I got my copy of the final from this website: http://www.tennisdvdworld.net/us-open-2012-mens-final-murray-djokovic.html.
It's the Sky Sports commentary which is my favourite.
I've not watched the AO final again and probably won't (I hardly ever watch matches Andy loses, especially his slam finals). It's hard to say how the match would have gone if Andy hadn't had his blisters as they obviously impaired his movement a lot. It probably would have been a very tough battle anyway as Djokovic was really hungry for this slam title, having missed out on the USO and failed to reach the final of Wimbledon and the Olympics.
I didn't feel too disappointed at the time but watching the match again (something I've never done before when Andy loses) was a bit depressing. Andy had Novak rattled in the second set, and he showed it, so despite the lost BP opportunities and the wayward feather, I still felt that had Andy been 100% there physically and mentally he could have turned the match around and continued to go toe to toe with Djokovic by upping his own game, thereby giving the spectators the match they had been hoping for and which the players themselves no doubt wanted. It would have been hard-fought, and with an unpredictable outcome, but at least the playing field would have been much more even. The fact though that Andy was still able to push Djokovic around despite everything is very much to his credit.
I haven't watched the final again yet. I will, but I just can't make myself do it at the moment. The fact that I've rewatched the semi about four times probably says a lot about me lol.
I was under the impression that the hamstring injury played a bigger part in Andy losing than the blisters to be honest, although I still don't understand the point of showing Andy's blisters on the big screen in the stadium. Brilliant way to let on to an opponent that the other bloke is injured if you ask me. It seemed ridiculous, I mean, we all know what a blister looks like, but all Djokovic needed to do was look up and see that Andy could have a problem he could use. I'm not saying he did, but he could have done.
Djokovic did up his level, I grant you that, but I do think Andy not being quite 100%, plus everything the semi with Federer took, especially emotionally, and the fact that Djokovic had a very easy semi and extra rest time was a factor, and I mean no disrespect to Djokovic when I say that. I really do feel that a fit Andy, with comparable rest time between the semi and the final, would have pushed Djokovic even closer than he did, or could have clinched it. It would probably still have been close, but most of their matches, especially recently, have been.
I think Djokovic's celebration at the end had the right tone. It was right that he should be pleased he had won, of course, but I would have been annoyed if he had done the shirt ripping thing. I just don't like it. It felt to me as if he knew that Andy wasn't quite right and he celebrated accordingly. I think they both did well in their speeches too, coming across as respectful of one another.
I think most of us would prefer to re-watch the Federer match! Just a pity it wasn't the final.
I didn't see the point in showing the blisters in all their ghastly glory either, but that seems to be how things are done these days. From what Andy said later though it seems it was the pain from his hamstring that was giving him more bother, and he must have been understandably concerned in case he did further damage to it. Whether Djokovic would have been aware of that problem, I don't know, although I think players are probably so tuned in that they can pick up on these things fairly quickly after a match starts.
Also (and I was watching on the BBC), despite the muted ape-man celebrations, Djokovic did tear off his shirt and throw it into the crowd, although he did at least retire to the side of the court before doing so. It seemed to me that Andy's voice kept cracking slightly during his speech, but he did very well to hide the huge disappointment and frustration he must have been feeling.