Don't listen to the BBC when it comes to tennis (From St Albans & Harpenden Review)

Don't listen to the BBC when it comes to tennis

4:42pm Thursday 23rd July 2009 in

• Skip social links
• Print
• Email
• Comments(0)

When I said in my last blog that Andy Murray can win Wimbledon, it was with the belief that with it being arguably his best chance of winning Wimbledon, he would take this opportunity and at the very least reach the final.

Of course that didn’t happen and I feel a little silly for thinking he could win Wimbledon because he failed to deliver when it mattered most.

With Rafael Nadal out injured, Murray had a clear run to the final. At least that’s what the BBC and the British media said. Roger Federer had won the French Open and if he Wimbledon he would break the record for the number of Grand Slams held. But apparently that pressure would be too much and with Murray’s winning record against him, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Murray would win Wimbledon. At least that’s what the BBC and the British media said.

So it’s the 3rd of July at around 3pm and Federer has just beaten Tommy Haas to reach his sixth consecutive Grand Slam final. In his last 15 Grand Slams, Federer has reached the final on 14 occasions which is the greatest evidence that he produces his best form when it matters most.

It is Murraymania on a packed Henman Hill and the fans were confident of victory, some had even camped out since Wednesday night for tickets.

Andy Roddick was Murray’s opponent. It was billed as the best server in tennis vs the best returner of serve in tennis. Murray’s all court game would surely be too much for Roddick because his only weapon was his serve and Murray would get enough balls back in play to win. At least that’s what the BBC and the British media had you believe.

Three hours later and hopes of British winner were ruined for another year. We should know better than to trust the media because they had us convinced that Murray would win Wimbledon.

Yet when he needed to play at his very best, he couldn’t do it. That’s been the story of his year in the Grand Slams. He arrived at the Australian Open in January as the form player on the tour and he got as far as the quarter finals where he lost to Fernando Verdasco. At the French Open he was once again looked at as a potential winner and it increased when Nadal was knocked out. But again he reached the quarter final and lost, this time to Fernando Gonzalez.

Murray has many of the attributes needed to win a Grand Slam. He’s one of the fittest players on the tour, he’s quick, has great defence, imaginative and above all else he is very good.

But if he wants to win a Grand Slam, he still has key areas which he must improve on. His 2nd serve is a major weakness. When his 1st serve goes in, it is around the 130mph range and it’s very difficult to get back in play. However, the second serve is around 90mph which is far too slow to be competitive and it regularly gives his opponents the opportunity to gain an advantage early in the rally.

Murray’s backhand is probably the best on the tour. Technically its perfect, he can hit any shot with backhand because he has the rarely ability to disguise his shots so that he can hit 2 completely different backhands yet the preparation before impact is exactly the same.

This makes it all the more surprising that he is so defensive. He seldom takes the initiative during points and generally waits for his opponents to make the mistake.

The lack of aggressiveness has been highlighted but it still hasn’t been adapted and it will continue to hurt his chances of winning a Grand Slam until it is changed. When he has reached the later stages of tournaments he has been too passive and complacent.

He must be performing a 110% to reach finals because it won’t be handed to him. That’s why Federer’s record of 21 consecutive semi final appearances is so great. The consistency of performance when the pressure is on is what separates the great players from the good players.