I reckon they need to look at the whole staggering the semis idea. In five out of the last six years, the guy playing the first semi, with a 24-hour recovery advantage, has won the final.
Well if that doesn't tell the organisers something, then nothing will, even although it's blindingly obvious.
Why should we pretend it didn't happen? That attitude seems to me to discredit all that Murray has and is achieving. He got to the final for goodness sake. En route he achieved the ginormous step of slaying one of his nastiest and most viscous dragons. If as people are suggesting, and the evidence would seem to support that, it is going to be the Murray/Djokovic era, then Murray is going to win some and lose some. He might well lose more than he wins. We all need to get used to that.
Much as it pains me so say it, the fact that Boogers reports doesn't look like it is going to be too negative is an indicator of the fact that he put up a good fight.
It might have been the blisters, it might have been the emotional fall out from the Federer match, who knows? The important thing is Murray was up there in another GS final. I don't think Lendl is going to be too worried about this one.
I am proud ( although I have no right to be, not actually knowing the guy), of how well he fought in a difficult situation. There are more positives than negatives from this tournament in my opinion. Not just the Fed match, but the fact the early rounds were not the normal rollover coaster. He is making progress all of the time. He certainly shouldn't scurry away like a thief in the night. I was glad he held his head up high in the presentation. We as his supporters should do likewise.
And Boogers' report is a very fair account of the match.
I'm not too disappointed because I wasn't realistically expecting a Murray win. He's still a work in progress with Lendl, who himself took over a year to win his second Slam, but one thing is certain and that is that Murray's mental fortitude is no longer an issue, and he showed us it again in this match. He must have known by the third set that his blistered feet (can't Adidas do something to make their shoes more wearer friendly?) were going to deny him the pleasure of a win, and that Djokovic would, understandably, take full advantage of the situation, yet he refused to give up despite being in obvious pain, something a tweaked hamstring only added to.
It's being said that Djokovic was the better player throughout but there were definite signs in the early stages of the match that Murray had him rattled - and at least one racket suffered, albeit slightly by Djokovic's standards. The important thing is that Murray now knows he can win a Slam, and with that knowledge, plus the fact that he beat Federer for the first time in one, he can build on this match, taking the positives from it and seeing the negatives in their true perspective. Unlike the aftermath of previous AO final defeats the future looks bright, not bleak.