Wimbledon 2009 - Men's Semifinal round-up
July 3rd 2009 20:23
Match Lineup
Today was a day of contrasting matches. The towering nonchalance of one Roger Federer was in stark contrast to the brisk efficiency and bloody mindedness of Andy Roddick. But both knew what they had to do get to the final summit. And they did what they do best - ground out spirited fightbacks. While the first match had a poetic quality to it aided somewhat by the single handed backhand of both players, the second one was relentless in its ability to keep spectators on knife edge. Certainly all Brits on Centre court would have been riveted to the action as their sole hope Murray looked till the end to be in the game and giving Roddick quite the fight.
Call me a throwback or a traditionalist or whatever you will, but the single handed backhand is that unique gift - at once providing the ability to defend or attack, play a slice or a drop or a pulverizing shot cross court or down the line. Perhaps it loses out to the double handed variety on two counts - sheer power and improbable angles. While power remains the double handed backhand's forte, the angle part of it is fast becoming contested thanks to today's incredibly strong wristed players - players also gifted with the powerful imaginations needed to conceive strokes of amazing brilliance and the skill needed to execute it.
Swiss nonchalance
The first semifinal arguably showcased a higher quality of tennis. Not very surprising considering one Roger Federer was involved in the game and was up against an old mate - Tommy Haas. This was one of those games which statistics do not adequately describe. A straight sets defeat is what the score line would say. But a look deeper would also highlight the premium placed on break points in the entire match. The first breakpoint in the match came up halfway in the second set when Haas faltered under extreme pressure from Federer's magical racquet work. It can be said, on reflection, that Haas was tight on the big points and that he let the pressure get to him. But that needs to be viewed in balance with the fact that the man he was facing up against was in the proverbial zone. Serves, forehands, backhands, volleys and drops all seemed to skim the top of the net and head straight for the lines. It was a match of a higher quality than the second semifinal but not quite as interesting. I know that is a strange statement. But the thing is that the match showcasing a higher quality of tennis need not be the most soul stirring one or the nail-bite-inducing one. The Murray-Roddick game takes the cake on the nail biting count. But the second match saw a larger number of errors and free points than the first. In balance let it be said that maybe a Brit would have seen this differently and for him/her the second game would have held far more fascination - simply because of the emotions riding on it.
American dream?
The Murray-Roddick game delivered on its promises. A drama filled game was what the public wanted and they got it. The match seesawed from one side to the other. Where early on, Roddick seemed to have the wood on the Brit, Murray showed himself to be a player who can adapt and can switch gears as he showed late in the 2rd set where he started putting more pace on his serves and his ground strokes. While the match balanced with 1 set each after 2 sets, Roddick seized the initiative with his big serves and booming ground strokes- especially the forehand in the 3rd set. Doing so, he threw a challenge to Murray. One which the Brit gamely accepted. For a while it even seemed to work as the young Murray played the game of a much older man giving Roddick no pace to capitalize on and just keeping the ball in play and letting Roddick make the errors. But this was a contest of strength and stamina more than anything else. And on the day Roddick was the stronger and fitter man. On the evidence of this match, Murray seemed to be the strategically better player and in my mind would have been more of a challenge for Federer. Yes, it is no secret who I am backing to win The Championships this year.
Over the years after having watched Edberg, Becker and Sampras scorch these lawns with their serves and ground strokes and volleys, it does appear that the grass has slowed down quite a lot. So much so that both the semifinals had quite a few rallies going back and forth - almost as if it were hard court tennis. The pace on the strokes was never quite that much that the players saw the sense in consistently following through to the net. Serve and volley is one of the spectacles in tennis and the Wimbledon authorities would do well to look into this and produce faster courts. It is not that watching rallies is boring or anything like that. It is just that Wimbledon, having the potential to be the one surface able to encourage the serve and volley style, does not make good on it.
The less said about Hawkeye the better it is. Not only does the technology not convince me that it is able to calculate distances in millimeters accurately, but we also had an instance in the match where it was not able to provide the video needed for a challenge call. It may have its good points but it is far from reliable and infallible.
Uncharted territory
Lastly what does one say about Federer. If Roger were to have one of those reflective moments and were to approach the mighty Rod Laver, the peerless Pete Sampras or the matchless Agassi, they could probably not tell him too many things. Federer is on uncharted territory here. Where he is planning to go, no mortal has in the game of tennis. Going where nobody has gone can be a lonely journey. What can pass unnoticed with others will be highlighted with you. What will be lauded as special from others will be expected ordinarily and regularly from you. But then you also get the attention, adulation and sheer fanfare that nobody else gets or has even ever got in the game. The Swiss genius is one game away from sporting immortality although many would argue understandably that he is already reached that stage. But the truth is that Federer has talent that cannot quite be kept in check by the numbers and statistics out there. He is at the top right now yes. But his talent is such and the mastery that he has over his own game not to mention how he has opponents and his peers in a thrall is so overpowering that he would be doing himself an injustice if he does not go on and follow through on his promise of being the best the game has ever seen in its long and rich history.
If you ask me whether I am happy about the final matchup I would say "No". I think Murray could have offered Federer a tougher match than Roddick. The American, as strong and fit as he is, simply lacks the imagination required to adapt and survive against Federer when he waltzes on court leaving behind just debris. But greater surprises have happened and one more would not be an absolute calamity. History might just want Federer to touch and change it. But then change never is easy - as the champion himself will attest. This is a changed Federer who will walk out onto Centre Court on Sunday; a man who has banished fears and exorcised demons - well almost all of them bar Nadal. But great men are after all allowed small liberties...
| 21 |
| Vote |
Add Comments
Read More
Comments (4)
Comment by Balachandhran S
on IPL Season II - Day 1
Tricolour Prism
Raji,
Well, I kind of have the opposite sort of viewpoint which should not come as a surprise for you.
The difference between Test and T20 cricket is something like the difference between a song in WAV format in the original audio CD and the same song in MP3 format. The latter is highly compressed. The highest and lowest frequencies are absent. To notice the difference you have to listen closely, yes. But the difference is certainly there.
As far as the game being a test of skills of the players, Test matches are the pinnacle. As far as entertainment (even for the non-cricket savvy public goes) T20 is the king. So, I guess it has to be a horses for courses policy that ought to be followed by the ICC.
I kind of see T20's as the ideal entry point to enjoying the deep game that is cricket. People new to the game could get initiated via T20 and then go on to sample greater depth, deeper strategies and more intensity and intricacy offered by the Tests and ODI matches.