TENNIS AUSTRALIAN OPEN:ANDY MURRAY shies away from the suggestion but there can rarely have been a better time to reach for his first grand slam title than in the absence of the two players who have made that quest such a forlorn exercise for so many for so long.
How completely and quickly Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal repair their contrasting wounds – pride and hamstring, respectively – will determine the shape of tennis in the months and years to come. There is a growing sentiment that Federer’s vulnerability over the course of the tournament in Melbourne betrayed an underlying decay in his game, a result of the commendable distraction of fatherhood but exacerbated by the rise of those around him on the circuit.
Nevertheless, when Murray walks on to the centre court here tomorrow alongside Novak Djokovic to contest the final of the Australian Open, he will glance around the Rod Laver Arena and either dwell upon or suppress the memory of his embarrassment in defeat by Federer in the same match a year ago. It will give him strength or nightmares.
Murray was convinced that was his time – which is why he could not quell the tears, devastated that, when his chance came, he did not trust his talent. He promised himself he would never let that happen again. In the main he has kept that promise.
To lose one legend is unfortunate, to lose two is blessed good fortune for everyone else. There will be wider discussion later about what the travails of Nadal and Federer mean for the sport in general and their peers in particular, but there is no denying this tournament will be remembered as the one that provided Murray and Djokovic with the stage they had always craved: a grand slam context to decide the championship of each other.
When Murray put away Spain’s David Ferrer, the number seven seed, in a fierce struggle over four sets in the second semi-final yesterday, his thoughts turned immediately to an opponent he has known for a decade and more, the one player he regarded as competing with him most intensely to overthrow Federer and Nadal.
Murray acknowledges that Djokovic initially pulled ahead of him; he has also already won a major. What more incentive could he need?
Certainly he spends little time dwelling on the Fred Perry Question: his Scottishness, perhaps, inures him to the weight of expectation to emulate the great pre-war English star, one so far away, 75 years in fact, he might be a fading supernova. Repeatedly Murray says he cares little for such historical quirks.
But is this, nevertheless, his best chance to win a major?
“I felt like last year was a good chance as well,” he said. “It depends on the day. I am playing against a great player. Novak played unbelievable tennis against Roger. It is one of those matches where, if I play very well, I will definitely be within a shot of winning. But I will need to play my best tennis. It is a chance. Whether it is better than the other ones I don’t know.”
Obviously he respects Federer. But he does not fear him. Nor does he quake in Djokovic’s presence.
Theirs is a rivalry not unlike that of Federer and Nadal: unmitigated but full of respect. They are, he says, good friends.
“I think I’ve got closer to him over the past year. We always got on well. I have spent a lot more time with him.
“We have had quite a lot of the same experiences over the last few years. We have got a lot in common and the last year or so we have spent a lot more time practising together. We always message each other if we do well in tournaments and stuff.
“He is a very nice guy – good fun, nice to be around. I will be putting that to one side on Sunday, but hopefully we will be friends afterwards.”
So, who will win? Djokovic is favourite, rightly so after the number he did on Federer. He was tough on the sixth seed, Tomas Berdych, too, in three relatively quick sets, put an injured Viktor Troicki out of his misery quickly and took the final set to love against Nicolas Almagro in the fourth round. There was hardly a blip.
Murray’s passage to the final has been the usual voyage of discovery and flickering concern, but it might have better prepared him for the big day.
This was some semi-final. Murray has found many ways to transmit his own anxiety to those in the stands cheering him on and going punch for punch with the Spaniard certainly did the trick for the first hour of an enthralling contest.
Neither betrayed a hint of surrender. Murray was not at his best in the first set, which Ferrer gladly grasped with uncomplicated, robust ground strokes that allowed his opponent barely a moment to breathe.
Normally, under such an onslaught, Murray finds a way to prick the assault with subtle and soft retaliation. Not here. He was rattled and he gave nearly as good as he got.
The second set took a similar path. Murray was in danger of going out if he could not find a way to stem the Spaniard’s brutal game.
He did, gathering his resources just in time to blitz Ferrer in a tie-break.
He returned to his imperious best in the third and it looked as if Ferrer would fold. He did not. He pushed Murray all the way in the fourth and impartial observers had to wonder who might emerge stronger in a fifth set.
It was not needed. Again Murray prevailed in the tie-break.
Perhaps he knew Ferrer has not won a single tie-break in 10 attempts at the Australian Open. History is not all bunk.
Guardian Service
Australian Open Melbourne Park
MEN’S SINGLES: Semi-final: (5) Andy Murray (Sco) bt (7) David Ferrer (Spa) 4-6 7-6 (7-2) 6-1 7-6 (7-2).
WOMEN’S DOUBLES: Final: (1) Gisela Dulko (Arg), Flavia Pennetta (Ita) bt (12) Victoria Azarenka (Blr), Maria Kirilenko (Rus) 2-6 7-5 6-1.
MIXED DOUBLES: Semi-finals: Yung-Jan Chan (Tpe), Paul Hanley (Aus) bt Bethanie Mattek-Sands (US), Horia Tecau (Rom) 2-6 6-3 11-9; (2) Katarina Srebotnik (Slo), Daniel Nestor (Can) bt (3) Maria Kirilenko (Rus), Nenad Zimonjic (Ser) 6-4 7-5.
