Davis Cup - the same old dilemma

Having received a bye through the first round of the 2013 competition GB will play host to Russia in April with a place in the promotion play-offs at stake.

Although they are not the force they once were, Russia have 9 players in the top 200 including former number three Davydenko. GB have?? Anyone? Yep, still just Murray. So, barring a miracle, the only way for GB to win the tie is for Andy Murray to win both of his rubbers and for the doubles team (probably Flutchins) to win as well. I believe that the Davis Cup team has improved under Leon Smith but there is still not a second singles player who can compete consistently at anywhere near the top level. Simply put GB is not a World Group level team. If Murray does play and win both his rubbers (as he almost undoubtedly would) and if Flutchins come through then what happens in September? Same scenario again. Sound familiar? We are basically looking back to the days where Murray was trying to win ties on his own. This culminated in Murray trying to win a tie literally single handed in 2009, playing three matches with an injured wrist and missing a good chunk of the end of the year. At least Smith is putting in a solid doubles team unlike John Lloyd. IIRC Flemski was doing pretty well in the John Lloyd days but weren't selected . The situation Murray is in is unlike the other top players. Spain have about 652 players in the top 100 and neither Federer or Nole are out there on their own. Also they are all secure in the World Group.

So what is the alternative? If Murray states he is unavailable for the tie he will undoubtedly face a lot of backlash from parts of the press and some former players who should know better - Lloyd will be at the head of that queue. If the LTA had any backbone Roger Draper would make a joint public decision with Murray. The sensible decision would be to state that Murray should concentrate on his own tournaments and leave the rest of the team to find their own level rather than the 2nd singles player having his posterior handed to him at every future tie until Murray gets injured or Flutchins lose and they are inevitably relegated again. Perhaps Draper could make a plan with a time frame . Of course this won't happen and Murray will be left to make the decision and face the consequences (either way) on his own as per usual.

The joys of being GBs number one player

Dan Evans beat a couple of players ranked above him against Slovakia, including the decisive fifth rubber (in five sets, against Kilzan I think). Anyone know what's happened to him, seemed to have a decent game.

As for Murray, it's rather a case of damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. I think he likes playing Davis Cup, but realised what a big mistake he made in 09 playing when injured. I'd rather he focussed on his singles career, I think success there will have a better long term effect on British tennis than winning a few DC ties anyway.

Problem is, there'll be big pressure on him to play, because if he does we have a chance against most teams.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:Dan Evans beat a couple of players ranked above him against Slovakia, including the decisive fifth rubber (in five sets, against Kilzan I think). Anyone know what's happened to him, seemed to have a decent game.

He's a prime example of a player who appeared to flourish under Smith's captaincy. Either than or he just matured. His previous DC experience is better forgotten.....

By the looks of it he is still slogging away. Appears to have lot of futures tournaments on his playing activity for the year.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:As for Murray, it's rather a case of damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. I think he likes playing Davis Cup, but realised what a big mistake he made in 09 playing when injured. I'd rather he focussed on his singles career, I think success there will have a better long term effect on British tennis than winning a few DC ties anyway.

Problem is, there'll be big pressure on him to play, because if he does we have a chance against most teams.

My feelings exactly. I also feel it would be better for the team to be at a level the others can cope with and gradually improve upon, that way they can provide effective support in the future.

well the "better for the team" bit can be argued both ways. Some players thrive against higher level of opposition (Dan Evans for instance). Then take Laura Robson for instance, who since that Olympics silver with Murray has really kicked on. Of course, Robson always had the potential to be a top player, something none of our male players have at the moment. Still, it's not impossible Murray could rub off in a positive way.

At the end of the day, if we had another player ranked in the top 50 or so I'd want Murray playing every tie as it would give us a genuine chance of winning them. As it is, he's much better off looking after himself first.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:well the "better for the team" bit can be argued both ways. Some players thrive against higher level of opposition (Dan Evans for instance). Then take Laura Robson for instance, who since that Olympics silver with Murray has really kicked on. Of course, Robson always had the potential to be a top player, something none of our male players have at the moment. Still, it's not impossible Murray could rub off in a positive way.

True, but with a world ranking of 296 I think that Group 1 would provide plenty of challenge for Evans at the moment. They need to find a level they can sustain as a group.

Mad for Chelsea wrote:At the end of the day, if we had another player ranked in the top 50 or so I'd want Murray playing every tie as it would give us a genuine chance of winning them. As it is, he's much better off looking after himself first.

Depends where to go with this. Are Ward and Evans going to improve to an extent that they would climb the rankings? Ward hasn't really kicked on from his Queens campaign in 2011. Evans had one purple patch during the Slovakia match which MFC elluded to. What Evans and Ward have are scars from previous DC defeats.

For me I would look at either Golding or Broady. Young players without the scars of defeat. It is a massive gamble and could even crush their singles careers before they have taken off. They have proved themselves at Junior level and for me could be the fresh injection the DC team needs. If Murray decides not to participate, put them both in. I mean seriously without Murray what have they to lose.

legendkillarV2 wrote:Depends where to go with this. Are Ward and Evans going to improve to an extent that they would climb the rankings? Ward hasn't really kicked on from his Queens campaign in 2011. Evans had one purple patch during the Slovakia match which MFC elluded to. What Evans and Ward have are scars from previous DC defeats.

For me I would look at either Golding or Broady. Young players without the scars of defeat. It is a massive gamble and could even crush their singles careers before they have taken off. They have proved themselves at Junior level and for me could be the fresh injection the DC team needs. If Murray decides not to participate, put them both in. I mean seriously without Murray what have they to lose.

May be worth putting one of them in even if he does participate. After all he made his first appearance aged 17(doubles). 18 for singles.

As long as they keep playing the home ties in Glasgow I think Murray should continue. I think he loves playing in Britain and playing in Scotland is even better for him.

As someone said, Murray can't win. If he does play, he's carrying a team that (aside from the Flutchins) are pretty ordinary and if he doesn't play he gets slated by John Lloyd and the press. I would like to see Oli Golding in DC action though. He did well against Andreev at Wimbledon for 1 set before something happened and he capitulated.

The Special Juan wrote:As long as they keep playing the home ties in Glasgow I think Murray should continue. I think he loves playing in Britain and playing in Scotland is even better for him.

As someone said, Murray can't win. If he does play, he's carrying a team that (aside from the Flutchins) are pretty ordinary and if he doesn't play he gets slated by John Lloyd and the press. I would like to see Oli Golding in DC action though. He did well against Andreev at Wimbledon for 1 set before something happened and he capitulated.

He clearly loves playing Davis Cup and got very emotional about the opportunity to play tennis in Scotland and the reception he received. They may decide to host this tie at Braehead again as a hard court tie would fit quite nicely after Miami - not sure though that could be too much like joined up thinking for the LTA.

Definitely agree with you and LK that it would be good to have some new young blood on the team. Murray flourished in the pressurised environment so they may do soon. Either way it is good BO5 experience.

I hope he doesn't play to be completely honest. I'd love a British Davis cup team that could compete to win it, but that simply won't happen with 1 singles player who can win matches.

I'd rather Murray did all he can to win more slams, rather than disrupt his season with a competition he knows he can't win that could be detrimental to him. I'm not anti Davis cup and I'd love Britain to do well, but its not gonna happen.

Maybe in a few years the likes of Broady could make it worthwhile, but at the moment the juice isn't worth the squeeze for Murray. It's not worth it for Britain either. He'd do more for British tennis by winning more slams than he could by sacrificing himself for a hopeless cause.

That's just my opinion. I actually think he'll probably play, and if he does I hope it doesn't backfire like it did a couple of years ago.

Spot on Danny.

Why partake in a competition that GB have absolutely no chance whatsoever in winning until we have another couple of players ranked inside the top 100 or top 50? Even if Andy were to play and we scrambled a win (somehow) all it would do is paper over the cracks in the overall state of British man's tennis (Andy Murray aside). It is time others took some responsibility for putting British tennis on the may - Andy Murray has more than done his bit.

Sadly Craig, people's jobs probably depend on Davis cup results. So cracks being papered over by Murray victories is just what those people want to happen.

If we had a situation like in the women's game with a couple of British girls inside the top 100 and looking like good prospects then I'd hope Murray would be all over it. But we're not in that situation.

I want Murray to win slams, much more than i want him to be our Davis cup martyr. So I'm a Brit that desperately hopes our best tennis player in 70 odd years doesn't represent my country, as weird as that may sound.

Yes and I feel the same. Why risk an injury (short or long term) playing in a competition that you have no chance whatsoever of winning. Especially, when your career is moving onto a new level with big goals in front of you (all far more achievable than winning the Davis Cup for GB).

Obviously nobody cares about Davis Cup and I've no idea why Murray would play.

Equally, I have no idea why money was given to Murray to pursue his personal career.

I wouldn't say nobody cares about the Davis Cup but just that, at this time and in current state of British tennis (Murray aside) then Andy has to prioritise. For all of the other top players ie Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Del Potro it is somewhat different. They play for teams well equipped to mount a strong challenge to win the Davis Cup so as it is a far more winnable tournament for them I can see merits for them entering - perhaps Federer aside as at his age he could do with more rest time.

I feel we have a good crop of players just left/leaving the juniors but we have nobody who's experienced with any decent results other than Murray. Evans is still limited to small events then we have Ward who's been tried and failed, Boggo who failed even worse then inexperienced like Golding, Morgan etc.

We're between a rock and a hard place

British Davis Cup has had this issue for 20 years now.

Otherwise the only thing vaguely interesting about DC this year is whether Nadal might make his return to tour for the Spain-Czech final.

Surely as well you'd think Rafa would be far more wary (with his injury) about playing a Davis Cup Final? I know if I were a Rafa fan I'd be very nervous about that.

I don't think this is a dilemma at all !

We have no chance of winning the DC !

Let Murray concentrate on winning Slams, Masters, etc and becoming world No1.

This I think would encourage more intrest and more youngsters to take up the game more than DC performances.

Speaking of Davis Cup - Sweden lost to Belgium 5-0.

Now here's one for you....from the land that brought us Borg, Wilander, Edberg, Jarryd, Nystrom, Pernfors, Enqvist et al...guess who their highest ranked singles player now is?

Patrik Rosenholm - ranked 393!!!!

They have only 10 players in the top 1000!!! (we have 34...Spain have 55)

http://www.atpworldtour.com/Rankings/YTD-Singles.aspx?d=24.09.2012&r=0&c=SWE

And to think many say we have problems in our tennis system!

PS....granted they have Soderling missing at the moment.

lydian wrote:Now here's one for you....from the land that brought us Borg, Wilander, Edberg, Jarryd, Nystrom, Pernfors, Enqvist et al...guess who their highest ranked singles player now is?

Patrik Rosenholm - ranked 393!!!!

They have only 10 players in the top 1000!!! (we have 34...Spain have 55)

Given that they have a population of about 9.5 million, they are still making a bigger relative impact than we are.

Did Soderling retire or something Lydian?

Turron if population size mattered India and China would be dominant.

Its interesting that Sweden have a quality history of producing in the mens yet neighbours Norway and Denmark didn't really have anyone.