It?s a telling phrase; Roddick seems to have, in all areas, a great respect for the process. He works incredibly hard, on the court and off; makes an effort to be forthcoming and charming with the press, and acts as a mentor to the younger American players (he has been meaning to call junior Roland Garros winner Bjorn Fratangelo all week after making the effort to get his number). He seems to have an idea in his head of what the consummate tennis professional should be. It?s hard to tell what in all of this appeals so much to the crowd here at Queen?s Club, where he is a great favorite. Roddick has won here four times, but you wouldn?t expect even that to offset the chilliness that some of his on-court behavior should provoke from the notoriously reserved crowds. Yet he got almost as much support during his semifinal against Murray as the native Andy.
Part of that is probably due to the fact that nobody likes seeing a beating, and that?s what it was, even if it was delivered more through finesse than force.
"Today was just one of those days when everything went right,? Murray said afterward, and even Roddick?s equanimity in his press conference has a lot to do with the fact that; as he said, Murray was simply too good. Breaking Roddick?s serve immediately at the beginning of the match, the world No. 4 snuffed out any prospect of an immediate leveling with a backhand winner and some big serving. Picking Roddick?s serve as easily as if the American had sent him a telegraph announcing his intentions, he deprived Roddick of his biggest weapon and left him with an unpalatable choice: stay back and be out-rallied, or come forward and be passed.
Neither option was tenable. For all of Roddick?s sound and fury?the huffing and puffing, the bounding around the ball?he doesn?t generate that much pace or power off his groundstrokes any more, and he simply couldn?t live with Murray from the back of the court. Coming forward was equally unpalatable, as almost every single time he tried it, he worked a sliced approach shot that Murray reached with time to spare and, inevitably, made the pass. Whatever he did, point after point ended with the ball screaming past him. By the time he was serving out the first set, Murray was making the decisions for him, teasing him up the court only to curl the ball delicately around him. The second set, lasting just seven games, is more of the same; forehand winners from the back of the court or passing off both wings from Murray. In fact, it looks like watching the same point over and over again, exposing Roddick?s limited options in terms of hurting Murray. Serving at 1-5 to stay in the match, Roddick was reduced to yelling, "let?s keep it social, huh?? across the net as Murray sent another blistering forehand return winner past him. It?s hard not to wonder how exactly this match-up produced such a different result at Wimbledon in 2009.
Perhaps that match was on Murray?s mind as well, because he showed absolutely no mercy. In his press conference, asked about James Ward and his attention-grabbing run to the semifinals, he said straight-faced, ?I was getting a little bit jealous of the attention he was getting. I had to put in a good performance today to try and get some of the spotlight back.?
It was a joke and received accordingly, but maybe?just maybe?there?s a tiny kernel of truth in it. It may be wishful thinking, but Murray seems a touch more comfortable this year than he has in years past; possibly finally getting used to the oxygen-starved hothouse of expectation that is the British grass-court season, or maybe with just enough burrs under his skin?his injured ankle, another player getting more attention, the weather?to let him get out of his own way and just play. And when Murray plays like he can, like he did today, it would take something almost superhuman to stop him.
Of course, some of the same things were probably said two years ago in 2009 when Murray won this title. And he still has to go through Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who beat Ward in two sets today and is looking at his most relaxed and, hencem dangerous, before he can repeat that feat. Roddick, while not precisely defending or patronizing Murray?a difficult prospect after their match today?is quick to remind the room that we have been here before: ?He won two years ago before I played him. You guys were having the exact same article you?re gonna write tomorrow.?
Later, asked if he thinks Murray has the support of the British public in the same way that Henman did, he came back with: ?You guys gave Henman a hard time until he was three years retired. You?re forgetting?you?re trying to tell me a story, but I was actually there for the Henman years.? When the journalist in question points out that he was talking about the public not the press, Roddick is quick to expose it as an artificial distinction: ?You guys are kind of the connection between this room and the public ? a lot of times you guys help form the opinions, you know.? He seems to be demanding that the journalists sitting with him are honest with themselves, that they take responsibility for themselves. It?s clear that?s part of his conception of what it means to be a professional.
Still, despite Roddick?s timely reminders and the painful experience of history, it?s impossible?once reminded of what Murray can do with a tennis ball?not to get a bit excited, to think that maybe this year, this time ? The British are mocked a lot for thier desperation for a champion, and the old 'British-if-he-wins, Scottish-if-he-loses' adage has more than a bit of truth to it. But I never looked at Tim Henman and saw a champion. I?ve never looked at Murray and seen anything else. And if I can?t help getting a bit too excited over that possibility ? well, that?s part of the process, too.
Source: http://feeds.tennis.com/~r/tenniscom-features/~3/6MTr3x1Az8A/
No comments:
Post a Comment