next »

[Fiverings]

This final was won by the best player currently... it was not lost by Andy who  is the second best player on current form, but there was little between them and they are both streets ahead of all the other players on the tour. Glad that on the way to the final he laid to rest the myth of Fed being better on the big stage. Talking of acronyms can anyonyone think of an inoffensive one for Past It GOAT?Well done Andy.

   Good Once Not Now ?

[Ruthie]

yeah ...except I really dont know how she, or anyone else for that matter, can justify bashing the most talented and successful tennis player britain can lay claim to for 70 or whatever years. 3 successive grand slam finals...winner of 1 in arguably the strongest era of mens tennis.... yeah Virginia clever very clever.... Not!

I'd be the last person to defend Virginia Creeper but the bit I saw of the Eurosport chat she was in fact very positive about Andy. Essentially said he'd been brilliant but that he hadn't paced himself well enough. 
Re some other posts I've noticed over the past year or so how certain people build Andy up as some kind of god so that if he wobbles slightly on the pedestal they've built for him they then attack him for having feet of clay and not meeting their great expectations.   He's an ordinary mortal.  No he didn't play his best today but he played pretty good for 2 sets and still showed flashes of brilliance right up till the very last game.  He has proved that he belongs right at the top of the game. 
Anyone (not on MW I hasten to add) who is now labelling him a one slam wonder just shows how ignorant they are given that noone has won a 2nd slam immediately after the 1st in the open era.  And to beat the top 2 ranked players in the world to have done so would have been quite a feat.  I wish Andy could have done it but I'm still proud of what he has achieved.  And he can continue to hold his head up high. 

[deb]

I'd be the last person to defend Virginia Creeper but the bit I saw of the Eurosport chat she was in fact very positive about Andy. Essentially said he'd been brilliant but that he hadn't paced himself well enough. 
Re some other posts I've noticed over the past year or so how certain people build Andy up as some kind of god so that if he wobbles slightly on the pedestal they've built for him they then attack him for having feet of clay and not meeting their great expectations.   He's an ordinary mortal.  No he didn't play his best today but he played pretty good for 2 sets and still showed flashes of brilliance right up till the very last game.  He has proved that he belongs right at the top of the game. 
Anyone (not on MW I hasten to add) who is now labelling him a one slam wonder just shows how ignorant they are given that noone has won a 2nd slam immediately after the 1st in the open era.  And to beat the top 2 ranked players in the world to have done so would have been quite a feat.  I wish Andy could have done it but I'm still proud of what he has achieved.  And he can continue to hold his head up high. 

well said Ruthie.

[wimbledonwestie]

Connors, McEnroe, Lendl, Edberg, Becker, Agassi (to name a few) all remembered and respected for the slams they won - and rightly so. They all lost plenty finals too!  No one is decrying them for it - again, rightly so. If you are going to put yourself in a position to win a slam, realistically there will be times when you come second. Andy can be proud of his achievements so far and look forward to adding to them. And we look forward to celebrating them all! Remember where we were this time last year? Where will we be this time next year? Exciting times - and tennis is right on the sporting map just now, fantastic!

[Grabcopy]

Lendl made 19 finals. That's a lot. If Andy does the same, he's sure to win at least eight.

[ABF]

I just don't agree with the majority of journos , pundits, anti-murrays and the like. Its like they watched a different match to me. There was nothing seperating Andy and Novak for the majority of time spent on court. Everything changed after that medical time out from murray. Murray was then severly restricted in his ability to take off and stop. Novak knew he was struggling with the blisters and made Murray run to the corners much more than he had been doing and was able to do. Andy was clearly restricted in movement and his game suffered.His effectiveness dropped a level or 2 ....or 3 by the 4th set.

Sure Djoko played a fine game ..of course he did...but upped his level of play to standard Murray couldnt perform at??...********! Djoko just played like most would when they face an injured or physically struggling opponent. He played the ball into the corners and played a short ball to the net...didnt have to be great shots...just placed at those spots.

As for the Heckler....if you are reading this...and there is a chance you are considering some of the posts ive read.....you are a prize ****...and why you weren't ejected from the stadium is beyond me.

Murray is just as good as DJoko if not slightly the better player....thats my opinion ...and thats that

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/tennis/novak-djokovic-beats-andy-murray-in-australian-open-final-1-2761924

[ABF]

Lendl finally won in his fifth final at the French in 84 at the age of 24 yrs 3 months. His 6th final, from memory, was the US Open in 84, when he was 24 yrs 6 months. He was about a year ahead of Andy.

He lost his next slam final, too, against Wilander at the 85 French - so he was one from seven. It wasn't looking good. Then he went on a tear and won the US Open from 85-87 and the French in 86 and 87. It was that three-year period, really, that defined his career.

To do the same, Murray has to find an answer to Nole.

I think the answer to Nole is for Addidas to make Andy sneakers that dont give him blisters.... lol...that should do the trick