Novak Djokovic shows Roger Federer the exit door at the Australian Open semifinals, that too in straight sets. The harbinger of a change of guard in men's tennis or a slight blip in the path of a genius? Does this mark the beginning of the end of the Federer stranglehold over men's tennis?
Federer has dominated and enchanted the past few years with the game of a chameleon, with his genius adapting with supreme ease to opponents and surfaces. The likes of Lleyton Hewitt and Andy Roddick have been reduced to rubble, with Federer making short work of them match after match. Marat Safin once showed Federer is not invincible (Australian Open 2005 semifinal), but the Russian has been too busy battling his inner demons and injuries. Clay court supremo Rafael Nadal has shown repeatedly that he can give Federer a tough fight outside the comfort zone of clay, but the Spaniard is a one-dimensional player.
I first noticed Novak Djokovic last year at the US Open, where he took on Federer in the final. The 20-year old Serb had a booming serve and oddles of power, reminding me of his countryman Slobodan Zivojinovic of the 1980s (1986 Wimbledon semifinalist). He had come into the US Open fresh from stunning Federer to clinch the Rogers Cup in Montreal.
Djokovic lost in straight sets (7-6, 7-6, 6-4), but in the first two sets Djokovic stretched Federer to a tiebreak. The youngster had his chances to put it past Federer, but the big match temperament was missing.
Djokovic had arrived though, becoming the first Serbian to reach a Grand Slam final. Come January, Federer was to realise the power of the Serbian brigade. Round three of the Australian Open, Janko Tipsarevic came perilously close to packing off Federer.
A small blot in the copybook, or so it seemed, when I switched on the television to catch up on the Djokovic-Federer semifinal. And my eyes literally popped out on seeing the scores. Federer was two sets down, struggling to survive. The world number one was clearly not at his best, with one sublime passing shot followed by two unforced errors. The third set was still evenly fought, with Federer unwilling to surrender. But the Djokovic of January had the nerves to match his shots, when confronted with 'set point Federer'. Unlike the US Open, Djokovic's booming serve saved him when the chips were down.
Federer still remains peerless but there is nothing like a big defeat to give a fresh impetus to others. The 1986 World Open in squash saw the end of Jahangir Khan's five-year unbeaten run, which covered over 500 consecutive wins. New Zealander Ross Norman's upset triumph opened the floodgates, and a year later Jansher Khan had become a constant thorn in Jahangir's flesh.
So will Djokovic go the Jansher way or remain a one-title wonder like Ross Norman? In tennis, there is the case of the 1996 Wimbledon champion Richard Krajicek, who dismissed a Pete Sampras in his prime in the quarterfinals in straight sets. But the talented Dutchman simply faded out, never living up to his billing as a potential challenger to the Sampras throne.
Federer is closing on Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam titles, with 12 slams already. But it is better for the game if Federer is made to sweat it out for those titles. Whether it is Federer vs Nadal or Federer vs Djokovic tennis needs rivalries. A genius casting his spell across the court may be a pleasure to watch, but the game needs rivals up to the challenge. Rivals who can force Federer to push the envelope further.
Related Posts
WHO'S THE GREATEST?
Showing posts with label Sports. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sports. Show all posts
Saturday, January 26, 2008
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
THE SPORTING SIDE OF CHE
He was an avid rugby player despite an asthma handicap and earned himself the nickname Fuser — a combination of El Furibundo (The Raging) and his mother's surname (Serna) — for his aggressive style of play.
He also founded a rugby magazine, called Tackle. He wrote the entire contents under either his own name or a code name, Chang-Cho, which is apparently a play on one of his nicknames, the Pig.
This question was asked at a quiz I went for a few weeks ago. I knew Albert Camus had played football, Hemingway had a passion for bullfighting and that Conan Doyle and Wodehouse had a yen for cricket. But this was unfamiliar trivia. It had to be somebody with a Spanish language connection but Spain or Latin American countries had no rugby tradition to boast of. Our tame guess was legendary Argentine footballer Alfredo Di Stefano.
The answer turned out to be another Argentine, none other than Ernesto 'Che' Guevara. And 40 years after his death, there is a rugby footnote too to the myth of Che the revolutionary icon. The Telegraph has an evocative piece with a photo of Che the rugby player, who's now emerged as an unexpected icon of the Argentine rugby side.
And it's fitting that the 40th anniversary of Che's death coincides with the Pumas' (Argentine rugby squad) surprise entry into the ongoing Rugby World Cup semifinals. A year the outsider breached the inner circle.
He also founded a rugby magazine, called Tackle. He wrote the entire contents under either his own name or a code name, Chang-Cho, which is apparently a play on one of his nicknames, the Pig.
This question was asked at a quiz I went for a few weeks ago. I knew Albert Camus had played football, Hemingway had a passion for bullfighting and that Conan Doyle and Wodehouse had a yen for cricket. But this was unfamiliar trivia. It had to be somebody with a Spanish language connection but Spain or Latin American countries had no rugby tradition to boast of. Our tame guess was legendary Argentine footballer Alfredo Di Stefano.
The answer turned out to be another Argentine, none other than Ernesto 'Che' Guevara. And 40 years after his death, there is a rugby footnote too to the myth of Che the revolutionary icon. The Telegraph has an evocative piece with a photo of Che the rugby player, who's now emerged as an unexpected icon of the Argentine rugby side.
And it's fitting that the 40th anniversary of Che's death coincides with the Pumas' (Argentine rugby squad) surprise entry into the ongoing Rugby World Cup semifinals. A year the outsider breached the inner circle.
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
CHUCK DE, PLEASE
You switch on a news channel and all you hear or see on the screen is Chak De India. Granted it's a catchy song with an anthemic quality, a We will we will rock you embellished with dollops of pop patriotism. And it's the ultimate sports film, picking up a sport in the doldrums and celebrating the triumph of the underdog.
But heard and seen day in and day out, even a good thing grates on your nerves. And the song itself has been hijacked by the very game the film Chak De India raised its voice against - cricket. Shah Rukh Khan was heard on news channels after India recently won the Asia Cup hockey tournament in Chennai, but then he was seen (at the Wanderers) as well as heard after the Twenty20 triumph. Therein lies the rub.
As the media circus rolled along with Team India, hockey coach Joaquim Carvalho decided to stick his neck out with hockey's familiar theme - Big Brother Cricket. Carvalho castigated a Union Minister and four state governments for ignoring their Asia Cup triumph, while showering cricketers with praise and more importantly big bucks.
Yes, Carvalho is right if he feels hockey ends up playing second-fiddle and politicians bend over backwards searching into the state coffers to reward cricketers. But then Asia Cup is one thing and the World Cup is something else. And it's not as if the Asia Cup triumph did not get its due share of importance. For starters, Chak De and its offshoots were all over the headlines of news channels and newspapers.
As Karnataka CM Kumaraswamy hinted, it's time for Carvalho to stop cribbing and think about the World Cup, Olympics, Champions Trophy etc. After all, nothing succeeds like success.
But heard and seen day in and day out, even a good thing grates on your nerves. And the song itself has been hijacked by the very game the film Chak De India raised its voice against - cricket. Shah Rukh Khan was heard on news channels after India recently won the Asia Cup hockey tournament in Chennai, but then he was seen (at the Wanderers) as well as heard after the Twenty20 triumph. Therein lies the rub.
As the media circus rolled along with Team India, hockey coach Joaquim Carvalho decided to stick his neck out with hockey's familiar theme - Big Brother Cricket. Carvalho castigated a Union Minister and four state governments for ignoring their Asia Cup triumph, while showering cricketers with praise and more importantly big bucks.
Yes, Carvalho is right if he feels hockey ends up playing second-fiddle and politicians bend over backwards searching into the state coffers to reward cricketers. But then Asia Cup is one thing and the World Cup is something else. And it's not as if the Asia Cup triumph did not get its due share of importance. For starters, Chak De and its offshoots were all over the headlines of news channels and newspapers.
As Karnataka CM Kumaraswamy hinted, it's time for Carvalho to stop cribbing and think about the World Cup, Olympics, Champions Trophy etc. After all, nothing succeeds like success.
Friday, August 31, 2007
MAKING SENSE OF NEHRU CUP WIN
August 29 was one day football grabbed the headlines for a change. That too Indian football and not the deeds of a Real Madrid or a Manchester United.
The Nehru Cup triumph is undoubtedly celebration time for a country who is deep in the abyss as far as football is concerned. Just the dose of confidence the team needs to aim for taller deeds in the international arena.
The victory was all the more sweeter because it came against Syria, ranked 112 by FIFA compared to India's abysmal 151. An upset to savour, though it was a young Syrian side without six key players. Something more credible than occasionally winning SAF (South Asian Federation) tournaments against the likes of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Does this victory herald a new dawn for Indian football? After all, the other teams in the fray were Kyrgyzstan (ranked two places below India at 153), Cambodia at 173 and Bangladesh at 176.
Far too early to say but coach Bob Houghton has generated hope. The triumph may result in more corporate interest and more money pumped into the game, but as long as it is not channelised properly, it will be curtains. A host of foreign coaches, from Ciric Milovan in the 1980s to Stephen Constantine recently have thrown in the towel, faced as they were with a brick wall.
Also there is less awareness about domestic football, especially in urban areas. Kids may have heard of Bhaichung Bhutia but that's about it. And Bhutia has been around for more than a decade. One hears people waxing eloquent about Ronaldinho, Cristiano Ronaldo, Man U, Barca et al, but when it comes to Indian football, it is a blank.
A strong, well-marketed professional league is a must. If the Nehru Cup in Delhi witnessed good crowds and if Malayalis all over Delhi could descend in droves on the Ambedkar Stadium for the Santosh Trophy final in 2004 to cheer Kerala to victory, Indian football certainly has passionate fans. It's all about giving them competitive clashes to fuel their passion.
Morevoer, local players badly need to play abroad. Corporate support and club tie-ups which enable them to get stints overseas will go a long way in bolstering Indian football.
Here's wishing for a day when we get to see bigger teams in the Nehru Cup (like in the 1980s) and India stands up to their might and does not get thrashed black and blue (like in the 1980s)
The Nehru Cup triumph is undoubtedly celebration time for a country who is deep in the abyss as far as football is concerned. Just the dose of confidence the team needs to aim for taller deeds in the international arena.
The victory was all the more sweeter because it came against Syria, ranked 112 by FIFA compared to India's abysmal 151. An upset to savour, though it was a young Syrian side without six key players. Something more credible than occasionally winning SAF (South Asian Federation) tournaments against the likes of Bangladesh, Pakistan and Sri Lanka.
Does this victory herald a new dawn for Indian football? After all, the other teams in the fray were Kyrgyzstan (ranked two places below India at 153), Cambodia at 173 and Bangladesh at 176.
Far too early to say but coach Bob Houghton has generated hope. The triumph may result in more corporate interest and more money pumped into the game, but as long as it is not channelised properly, it will be curtains. A host of foreign coaches, from Ciric Milovan in the 1980s to Stephen Constantine recently have thrown in the towel, faced as they were with a brick wall.
Also there is less awareness about domestic football, especially in urban areas. Kids may have heard of Bhaichung Bhutia but that's about it. And Bhutia has been around for more than a decade. One hears people waxing eloquent about Ronaldinho, Cristiano Ronaldo, Man U, Barca et al, but when it comes to Indian football, it is a blank.
A strong, well-marketed professional league is a must. If the Nehru Cup in Delhi witnessed good crowds and if Malayalis all over Delhi could descend in droves on the Ambedkar Stadium for the Santosh Trophy final in 2004 to cheer Kerala to victory, Indian football certainly has passionate fans. It's all about giving them competitive clashes to fuel their passion.
Morevoer, local players badly need to play abroad. Corporate support and club tie-ups which enable them to get stints overseas will go a long way in bolstering Indian football.
Here's wishing for a day when we get to see bigger teams in the Nehru Cup (like in the 1980s) and India stands up to their might and does not get thrashed black and blue (like in the 1980s)
Monday, July 09, 2007
WHO'S THE GREATEST?
The man's a chameleon. Roger Federer's the man for all surfaces. Be it serve and volley or slugging it out from the baseline, Fedex can change his colours at the drop of a hat. He's closing in with supreme ease on Pete Sampras' record of 14 Grand Slam titles. By now, he would have won everything in sight, if not for a Spaniard who's just too good on clay. But is he the greatest in the Open Era? (after the Grand Slams were thrown open to professionals in 1968)
For all his genius, Federer's had a free run for years without a worthy rival. Andy Roddick and Lleyton Hewitt were humiliated time and time again, exposing them as one-dimensional, limited players. Marat Safin once showed he had it in him to oust Federer (2004 Australian Open semifinal) but then the temperamental Russian is his own biggest enemy. Age had caught up with Andre Agassi, by the time Federer displayed his wares on the big stage.
Only now has Federer found a rival who's here to stay. Rafael Nadal is the first Spaniard in the last three decades who's made the effort to prove he's not just a clay-court bully. Nadal this time proved he is serious competition to Federer even on grass. His sharp angles and net charges left one spellbound. The one drawback being the lack of a killer serve, with Nadal coming up with just one ace compared to Federer's 24.
Nadal's just 21 and a great rivalry is in the offing, with Federer yet to win the French Open and Nadal still awaiting his first Wimbledon title.
Cut back to 2001. Wimbledon 4th round. A talented Swiss youngster halts Pete Sampras in his tracks. At a time when Pistol Pete was unstoppable on grass, with seven Wimbledon crowns already. And he was poised to equal Bjorn Borg's feat of five successive Wimbledons.
The one and only time Roger Federer and Pete Sampras faced each other. The beginning of sunset for Sampras, who never won another Wimbledon. Fittingly enough, the man who scuttled Sampras' plans to emulate Borg's feat, has now achieved exactly that. Pity Sampras and Federer straddled different decades.
Coming to Sampras, did he have a worthy rival who pushed him all the time? Andre Agassi had an all-court game, but he discovered consistency only by the time he was pushing 30. And he couldn't hold a candle to Sampras on grass. Edberg and Becker were on the decline by the time Sampras won his first Wimbledon in 1993, Goran Ivanisevic was far too often consumed by his inner demons and Pat Rafter could have done much more though his serve-and-volley game was a treat to watch.
Federer scores over Sampras, thanks to Sampras' feet of clay when it came to Roland Garros. Only one semifinal appearance in so many attempts does take away some of the sheen from his legend status. For Federer too, the French Open remains a mystery, but that's not because he's failed to come to grips with clay. Just that he has to contend with a formidable rival, who's just too good.
So who's combined Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer year after year? Six titles on clay and five on grass, that too operating from the baseline. The answer is the Ice Cool Swede Bjorn Borg.
Borg consistently managed to be first among equals in a bad-tempered, colourful and competitive era. And it was quite a feat to remain ice cool pitted against the likes of John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors and Illie Nastase at their nasty worst.
Borg was supreme on clay, but when it came to Wimbledon he had to fight every inch of the way.
One side there was Jimmy Connors, who barked after losing to Borg in the 1978 Wimbledon final, "I'll chase that son of a bitch Borg to the ends of the earth." When it came to the US Open the same year, Connors thrashed Borg in straight sets.
At the other end, the sublime touch artist John McEnroe, who saved matchpoint after matchpoint to clinch a dramatic fourth set tiebreak in the 1980 final. Only for Borg to bounce back in the final set.
Five successive triumphs with Connors and McEnroe breathing down his neck is no mean feat. But then Borg too had one achilles heel, the US Open, where he reached the final four times, never to win.
The sheer versatility in his game enables Federer to score over Sampras and Borg. But when it comes to competition, Borg had a tougher time. It's thus stalemate between Federer and Borg.
So who's the greatest in the Open Era? It's still Rod Laver, who won the Grand Slam in 1969 at 30-plus.
For all his genius, Federer's had a free run for years without a worthy rival. Andy Roddick and Lleyton Hewitt were humiliated time and time again, exposing them as one-dimensional, limited players. Marat Safin once showed he had it in him to oust Federer (2004 Australian Open semifinal) but then the temperamental Russian is his own biggest enemy. Age had caught up with Andre Agassi, by the time Federer displayed his wares on the big stage.
Only now has Federer found a rival who's here to stay. Rafael Nadal is the first Spaniard in the last three decades who's made the effort to prove he's not just a clay-court bully. Nadal this time proved he is serious competition to Federer even on grass. His sharp angles and net charges left one spellbound. The one drawback being the lack of a killer serve, with Nadal coming up with just one ace compared to Federer's 24.
Nadal's just 21 and a great rivalry is in the offing, with Federer yet to win the French Open and Nadal still awaiting his first Wimbledon title.
Cut back to 2001. Wimbledon 4th round. A talented Swiss youngster halts Pete Sampras in his tracks. At a time when Pistol Pete was unstoppable on grass, with seven Wimbledon crowns already. And he was poised to equal Bjorn Borg's feat of five successive Wimbledons.
The one and only time Roger Federer and Pete Sampras faced each other. The beginning of sunset for Sampras, who never won another Wimbledon. Fittingly enough, the man who scuttled Sampras' plans to emulate Borg's feat, has now achieved exactly that. Pity Sampras and Federer straddled different decades.
Coming to Sampras, did he have a worthy rival who pushed him all the time? Andre Agassi had an all-court game, but he discovered consistency only by the time he was pushing 30. And he couldn't hold a candle to Sampras on grass. Edberg and Becker were on the decline by the time Sampras won his first Wimbledon in 1993, Goran Ivanisevic was far too often consumed by his inner demons and Pat Rafter could have done much more though his serve-and-volley game was a treat to watch.
Federer scores over Sampras, thanks to Sampras' feet of clay when it came to Roland Garros. Only one semifinal appearance in so many attempts does take away some of the sheen from his legend status. For Federer too, the French Open remains a mystery, but that's not because he's failed to come to grips with clay. Just that he has to contend with a formidable rival, who's just too good.
So who's combined Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer year after year? Six titles on clay and five on grass, that too operating from the baseline. The answer is the Ice Cool Swede Bjorn Borg.
Borg consistently managed to be first among equals in a bad-tempered, colourful and competitive era. And it was quite a feat to remain ice cool pitted against the likes of John McEnroe, Jimmy Connors and Illie Nastase at their nasty worst.
Borg was supreme on clay, but when it came to Wimbledon he had to fight every inch of the way.
One side there was Jimmy Connors, who barked after losing to Borg in the 1978 Wimbledon final, "I'll chase that son of a bitch Borg to the ends of the earth." When it came to the US Open the same year, Connors thrashed Borg in straight sets.
At the other end, the sublime touch artist John McEnroe, who saved matchpoint after matchpoint to clinch a dramatic fourth set tiebreak in the 1980 final. Only for Borg to bounce back in the final set.
Five successive triumphs with Connors and McEnroe breathing down his neck is no mean feat. But then Borg too had one achilles heel, the US Open, where he reached the final four times, never to win.
The sheer versatility in his game enables Federer to score over Sampras and Borg. But when it comes to competition, Borg had a tougher time. It's thus stalemate between Federer and Borg.
So who's the greatest in the Open Era? It's still Rod Laver, who won the Grand Slam in 1969 at 30-plus.
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
For the umpteenth time Spain flattered only to deceive. A young side brimming with zest and talent - after seeing them bulldozing their rivals in the group stage I thought Spain's moment of glory was finally round the corner.
I do have a soft corner for them, being a bunch of hugely talented individuals who just never seem to be able to put it together at the big stage. But then for once when the whole was equal to the sum of its parts, Spain ran into a bunch of players determined to coax victory out of a creaking reputation sullied by age.
Spain did show that their sheer pace could catch France on the wrong foot, but then those ageing French legs closed ranks and youth simply could not penetrate their way for the final thrust home.
The 1998 stars were very much in evidence - Patrick Vieira and the talisman himself Zinedine Zidane, with both helping themselves to goals. But can those ageing legs go all the way - with Brazil lined up next?
The French workhorse who impressed me though was Frank Ribery. He was certainly the livewire, slotting in the equaliser, busying himself creating chances and yes, he is one of those who has age on his side.
It's still advantage Brazil in the quarterfinals, but Ronaldo and company had better beware of a team which seems to be slowly inching towards its peak. And France has tons of experience to bank on, to see them through at the crunch. For Zizou it might just be sunset on his own terms, as he conducts the French orchestra.
I do have a soft corner for them, being a bunch of hugely talented individuals who just never seem to be able to put it together at the big stage. But then for once when the whole was equal to the sum of its parts, Spain ran into a bunch of players determined to coax victory out of a creaking reputation sullied by age.
Spain did show that their sheer pace could catch France on the wrong foot, but then those ageing French legs closed ranks and youth simply could not penetrate their way for the final thrust home.
The 1998 stars were very much in evidence - Patrick Vieira and the talisman himself Zinedine Zidane, with both helping themselves to goals. But can those ageing legs go all the way - with Brazil lined up next?
The French workhorse who impressed me though was Frank Ribery. He was certainly the livewire, slotting in the equaliser, busying himself creating chances and yes, he is one of those who has age on his side.
It's still advantage Brazil in the quarterfinals, but Ronaldo and company had better beware of a team which seems to be slowly inching towards its peak. And France has tons of experience to bank on, to see them through at the crunch. For Zizou it might just be sunset on his own terms, as he conducts the French orchestra.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
AGE-OLD BLEUS
Was watching France in action during the weekend. The Les Bleus hardly inspired confidence - disappointing draws against Switzerland and Korea, and they seemed to be carrying the baggage of age. Which other team has so many ageing remnants from a moment of glory, eight long years ago? And the talisman, Zinedine Zidane was a pale shadow of his old self.
Zidane's suspension, forcing him to miss the Togo match in a way was a relief to me. Tired as I was of an ageing side clutching at an equally ageing conductor, I was longing to see the younger lot try their luck at being playmakers.
No Zidane, and Patrick Vieira stood up to be counted. Responsibility seemed to have brought out the best in him. Also it was a pleasure to watch the likes of Frank Ribery playing a pivotal role. Not to forget throwing in David Trezeguet and Thierry Henry together.
Come Tuesday's Spain clash, and Zidane should be back. But the Zidane game is no match for the Zidane name now. Maybe, just maybe, a big occasion and a formidable rival could bring out those dormant seeds of genius.
Mind you, I am not a big fan of the Les Blues. But I wouldn't like to see a once-proud side limp into the sunset with its icon cutting a sorry figure. Especially after having followed the French through the euphoria of World Cup 1998 and Euro 2000.
Zidane's suspension, forcing him to miss the Togo match in a way was a relief to me. Tired as I was of an ageing side clutching at an equally ageing conductor, I was longing to see the younger lot try their luck at being playmakers.
No Zidane, and Patrick Vieira stood up to be counted. Responsibility seemed to have brought out the best in him. Also it was a pleasure to watch the likes of Frank Ribery playing a pivotal role. Not to forget throwing in David Trezeguet and Thierry Henry together.
Come Tuesday's Spain clash, and Zidane should be back. But the Zidane game is no match for the Zidane name now. Maybe, just maybe, a big occasion and a formidable rival could bring out those dormant seeds of genius.
Mind you, I am not a big fan of the Les Blues. But I wouldn't like to see a once-proud side limp into the sunset with its icon cutting a sorry figure. Especially after having followed the French through the euphoria of World Cup 1998 and Euro 2000.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
