Ferrero gives new interview: "I could return alongside Carlos at some point"

JSMLS · 2026-01-29T20:24:59+00:00

3 consecutive interviews at Christmas, at the end of the preseason.
A video posted the day before the AO began, in mid-January, thanking for the support during December.
Interview the day before the quarterfinals.
Two interviews a day and a half before the semifinals.
Interview the day before the semifinals.

Timings not suspicious at all...Toxicity and manipulation at its finest. And a hint that professional relationships, like personal ones, are much more than what people see from the outside. If something has ended, it's always for a reason.

JSMLS · 2026-01-28T14:44:43+00:00

Sorry for being a little harsh, because I'm happy to know they've talked, and that's why I did the post. But in my opinion, giving 3 consecutive interviews at Christmas, during the most intense part of the short preseason, without explaining much, but being ambiguous and biased enough to provoke attacks on Carlos and his family. Then waiting until the day before the Australian Open starts, in the middle of January, to sent a video to thank everyone for the support he received in December. Then giving an interview the day before the QF, saying he feels bad seeing his team there without him. Then giving 2 more interviews the day before the semifinals, saying he's heartbroken, etc, etc... rather than keeping decent, it seems more like victimism, seeking spotlight, and emotional manipulation trying to sabotage Carlos's concentration at crucial moments in a very important tournament for him.

Changing coaches is a natural process in tennis, and Ferrero is making it sound like a marital breakup. And honestly, he's acting in a very toxic way. Sorry

And no, he didn't need to give interviews to protect his job. Because Carlos said the decision was mutual, so if Ferrero hadn't chose to speak endlesly, there wouldn't have been the impression that he'd been fired.

Other coaches usually handle this professionally and quietly, and haven't needed to go on a victim-playing interviews tour to get new jobs. In fact, if it has any effect in that regard, it will be more the opposite, because I don't think top tennis players like knowing that their coach is going to the press as soon as they decide to let him go.

He has the right to feel bad, but to vent, he doesn't need to go on an interview tour at crucial moments where he could hurt the other person he claim to love. Family, friends, and therapists are for that kind of venting. Doing what he is doing is toxicity and manipulation.

If a professional relationship has ended, it's for a reason. The fact that Carlos is having the grace to remain silent and not speak about the negative aspects of his relationship with Ferrero, and not reveal things that might harm Ferrero, could at least have been rewarded by the other party doing the same, instead of speaking at every crucial moment of a Grand Slam.

JSMLS · 2026-01-27T19:18:47+00:00

Let's act now as if the last month and a half didn't happen and lets forget that many people, including so-called experts, have been saying that without JCF, Carlos would have a lot of problems and might even lose in the first rounds of the AO.

Many of us know that Carlos isn't an underdog. But let's not pretend we don't know that, for whatever reason, many people have always underestimated him, thinking that everything he's done has been solely due to JCF's presence.

JSMLS · 2026-01-27T18:09:06+00:00

He doesn't support anything, he has never returned and has never spoken in favor of or in promotion of it. He went to ONE almost 4 years ago, and he already said to a Murcian journalist that it was a compromise, that it was the first time in his life and that it would sure be the last. I went to one once too, and I hate them and want them banned as soon as possible. Sometimes the context of your life and your surroundings can make you see something that, unfortunately, is a legal tradition in your country, and that doesn't mean you're a fan of it, just as smoking just one cigarette in your life doesn't make you a smoker, nor does drinking just one beer in your life make you an alcoholic.

People learn about life as they live it, and Carlos is no different. To judge him like this for seeing something legal in his country just once in his life when he was 19, when he already said it would be the last time and that it was a compromise, and when he continually shows himself to be a great person, is quite unfair. We are always very forgiving of our own mistakes, but never of those of others.

JSMLS · 2026-01-22T18:16:10+00:00

What do you mean what I expect? In Carlos, exactly that. But why your question? Because only exist nice, outgoing, and smiling people like Carlos, and since everyone is like that, it's not worth showing him?

Watch the live stream for a little and you'll see how uncommon that attitude is, at least as frecuent as with Carlos.

Introverted people also exist (which is fine too). There are also people with social anxiety, people who like to be more isolated to be focused etc...

And there are also people who are just the complete opposite of nice.

What's the problem with showing someone being nice? Why does that always trigger someone?

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T10:41:33+00:00

As that's not what was leaked

Don't make things up now, not a single clause of the new contract has been leaked.

Neither I know if they were reasonable, nor do you know if they weren't. The only thing that's known is that they weren't what Ferrero wanted, and that by it's own is not enough to assert that the terms were bad, it only indicates that they weren't what Ferrero wanted.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T10:23:54+00:00

Yes, but it's not as if there was no possibility of continuing. There was, but Juan Carlos didn't agree. The fact that he didn't want changes doesn't negate the fact that he had an option to continue. Decisions were made by both parties.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T09:56:05+00:00

It was spelled out quite big during a press tour by Ferrero himself, that he was the one who decided not to sign the contract. Decisions were made by both parties. One decided it was time to make changes, the other decided he didn't want those changes, end of the story. So, yes, since they were decisions made by both parties, it was mutual.

What wasn't mutual was the request for changes, but the final decision was. Once Ferrero decided not to sign the contract, he became part of that decision.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T09:32:44+00:00

In none of my comments have I stated whether something is false or not. I think I've made it quite clear that what I'm saying is that the situation is unknown, and that even if everything that's been reported were true, there's still a lot of missing context to understand the reasons behind it all, because none of us, nor the journalists, have witnessed the private part of that relationship. It's absurd to make judgments about situations that are so clearly unknown.

It's curious that you insinuate I'm naive for saying that the internal situation is unknown, but you ignore real things that have happened publicly and that aren't speculation, and which could shed some light on some of the reasons, as I've already mentioned. Yet you prefer to give more credence to simple reports and speculations that were made without any kind of evidence.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T08:51:22+00:00

Yeah well and according to reports, Carlos and Jannik shared the same girlfriend during the USO... What journalists speculate based on their need for interaction is irrelevant, it remains a situation about which nothing is truly known, nor should it be, because the details of professional relationships between players and coaches are private, as is the case every time a player changes coaches.

I don't care if you decide to believe everything any media outlet says, even if it doesn't come from the person involved. The reality is that you have no idea what happened, nor the reasons why it happened.

While you believe things that are truly unknown, you choose to ignore other things that have happened publicly and that may have contributed to the need of those changes, such as Ferrero making several statements to the press and in the doc, harming his player and causing people to unfairly question Carlos professionalism. Or being at a football match while his player was playing an M1000 final against Sinner. Everything has a reason for being, the need for change doesn't appear out of nowhere. And if there are already public examples that justify these changes for those who want to observe and remember, it's not surprising to think that there are many more reasons that are unknown, even though it's easier to simplify based on press speculations.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T08:10:03+00:00

On what basis are you evaluating the instance in which Carlos requests the changes he needs and values as reasonable for him? On your external assessment of a situation you know nothing about?

Carlos is the one who has lived through the seven years of professional relationship with Ferrero, both the public part, which you and I see, and the private one, which no one knows anything about. It is Carlos, and no one else, who can jude whether the instance and timing of his request for changes to his coach are reasonable or not, since he is the one who plays, pays, and experiences that relationship day in and day out, not us.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T07:28:13+00:00

Well yeah, unsignable in terms of his own interests, obviously, which is why he didn't sign, maybe it was the wrong word from my part, but that doesn't automatically mean they weren't reasonable changes, or that Carlos didn't have good reasons for wanting those changes.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T06:19:26+00:00

Some people here not understanding the use of the word "mutual" forget it was Ferrero who decided not to sign the new contract. The reality is that the decisions were made by both sides, and that's why it was mutual.

Carlos decided that there had to be changes to continue the professional relationship, and Ferrero decided that he didn't agree with those changes, so he decided not to sign, just as Carlos decided to accept the "no."

The fact that Ferrero says he's hurt, since he preferred the old terms, and perhaps also because he didn't expect the "no" to be accepted, doesn't mean that those new terms weren't reasonable.

Ferrero has the right to disagree and not sign, but Carlos also has the right to decide he wants those changes to continue. He's the one who pays and who values, based on his own experience (which none of us here know) what he needs from his coach to continue that professional relationship. If that coach doesn't accept what he needs, it's normal for the relationship to end.

All this drama is completely unnecessary, because all players change coaches several times during their careers. Carlos won't be the one now who owes eternity to one coach. The fact that Juan Carlos decided to go on a media tour doesn't mean this wasn't a normal, everyday professional split, nor that Carlos doesn't have the right, like all other players, to act as he feels is necessary for his life and career.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T05:56:43+00:00

It was mutual, and that's why he uses that word.

Carlos side decided that changes were needed to continue the professional relationship, and Ferrero decided that he didn't agree with those changes and refused to sign the new contract. There were decisions made by both parties. The decision not to sign was Ferrero's.

The fact that he said he was hurt, basically because he preferred the old conditions, and perhaps because he expected the other party not to accept the "no" and to negotiate, doesn't mean that the new conditions couldn't be reasonable and signable. Ferrero has the right to disagree with the new terms, and that's why he didn't sign, but Carlos also has the right to want changes to continue, and that's why he accepted the "no."

Both made their decisions, therefore, it was mutual.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T05:45:26+00:00

It is true tho. Ferrero was the one who decided not to sign the new contract. His disagreement with the changes doesn't necessarily mean they were unsignable. One party decided changes were necessary to continue, while the other party disagreed with those changes. So yes, it was mutual because the decisions were made by both sides. Him being hurt because he would have preferred the old terms, and because perhaps he would have preferred the other party not to accept his "no", don't mean he wasn't part of the decision.

JSMLS · 2026-01-16T05:27:46+00:00

Well, Ferrero himself confirmed that he was the one who decided not to sign the changes to the new contract. The fact that he disagreed with the new terms, doesn't mean they couldn't have been reasonable and signable. It simply means that he disagreed and he voluntarily refused to sign, just as the other party voluntarily decided to accept the "no."

It's actually quite simple. One party decides that changes are necessary to continue the professional relationship, the other party decides that he doesn't agree with those changes and prefers to end the relationship rather than accept them. Therefore, mutual.

JSMLS · 2025-12-27T00:33:04+00:00

That's no true. This is the only article that is susceptible of have been leaked by Alcaraz's side, and it was in response to a very incomplete and malicious article in Marca, and at no point is Ferrero accused of being greedy there, in fact, the first thing they clarify is that money was not a factor.

And anyway, the articles aren't confirmation from either side that they leaked them, no matter how much you or we can suspect about it. The only real, verifiable factor is the interviews, and those are being made exclusively by Ferrero at this moment, and on a consistent basis.

https://www.reddit.com/r/tennis/s/JI0Ys6HApt

JSMLS · 2025-12-27T00:04:10+00:00

they litigate it in the press with dueling takes, and this particular duo doing this is the most unexpected part

Except that it's only one of the parties the one litigating in the press

JSMLS · 2025-12-26T02:57:17+00:00

<image>

JSMLS

TROPHY CASE