 |
| Rafael Nadal king of Clay |
I like sport’s either/or game and the instinctive responses it brings.
Ask me Alain Prost or Ayrton Senna and I’ll say Senna. Ask me Cristiano Ronaldo
or Lionel Messi and I’ll say Messi. Ask me Mike Tyson or Lennox Lewis and I’ll
say Tyson. Ask me Roger Federer or Rafa Nadal and I’ll say Federer. Every
single time.
Federer is my favourite sportsman. He is not only the most successful
tennis player there has ever been but he has also won his titles with a
bewitching grace and style that makes every time you watch him play live feel
like the rarest and most cherished of privileges.
And yet when the French Open begins in Paris on Sunday, I’ll still be
rooting for Nadal. He might have won at Roland Garros nine times already — a
level of dominance that has never been achieved by any other player at any
other Grand Slam event — but I hope that this year he makes it 10.
Partly that is because Federer has needed Nadal to define his greatness.
The idea that the two men established separate simultaneous empires in tennis —
Federer on grass and hard court and Nadal on clay — doesn’t really scan. Nadal
is better than that. He has won the US Open and Wimbledon more than once, too.
To watch Federer is to be lost in wonder. To watch Nadal is to be awed.
It has often been that way in tennis. John McEnroe and Bjorn Borg were
opposites in many ways. So were Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi. It is possible
to prefer one but still admire the other.
It is like that with Nadal. His rivalry with Federer and, more recently,
Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray, is part of something bigger. Together, they
have been part of a golden era in men’s tennis, an era when a group of great
players have taken their sport to new heights of wonder.
That's why so many of us will be pulling for Nadal in
Paris over the next fortnight. Because we don’t want it to end. Because we
don’t want the Fab Four to break up just yet. And because even though Nadal is
only 28, he is the one who appears to be fading first.
There have been times in previous years when Nadal seemed vulnerable,
when he was beset by the knee problems which have caused many to predict his
career would come to a premature end. But he has always had Paris. He has
always recovered in time to win there.
His only blip came in 2009 when he lost to Robin Soderling, allowing
Federer to steal in and complete his career grand slam. Nadal’s continued
dominance there is the barrier that has prevented Djokovic completing his
collection of major championships, too.
Nadal’s dominance on the Paris clay had been one of the great phenomena
of modern sport. Watching him play and win there, witnessing his indomitability
at Roland Garros has been one of the great sporting sights of our generation.
Like seeing Michael Jordan at the United Center. Or Senna on the streets of
Monaco.
But this year, for the first time in a decade, he will not be the
favourite when he begins his defence of the title he won last year by defeating
Djokovic in four sets.
He has not won on clay this season. He lost heavily to Murray in the
Madrid Masters final earlier this month and fell in straight sets to Stan
Wawrinka in the quarter-finals in Rome the week after. He has fallen to seventh
in the world rankings and his seeding in Paris mirrors his standing. It will be
the first time in a decade that Nadal will not figure among the top four seeds
at a Grand Slam event. Djokovic is the firm favourite this time.
Murray cautioned last week that it would be madness to write off Nadal
in Paris. Former player and respected coach Darren Cahill echoed that. ‘I
believe beating Nadal over five sets on clay might just be the most difficult
challenge in any sport,’ said Cahill.
Others believe we are witnessing the start of a sharp decline that will
lead quickly to Nadal retiring. That was the way it happened for Borg at just
26 and those who espouse a similar doomsday scenario for Nadal point to the
stress his body has endured and the fact his game is so dependent on effort
expended.
If he loses in Paris this year, it will not feel like the defeat by
Soderling in 2009. That loss was treated as an aberration, a fluke. It felt
like an interruption.
This time, it feels as if much, much more depends on him winning again.
It will be a huge psychological blow to him if he fails. For the rest of us, it
will be the end of an era.
Source:dailymailsport.co.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment