He won the USO and Wimbledon with it so, yes it was just a niggle. I think part of the reason Andy had the op was so he could take a break from tennis for a while.
What a ridiculous comment.
Look BN, you need to be honest now. Are you suggesting that Andy is lying about his back? If you are you've really got no place here.
It's been patently obvious since late 2011 that Andy was carrying a back injury. It's been obvious the injury was a particular problem on clay, because of the nature of clay-court tennis. This year it has become increasingly obvious to anyone with a pair of eyes to see that the injury was becoming a problem on the hard courts as well. What do you want him to do before you accept he has a problem, wave the white flag and admit defeat, because if you do you have no idea about the psychology of pro sportsmen.
There is no way Andy would risk a surgery purely for a break. All surgeries, no matter how 'minor' carry risks, which is exactly why Andy was reluctant to have surgery in the first place.
BN you contradict yourself by pointing out that athletes can carry injuries and play through them. What do you think Andy has been doing? He's used pilates, specialist physio, pain meds, including injections, and all sorts to enable him to continue to play, but lately he's obviously decided enough is enough.
As for Andy winning majors with the injury, grass is a much more forgiving surface than the others. I think that is partly why Andy has had such great results on the surface for the last year or so. Also, Andy lost 4 major finals before he won his first. There is no doubt in my mind that the the bloody-minded will to win the USO and Wimbledon (and the Olympics) in the face of those losses is exactly what kept Andy going through those major wins, even if he was in pain. Most pro sportsmen would rather die than stop, even for pain, but equally most know there comes a time when pain meds and other help are just putting off the inevitable and more permanent measures have to be tried.