Left field

Nadal fails to pull off the Rafa slam

Rafa Nadal was stunned 6-4 6-2 6-3 by fellow Spaniard David Ferrer in the Australian Open quarter-finals on Wednesday, ending his quest for a non-calendar grand slam.

A leg injury contributed to the defeat but maybe the task of holding all four majors at once is almost impossible these days, despite Nadal and Roger Federer’s dominance.

This loss is unlikely to affect the Spaniard greatly going forward. The way he bounced back from adversity last year was remarkable and Federer will know the battle is only just beginning.

Nadal was in tears and had his head in his hands at one point, the pain of the injury and the weight of expectation just proving too much.

Any thoughts on how the rest of the year will now pan out?

Rafael Nadal of Spain leaves after losing his quarter-final match against compatriot David Ferrer at the Australian Open tennis tournament in Melbourne January 26, 2011. REUTERS/Petar Kujundzic

Schiavone shows final set tiebreaks are for wimps

Francesca Schiavone and Svetlana Kuznetsova rescued the women’s singles at the Australian Open from anonymity on Sunday when they contested a four hour 44 minute epic that contrasted sharply with some of the dross served up by their rivals.

The third set alone lasted three hours as Italian Schiavone, a breath of fresh air for women’s tennis at the ripe old age of 30, edged a fourth round thriller 4-6 6-1 16-14.

It was a match of extremes that will surely have no equal at this year’s championships, demonstrating the compelling, edge-of-seat drama often served up at grand slams employing the “play til you drop” deciding set format.

While television schedulers may hate it, it has to be hoped that organisers in Melbourne, Roland Garros and Wimbledon never bow to the demand for “sudden death” finishes seen at most events, including the U.S. Open.

Tiebreaks also offer plenty of nerve-shredding tension but are a brutal way to finish a contest that has evolved over several hours.

Just imagine the sporting world being denied the jaw-droppingly unbelievable scenes at Wimbledon last year when John Isner and Nicolas Mahut traded blows for more than 11 hours before Isner prevailed 70-68 in the fifth set.

Schiavone’s victory was a breeze compared to that but has been the main talking point in a women’s draw which has failed to catch fire in Melbourne.

Can Federer complete a calendar slam?

Received wisdom heading into the Australian Open was that the combined effects of fatherhood and a record-breaking number of grand slams would reduce Roger Federer’s hunger for success to the point where mere mortals on the tour need fear him no longer.

Instead, the message remains: Beware of the GOAT.

The possibility no one seems to have considered is that the Wimbledon title that saw him overtake Pete Sampras as the most successful player in grand slams, coupled with the certain knowledge he now possesses that there are far more important things in life than tennis, might take every ounce of pressure off his shoulders and make him a more formidable opponent still.

Have you ever seen Federer looking more relaxed and confident in the midst of a tournament than in the breezy few minutes he spent talking to Jim Courier after his semi-final stroll past Jo-Wilfried Tsonga?

The Swiss delighted the crowd with a series of off-the-cuff remarks about his own game and the final to come against Andy Murray. Give the man a rim-shot or two from the backing band and NBC would have its Jay Leno/Conan O’Brien problem all solved.

Federer clearly feels he has nothing left to prove, which must be a nice position to be in at the age of 28. Physically, he looks as smooth as ever and his performance against Murray in the final, particularly in the first two sets, underlined the fact that in terms of sheer skill and courtcraft, he has no equal.

Justine Time, Henin makes one of the great grand slam returns

Justine Henin’s storming run to the final of the Australian Open illustrates exactly what women’s tennis has been missing in her absence.

The Belgian played just one tournament in the run-up to the Melbourne grand slam following an 18-month “retirement” but it looks as though she has never been away.

Her brutal 6-1 6-0 demolition of China’s Zheng Jie in Thursday’s semi-final means she is now just one win away from emulating compatriot Kim Clijsters who won the U.S. Open last year in her first grand slam since also coming out of retirement.

World number one Serena Williams awaits in the final and logic suggests the American should be favourite. But such has been the level of Henin’s play that it is too close to call.

Either way it will be intriguing to watch two great competitors, who have not always enjoyed the best of relationships, go toe to toe on a grand slam stage again.

Sport needs great rivalries and men’s tennis has been blessed with Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal. The WTA should be thanking their lucky stars that Henin decided she could no longer do without tennis because in her absence no one player has stepped up to the plate to take on Serena when it matters most.

Fatigue could be her Henin’s biggest obstacle on Saturday as her body reacts to the rigours of a seventh match but in terms of shot-making the diminutive Henin still has no equal in the women’s game. Her return might even inspire a few more youngsters to learn an all-court game rather than just stand on the baseline belting groundstrokes backwards and forwards.

Can Murray end Britain’s 74-year wait?

Is there a more notorious and oft-bemoaned sporting drought than Britain ’s long – and very far from tantalising – wait for a men’s grand slam tennis champion?

In the week the New Orleans Saints finally threatened to shed their unofficial moniker of The Aints because of their lack of Super Bowl success, Andy Murray is doing his level best to get the biggest monkey in world tennis off his back.

Not since 1936 and Fred Perry’s final major win at the US Open has a British man hoisted one of the sport’s four fabled prizes, but Scotsman Murray looks set to change all that.

It’s not just the fact Murray hasn’t lost a set so far in the championship, it’s the manner of his progress — the brutal groundstrokes, the calculated geometry of his angles from both wings, and an almost freakish ability to keep on running until all hope of winning the point is lost.

Throw in the devilish disguise on his backhand – is he dropping? is he driving? – and a courtcraft on a par with a McEnroe or a Federer and you have a formidable arsenal.

His devastating display against Rafael Nadal in the quarter-finals was highly suggestive of a man who knows he has a real chance. His advantage over Nadal was only slight, but it was consistent and ultimately irresistible as the Spanish dasher and defending champion threw in the towel at 3-0 down in the third.

British fans should not be hasty, however, with two formidable opponents lying in wait for the 22-year-old. Marin Cilic may have spent nearly twice the time Murray has on court in progressing to the last four but don’t be fooled: he destroyed Murray in the US Open fourth round last year and 18 hours on court – compared to the Scot’s 10 — will little affect the legs of the rangy 21-year-old.

Triumphant Clijsters even surprises herself

It was not part of Kim Clijsters’s grand plan, and that made her U.S. Open victory feel surreal to the Belgian.

“I can’t believe this happened,” the 26-year-old Clijsters told reporters following her grand slam triumph on Sunday after taking more than two years off to start a family.

“It still seems so surreal that in my third tournament back I won my second grand slam, because it wasn’t in the plan.

“I just wanted to come here and get a feel for it all over again, play a grand slam so starting the next year I didn’t have to go through all the new experiences over again.”

Instead, she experienced winning the Open all over again with her 7-5 6-3 triumph over 19-year-old Caroline Wozniacki of Denmark.

PHOTO: Kim Clijsters of Belgium carries her daughter Jada while holding the trophy after defeating Caroline Wozniacki of Denmark in the women’s singles final at the U.S. Open tennis tournament in New York, September 13, 2009. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

From the sublime to the ridiculous at Wimbledon

The trouble with a match as riveting as Andy Murray’s against Stanislas Wawrinka is that it’s very hard to find something good enough to follow it … and women’s quarter-final day at Wimbledon was singularly unable to do so.

From the sublime tennis provided by the British number one and the Swiss number two in an historic match under the new Centre Court roof, we went to a 6-1 6-2 victory for Venus Williams over Poland’s Agnieszka Radwanska that was ridiculously easy.

Next up was Elena Dementieva against Italy’s Francesca Schiavone and the Russian won 6-2 6-2. And that, if you were one of the people clutching precious tickets for court number one, was that, save for a doubles match that hardly anyone bothered to stick around for, that was that.

Back in centre court, fans were getting a little more value for money.  Dinara Safina had to come from a set down to beat Sabine Lisicki 6-7 6-4 6-1 but even though this was much more of a contest it still felt flat compared to Monday night’s action. Maybe the last of the four quarter-finals, between Serena Williams and Victoria Azarenka will catch fire.

The tournament certainly needs it to. I’m a fan of women’s tennis, and thought Maria Sharapova’s exit to Gisela Dulko was utterly compelling, but today was not a great advert for the game.

SUBLIME: Britain’s Andy Murray serves under the new roof of the centre court during his match against Stanislas Wawrinka of Switzerland, June 29, 2009. REUTERS/Toby Melville

RIDICULOUS EASE: Venus Williams of the U.S. returns the ball to Agnieszka Radwanska of Poland during their match at the Wimbledon tennis championships, in London June 30, 2009. REUTERS/Eddie Keogh

No rain at Wimbledon but skating aplenty

Leading up to this year’s Wimbledon all the talk has been about the new roof on Centre Court and the blessed reality that rain-filled days would no longer scupper everyone’s plans to watch some tennis.

Yet no one bargained for ice.

Just ask Novak Djokovic and Julien Benneteau, who provided the Centre Court crowd with thrills aplenty as both suffered some horrific looking falls on the increasingly slidey surface.

Benneteau earned several well-deserved ovations for the rowdy fans after requiring treatment for some heroic dives, and Djokovic was full of praise for his opponent after the match.

“He was fighting a lot and he deserved to be supported today,” the Serb told British TV.

Andy Murray plays last on Centre tomorrow, and will need to get his skates on against American Robert Kendrick. A long match is all the top players need in the early stages of a grand slam.

The fans weren’t the only ones making plenty of noise.

Can Wimbledon cope without Nadal?

When Roger Federer shows up at Wimbledon next week without Rafael Nadal looking down at him  from the top of the draw, it will almost feel like Laurel turned up without Hardy or Starsky without Hutch.

In an era when the Federer-Nadal showdowns are starting to become tales of Hollywood blockbusters, the Swiss will have to  go it alone for the first time since the 2006 Australian Open — which the Spaniard missed with a foot injury.

The 2009 season that promised much for Nadal when he beat Federer a thrilling five-set showstopper to win his first Australian Open title in January fell apart at the seams on Friday.

Wearing a purple T-shirt and with his shoulders sagging, he told the tennis world the news it did not want to hear. “Unfortunately this year I won’t be able to play at  Wimbledon,” he announced in Spanish.

While, as Serena Williams suggested, it left “a lot of guys on the men’s tour celebrating and partying, his absence will leave a gaping hole in the Wimbledon draw.

A tournament without its world number one, its top seed and its champion is a little like trying to stage the Oscars without  the prized golden statuettes. It is not what sports fans would have wanted — especially on the back of the heart-stopping five set thriller he won at Wimbledon 50 weeks ago to end Federer’s five-year reign.

Is Federer now the G.O.A.T?

We’ve heard what some of the great and good of tennis have said about Roger Federer’s achievements but can we now rank him as the best player ever to have picked up a racket? Here, Ossian Shine considers the arguments, while in the post below Miles Evans urges a spot of caution.

At first it looked as though the world’s tennis pundits were bickering about whether or not Roger Federer was a herbivorous bovid.

But what in fact was grabbing their goat was whether or not the Swiss phenomenon was the GOAT – or Greatest Of All Time.

The argument is likely to rage for years, or at least unless Federer grabs so many grand slam singles titles that he kills off the claim of his own hero Rod Laver.

Federer now sits level with Pete Sampras on a record 14 major singles wins, but pips the American in the GOAT stakes by virtue of the fact that Federer has won all four grand slam titles — Australian, French and U.S. Opens, plus Wimbledon — whereas Sampras never conquered Paris.

Despite all the froth this sort of argument excites, Federer refuses to get caught up in it.