get american players to be good. >> charlie: right. >> and i don't care where they come from, i just -- >> charlie: he's looking for support for the a academy isn't he. >> yes, he is and we support, we meaning the usa and the program support lots of program in the country. those programs are generally ones that have been successful for quite some time and have been in existence for some time. john is just starting. we're certainly hoping we'll work together.

we plan on it. >> charlie: tell me what it is that takes two young men of athletic ability, you and your brother, and one has the kind of extraordinary record that john did of great players, as good a touch as anybody ever had. >> right. >> charlie: and you who had a very good eighty. >> say it charlie, i was mediocre. >> charlie: no, you were not meadow cur. people didn't reach it but you know what i'm saying. what's the difference. >> you know it's interesting, the difference a lot of it is talent but what i started to learn as i got older and played on the tour and made it to the top 30 dm in the world there was something extra and i learned this from my brother in playing with him, alongside him and i tell the story in the book we were playing in a big tournament in france, in paris, a big doubles tournament. and my dad used to always want us to play doubles together. but it was always, you know, we were at different stages of our careers and there was always

pressure from our dad or from each other to want to do well. so we never played that much together. when we did it never went that great. but a long story short we're playing this big match indoor tournament. we're playing two french minute. it's five all in the tie break. crowd going crazy for the french men. night crowd going crazy in paris and they get a bad call against them gives us the lead match point for the mcenroe's. luckily john was to serve the next point. crowd goes crazy one of those 10 minute delays, they're complaining yelling at the empire, the crowds whistling. and john is just sitting there bouncing the ball just as happy as a clam. and i'm sitting there shaking in my boots and he calls me back to the baseline and he says pat, he says don't worry about this, he says i got it. i got this covered. and that was kind of, you know, for me a look into the way his mind worked, sort of in this term that he was at his most calm and most quiet.

what did he do, he got up and delivered a ace. many he went on to win that tournament. >> charlie: take that today to roger federer, raffa and who else might be in the top. eenld. >andy.>> andy murray. and -- is a great worker but not the same kind of athlete as know nadal or murray. he's gotten into hard work. >> charlie: he's in better shape. >> i think he has a chance to win wimbledon. >> charlie: he did pretty well a couple years ago. >> he almost won it last year. >> charlie: was that last year. >> it was last year. >> charlie: one of the great matches. between that match and federaller versufedererversus n. >> federer and nadal was better.

>> charlie: this was that better. >> because there are more points, more athletic points, more rallies. more about the serve, there was more shot making a little bit like my brother and borg been. >> charlie: and the talkerness. >> and the different styles, totally different styles of personalities the twist guy is a mice trmaestro. and to see them go head to had he at the cathedral of tennis and go back and forth. what i love about those guys and what i talked about in the book is their respect that they have for tennis, that they have for the history of the game, that they have for each other. they're incredible competitors, they desperately want to win. when it's over, what do they say. i got beat by the better man. and i think there's a really bootbeauty in that and i think t one-on-one that you get in

tennis when you get that great moment, you get that great moment in a huge match is what separates tennis in a lot of ways. >> charlie: you are saying here at this table today that roddic could do it again. >> i think he could. in my heart i would love to see him do it. i would like to see him do it because i've spent so much time with him in davis cup. he's been in three wimbledon finals, he's been in other semifinals when he lost to federer. he was so close last year. >> charlie: what did that do to his psyche. >> it hurt him initially because he was devastated. and the u.s. open where he went out to another american john eisner and some good up andal something guys there. in the long run we'll find out now at this winnable done, i think he's got the belief he can do that. he's put hard work in, he's had a pretty good year so far. i think it reenergized him in the off season and continued working hard. but we'll find out in wimbledon and i think nadal is hard to

beat there. >> charlie: his legs are okay. >> they are good and he come off that title without dropping a set. that was pretty impressive. but i think roddic will be heard from. >> charlie: federer is the best ever to have played the game. >> absolutely. >> charlie: he doesn't have to win the french to get that accolade from you. >> he's won it. >> charlie: i know it. >> multiple times. >> charlie: he didn't have to do it all in one year. >> that's right. by him winning it finally last year i believe that solidified him in my find. he is certainly the greatest player i've ever seen play. >> charlie: because? >> because of his sheer brilliance all over the court. defense, offense, movement, serve, up stairs, no real weakness in his game, consistency. you're talking about this streak just ended, charlie, going back for over six years, this man reached the semifinalsor better in every grand slam event he played. the next closest one was -- the

surfaces are all different now. australians a slow hard court, u.s. is fast hard court. french open is clay. nobody's come close to pulling that off. >> charlie: do you think somebody could win all four, of course they could, is it likely. >> very unlikely. more likely on the women's side because you have more dominance. serena if she had won that one. >> charlie: it didn't happen this year. >> it could happen but it will take somebody that mentally physically that's got -- nadal the toughest one is new york here at the u.s. open. >> charlie: why is that. >> the conditions are faster, the ball moves through the court faster. >> charlie: winnable done's fast. >> it's actually slower now believe it or not than the u.s. open. because they changed the nature of the grass they made the balls a little bit heavier. it's still, you need that athleticism and the ability to adjust quickly but the ball

doesn't zip as much through the court as it does at the u.s. open. >> charlie: so it doesn't slide. it doesn't go like that. >> it hits and it explodes. at wimbledon, if you hit a slough ball it will sit there. at the u.s. open it will move kind of like this table it will move through it faster than it will. and also for his body, the pounding that it takes on a hard court is more extreme and he runs so hard and he pounds whatever turf he's on. if he's on clay or grass it's much more forgiving on his body so at the end of a long season or summer of playing, that's why it will be very important to nadal how much he plays in between the u.s., the wimbledon and the u.s. open. >> charlie: could the right coach take him and his family does the coaching. >> his uncle tony does the roaching. he doesn't need anybody more than he's got. >> charlie: it's like team nadal.

>> exactly. >> charlie: i'm thinking of lynlindle used to prepare for te prepare. >> no, he prepared for wimbledon differently. >> charlie: didn't he build a court. >> yes. he was saying he was allergic to grass. >> charlie: he never won the french. >> pete never won the french. >> charlie: with the skills that you have and that's what they say you have that john doesn't have is the ability to sort of really listen and be a psychological influence on people. >> that usually comes from people who weren't that great as players. >> charlie: if you're not a perfect athlete. >> if you're a great athlete it's a little harder. exactly. because you were so good at it. just do it. >> charlie: that's the only argument about managers. they used to say people like ted williams, although he disagreed with that. he could never be a great manager because he couldn't understand why -- hello, it's just a ball coming across the

plate. >> john was saying why can't you pick up that little half ball. >> charlie: he would say that to you. >> no, i'm kidding but that's the mind set of a great player and also having that control out there. look, sam could have done things differently on claim. i think. i used to always wonder why he tried to serve so hard all the time on clay instead of mixing it up and serving a volley a little bit more. he tried a lot of different ways. the bottom line do you know why many people haven't done it. it's pretty darn hard. >> charlie: and he had a great forehand. >> great forehand, great serve, great volley. >> charlie: what did he need to win. >> he needed a little better backhand, more consistency on the backhand. >> charlie: most people on the tennis world agree that roger has earned, once he won the french he won the right to say. >> i think there's still a few out there that would say maybe the rocket is still there. >> charlie: your brother made be one of them. >> he had gone over to roger's

side. but it's a great debate. i'm only going from the open years it's hard for me to talk about the ludho and bill tilleddens. if you talk to some of the old ozzies. the game's different because of the technology. >> charlie: women's tennis. that's not what you focus on but tell me what's the status of women's tennis and what does it mean. >> well you know, i think it needs a little more consistency at the top and i think part of the fact that serena and venus has gotten back to one and two is amazing and all credit for doing it particularly serena. >> charlie: serena is the best player in women's tennis and has been for a decade. >> absolutely. >> charlie: because. >> she's got the fire, athleticism, she's got the intensity, she has a great serve.

we're seeing these serving academic problems on the women's side for the last few years. i think the other tap women are lacking in the mental stability department to be honest. i'm talking about -- all these girls briefly got to number one or won a major and then kind of disappeared. and venus and serena, particularly serena, venus has gotten back to number two really without winning a major tournament. >> charlie: how much does that have to do with the way their father trained them. >> i think it had a lot to do with it. >> charlie: people don't appreciate the foot work. >> they don't understand it because when they watch the player they've done the foot work. i always tell people watch roger federer when he's not hitting the ball. watch him while the other player's hitting the ball. i think that's a good lesson because you can kind of see, tennis is about expectations and all about where is the ball going to go, what were the

chances it's going to go over here. i'm on the court. what are the chances going up here and preparing yourself to make those moves and then to hit while they're on the run. that's where tennis has become more and more of an athletic game about hitting when you're moving. in the most tennis was more about striking the ball well from a spot. >> charlie: so wimbledon, your prediction is? >> i have a feeling that federer may not do it this year. i'm not really sure why it is, i just have a sense that he's a little more have yo vulnerable. >vulnerable. losing to the french. >> charlie: nobody makes much out of that, do you. >> it's really a feeling. i think nadal if he gets into the meat of the tournament will be hard to beat. it depends on the draw. that will be a big part of it. >> charlie: who is first, nadal. >> nadal is the top seed. there will be one and two so it doesn't matter. >> charlie: three will be.

>> probably jokovich or murray. and roddic will be in the next unless they decide to move roddic up which they've done in the past. >> charlie: because of previous wimbledon performance. >> correct. they could move him into the top four which would be good for him. that's a good thing because if roddic is not in the top four, he could play either federer or nadal in the quarter finals which would be a tough, which would be tough for him because he might have to go through two or three of those guys to win it. so the draw will say, let me say this. roddic to me matches up better against nadal on grass than he does against federer. federer obviously has the awkward game offensive and defensive skills he returns better. >> charlie: roddic is better against nadal. >> correct. >> charlie: he's more likely to beat nadal than federer. >> that's correct. federer would much much rather liked roddic than playing nadal. the other thing i point out in

the book that you will be interested in, back in those days when john and borg and carnes were playing, none of them played australians. it was an afterthought. when you look at the overall majors, my brother is seven, borg was 11, connors with it. wendall did play the australian but the others did not play the australian open and that was on grass in those days. imagine how many more. that's why sometimes when you look at the numbers overall of overall slams, sometimes it becomes a little skewed in favor of the more current players like agassi, like nadal who has got seven now, five french opens, even federer who has won a bunch of australians in australian open but people sort of forget that for a long time before the australian open moved to hard core it moved to a big time facility, it was really an afterthought. >> charlie: does your dad deserve or your mom or both deserve this credit for the passion you guys had for tennis? >> there's no doubt, there's no question they deserve.

>> charlie: who is both of them. >> both of them in different ways. but they allowed us, they gave us the opportunity to do different things and obviously we did a lot of sports when we were kids. but drilled us around and my dad's never missed a day that either one of us has been involved. >> charlie: never missed a match. >> never missed a match. john had many as a player, i had many as captain. so that passion is there. sometimes we like to say maybe too much passion. i'll end on this, charliement when my mom, when of her favorite moments was the day i got my drivers license. she said son, you're on your own. drive to your tournaments, i've had it with all these years. she's kind of the silent supporter that's been there for many years. >> charlie: i see your dad often at the u.s. open. >> oh yes.

>> charlie: this is from melissa who surrounding my own small world with so many shiny ones and gifted me with three beautiful daughters. >> absolutely. >> charlie: very nice. patrick mcenroe. thank you. >> thank you so much, charlie. >> charlie: thank you for joining us, see you next time.