On the eve of the men’s singles final
at this year’s Wimbledon championships, the British were hoping for a historic
double. A certain Jonathan Marray was aspiring to become the first Brit to win
the men’s doubles title since 1936. Yes, the same year in which Fred Perry —
you know who — won the last of his and Britain’s three singles titles at
Wimbledon, the burden of which Andy Murray was carrying into the men’s singles
final.
Standing between Murray’s and
Britain’s apparent date with destiny was 16-time Grand Slam and six-time
Wimbledon champion, Roger Federer. This year’s final was more intriguing than
the previous ones for the after effects the outcome would generate, than the
match itself. Should Federer win, he would equal William Renshaw and Pete
Sampras for the all-time record for men’s singles titles at Wimbledon. He would
also tie Sampras’s record of 286 weeks at No. 1. Should Murray win, he would
send the region into a sort of frenzy last witnessed after England won the 1966
football World Cup.
But alas, what could have been a
double delight, turned out to be just a doubles delight. Jonny Marray won the
doubles title while his more illustrious compatriot faltered. Andy Murray, who
before the start of the final was thought to have found a way to land the
coveted title, still seemed a work in progress at the end of it all.
Federer was coming into this
tournament having not tasted success at a Grand Slam since 2010, when he beat
Murray to win the Australian Open. He was written off with every single failure
to win a Grand Slam though he always made it to the business end of the
tournament. He was even reduced to a silent spectator to the great rivalry that
was unfolding between Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic.
But here he was, just a month short of
his 31st birthday, back at the helm of world rankings, with 17 Grand Slam
titles to his name and a seventh Wimbledon in his kitty.
Where will this put Federer in the
pantheon of greats? Right at the top? Critics might hold his inability to beat
Nadal on the red dirt at Roland Garros, even as Nadal has beaten him on his
beloved grass, against him. But to win a Grand Slam at nearly 31 — the first
since Arthur Ashe to win Wimbledon after 30 — when fitter and younger legs were
testing and exploiting his endurance was no mean task.
The run-up to the tournament clearly
belonged to Murray. But ultimately it was Federer who emerged on a high. Stats
and trivia ranging from the absurd ‘The last Brit to win a singles title at
Wimbledon was Virginia Wade in 1977, also a jubilee year and 2012 is also a
jubilee year’ to a more relevant ‘Murray is only one of two active players to
possess a better head to head against Federer’ were thrown in. But Murray hadn’t
beaten him when it had mattered the most — finals of the 2008 U.S. Open and the
2010 Australian Open.
However, under the prevailing
circumstances, it was more likely, that Murray’s start to the final would be
passive. To hang in there and wait for the openings. But it was he who started
on an aggressive note by breaking Federer in the very first game, displaying
the same qualities that helped him work his way up through a tricky draw.
He hit hard and hit deep and hurried
Federer into his shots. He forced Federer into committing way too many unforced
errors and won the first set — his first success from 10 attempts at winning a
set in a Grand Slam final.
However, the tide turned decisively in
Federer’s favour in the latter half of the second set, when Murray missed a
crucial break point. It would have given him a chance to serve for a two-set
lead. In the most familiar of places, Federer would have found himself in the
most unfamiliar of situations. But it was not to be. Federer held on, he broke
and won the set.
Then came the rain. Ideally the delay
should have helped Murray. To regroup and reassess. But once the match resumed
under the roof, Federer thrived and after just the first few games, it seemed
that he sensed victory.
He chipped, chopped, sliced, served
and volleyed, though the last two hardly came as a combination. He went for the
lines with the sort of confidence that had eluded him since the ignominy he
suffered at the hands of Jo-Wilfried Tsonga at last year’s Wimbledon when he
lost after taking a two-set lead. The turnaround was complete and this was the
Federer of old, the one that Djokovic encountered in the semifinal.
On the contrary, it wasn’t the Murray
of old. Even as a belligerent Federer ran around Murray’s backhands and second serves
to go on the offensive, the battered and bruised Brit clung on. He worked
harder than ever and came closer than ever but still fell short, plunging the
entire nation into a sea of despair.
So where does this leave Andy Murray?
“I played better this time in the final and that's the main thing,” said Murray
after the match. “It was my first time in a Wimbledon final, I’d never been
there before. So I’m still improving, still playing better tennis, trying to
improve,
which is all I can do.”
Murray now has the Olympics ahead and
then the U. S. Open. He would go into these knowing fully well that he is now
closer to the top three than ever before. As for Federer, he will be back in
Wimbledon, three weeks from now to win the elusive Olympic singles gold.
The Federer of 2012 will never be the
player who won three slams each in three calendar years in 2004, 2006 and 2007.
He won’t be his former invincible self either. The No. 1 ranking may still
change hands a couple of more times before the end of the year. But at the end
of this year’s Championships, he looks to have put an end to the long drawn
debate. He might after all be the greatest of them all.
No comments:
Post a Comment