Murray makes Nadal suffer

British No 1 wins second title of the year as Spaniard is troubled by knee injury

By Paul Newman

Monday, 16 February 2009

Share
Close
- Digg
- del.icio.us
- Facebook
- Reddit
- Google
- Stumble Upon
- Fark
- Newsvine
Print
Email

Andrew Murray goes from strength to strength with another title victory

enlarge

Andy Murray's rapid progress may have been brought to a halt at last month's Australian Open but the 21-year-old Scot is doing his best to prove that his fourth-round defeat in the year's opening Grand Slam event was just a blip.

Murray claimed his second title of the year yesterday when he beat Rafael Nadal, the world No 1, 6-3, 4-6, 6-0 in the final of the World Indoor Tournament in Rotterdam.

Although the match itself was a disappointment, with Nadal severely hampered in the latter stages by a knee injury, the result continued Murray's excellent start to the season. Having begun the year by beating Nadal and Roger Federer on his way to victory in an exhibition tournament in Abu Dhabi, he has now won 13 of his 14 competitive matches in 2009. His only defeat was at the Australian Open to Fernando Verdasco, who went on to give Nadal his toughest test in Melbourne.

Both players went into yesterday's final with injury doubts. Murray has been suffering from an ankle problem – he has withdrawn from this week's tournament in Marseilles, where he was due to defend his title – while Nadal has had trouble with his right knee.

Murray won the first set after breaking Nadal in the sixth game, but the Spaniard fought back well. However, he was forced to take a medical time-out three games into the second set, after which both players dropped serve four times in a row. Nadal, in particular, could put little power into his serve and offered limited resistance in the final set. The world No 1 is usually the most dogged of retrievers, but was clearly having trouble running.

''I thought the first set was very good,'' Murray said afterwards. ''I played well and saw nothing on Nadal's movement, but after his time out he wasn't running any more and was just hitting the ball hard from the baseline. After the first set and Nadal's problem I really struggled with my service game and got a bit nervous. It was disappointing as it wasn't particularly entertaining at the end.''

Yesterday's match will underline the fears of those who believe that Nadal may become increasingly troubled by knee problems. The world No 1 missed the end of last season, including Spain's historic Davis Cup victory over Argentina, with a knee injury and routinely plays with both legs strapped.

However, he refused to blame his injury for his second successive loss to Murray, who ended a run of five successive defeats to the Spaniard when he won their US Open semi-final last year.

''Murray just played better today,'' Nadal said. ''I tried but couldn't give anything more in the third set. I don't think that this injury will be a serious problem. For sure it is not the same as last year. It was an option not to finish the match, but that is not a good way to finish a final, not for me, not for Andy and not for the crowd.''

Like Murray, Nadal's next scheduled appearance will be in Dubai next week. ''I will have a week now before I play Dubai and don't expect a problem,'' Nadal said.

If the final itself lacked quality, Murray had every reason to be satisfied with his week's work. In previous rounds he had looked in increasingly good shape, particularly in his defeat of Mario Ancic in the semi-finals.

The win also continued his lucrative start to the year. Murray's winning cheque yesterday was for €277,000 (about £248,000), taking his prize-money for the first six weeks of the year to nearly £600,000. He is likely to have earned half as much again from appearance money.

Murray is the first British winner of the Rotterdam tournament, Tim Henman having finished runner-up in 1999, 2000 and 2002. It was the 10th title of the Scot's career. He has won seven times in the last 13 months, including Masters Series tournaments in Cincinnati and Madrid.

*Am�lie Mauresmo, the former Wimbledon champion, maintained her recent improvement when she beat Elena Dementieva, the Olympic champion, 7-6, 2-6, 6-4 to claim her third Paris Open title. It was the former world No 1's first tournament victory since she won in Antwerp two years ago.

Comments

( Leave a comment )

gonzalocg wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 02:57 am (UTC)

I don't think it is professional to title this review of the game: "Murray makes Nadal Suffer". Was it racist? I do think so. Nadal was injured and that is not a way to refer to having lost his game. Actually, he should be praised! He did not withdraw and accepted a defeat. That is something to have considered in the title.

It is dispiriting to approach this game so unprofessional when both players acted so professional. And more so, making it upfront in the front news.

Sincerely,
Gonzalo

Link | Reply | Thread

Murray's blip

charlisak wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 04:27 am (UTC)

It wasn't just a blip. It showed his true measure. Consider how he won. Gicquel was injured, Ancic was sick, Rafa was injured. If any of these guys had stayed healthy Murray would have gone home. So he was just lucky. As for his ankle problem, I didn't notice it bothering him even once. I think it was insurance he was taking out in case he lost. The true champion here is Nadal. I agree with gonzalocg. Murray is a good player but not that good.

Link | Reply | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

snail8585 wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 07:17 am (UTC)

Outragous comment - 'So he was just lucky' - so what if his some of his opponents were injured on this occassion you don't get to number 4 in the world, win back to back masters series titles and to the final of a grand slam being lucky charlisak. You get there by beating the best players. Look at what happened to Murray last year lost to Tsonga in Oz then had a brilliant second half of the year. Also consider his favourable record against top ten players federer 5-2, del potro 2-0, simon 3-1, roddick 6-2, verdasco 5-1. Although Nadal has a 5-2 record against, the last two times they have played in ranking events (as Murray also beat him in an exhibition this year) Murray has won including the US open semi-final which he beat a FIT Nadal in 4 sets over 2 days and that was his second title of the year. If he stays fit it will only be a matter of time before he wins a major.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

charlisak wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 08:21 am (UTC)

No, Nadal was not fit in the US Open. He was exhausted. And he wasn't fully fit in Capitala either.Simon was exhausted in Madrid after beating Nadal. Federer was sick, especially in Shanghai. Etc.etc. It's obvious he can't sustain his form in grand slams and five-setters. We'll just wait and see how far he'll get. Certainly not to the top spot for a couple of years or ever, I suspect. And think of all the other times when he was out in the first or second round (Beijing, for example.)So he won a few titles. Ten titles, no slams at 22. 33 titles, 6 slams for Nadal at the same age. Who is a better player? And we keep hearing how he works out. Every athlete works out but doesn't go around bragging about it.
So, enough with Murray already.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

iizjesus wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 10:12 am (UTC)

Enough with Murray? Regardless of what you think of him he's Britain's best player and deserves our support. And you compared him to Nadal - surely comparing him to the World's best shows you do rate him up there, and how can you try and claim Murray is no good because he doesn't match up to the record of perhaps the best tennis player we have ever seen? I seriously doubt he would be ranked world no.4 if he didn't deserve it. Stop being pessimistic.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

charlisak wrote:

Tuesday, 17 February 2009 at 07:42 am (UTC)

First of all, I compared him with Nadal because Nadal lost to him and everybody says that he is better than Rafa. Second, why should I be optimistic or pessimistic about Murray? I honestly don't care how he does. I am just sick and tired of all the hype surrounding him. And to be honest, I don't think it helps him any. It makes him arrogant and it puts a huge weight on his shoulders. Let the man be and he'll prove his worth when the time comes. For the present I don't think he'll get beyond no.4 in 2009.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

snail8585 wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 12:22 pm (UTC)

'Ten titles, no slams at 22' - federer had only won one slam at this age and was nearly 23 when he did it, players develop at different ages so I don't think that is a determining factor in whether he will win a slam. In my comment I never stated he was a better player than Nadal, i just don't think you are giving him enough credit by passing his victories over the best as 'lucky'. 'Federer was sick' - he wasn't sick the 5 times Murray has beaten him. He beat him in the semis of Doha this year. He also beat him in straight sets in Cincinnati when federer was in his prime in 2006 'It's obvious he can't sustain his form in grand slams and five-setters' - if it was that blatently obvious then I guess the final of the 2008 US open which he partook in is a figment of our imagination. Moreover if his semi-final was played over one day the final may have been closer. You also have to consider how well Verdasco played in OZ - he was close to beating Nadal as well. The reason he flexes his biceps after hard fought victories is bacause the British media and pundits constantly doubted he would be able become one of the top players bacause of his fitness. In any case I don't see how 'bragging' about working out as you put it has anything to do with how good a tennis player he is, or his chances of winning a Grand Slam.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread

Re: Murray's blip

sellypaws wrote:

Monday, 16 February 2009 at 08:46 pm (UTC)

Charlisak - You are a profoundly ignorant man. If you would like to claim that Murray has only advanced as far as he has because his opponents weer ill, then I assume you'd accept Nadal handing over his Wimbledon title to Federer (who spent much of 2008 suffering from Glandular Fever).

The claim that Nadal was not fit, but was tired at the US Open is balderdash. Murray, Del Potro and Federer had been just as deep into tournaments in the run-up to the US Open. And Nadal had an evening to rest in the middle of the third set. He would have lost in three had they not broken for rain.

Murray is a very fine touch player. He is a shot maker, in the same way as Federer is. He shows an instinct for shot creation, tactics, and changes of pace that remind people of Laver, Borg and McEnroe. He's a superb player, and as Nadal said today, could easily be number one.

Oh, and he was ill (a heavy cold) when he lost to Verdasco in the 4th Round of the Australian Open, but he didn't moan about it.

Link | Reply | Parent | Thread