Thanks for the Memories Andy

I would say that Andy Murray's days as one of the best tennis players in the world are now over with this hip injury but he has had a career he can be proud of having lifted British tennis up to new levels which I fear will not be reached again certainly not in my lifetime.

In a period of tennis where he was pitted against legends of the sport Roger Federer, Rafa Nadal and Novak Djokovic he still managed to have his moments of glory. His acheivements include:-

2 x Wimbledon Singles Titles
1 x US Open Title
1 x Davis Cup win
2 x Olympic Gold Medals (Stand alone record)
1 x World Finals Title
12 x Masters 1000 Titles (4th on all-time list)
45 x Career Titles (14th on all-time list)
Former World No 1
Knighthood
Multiple  Awards

Thanks for the memories Andy. You made this Scot very proud.

A little premature to write him off I would say. Think about what kind of injury troubles Rafa and Delpo have had to go through. And Federer, at 35 years old, returned from a long injury lay-off winning the AO.

I guess it all comes down to motivation now. It might be that he's happy with the above list of achievements and prefers to focus on something else now...

prostaff85 wrote:A little premature to write him off I would say. Think about what kind of injury troubles Rafa and Delpo have had to go through. And Federer, at 35 years old, returned from a long injury lay-off winning the AO.

I guess it all comes down to motivation now. It might be that he's happy with the above list of achievements and prefers to focus on something else now...

Federer's injury was different in seriousness. After a few months rest and recuperation he was back as fit as could be with unhindered movement. Murray has had almost exactly the same length of time off but rest and recuperation has not healed the injury. Evidently, it is still hindering him and if six months of rest has not solved it that is very worrying. Surgery may help a little to ease the pain but I am realistic enough to accept his days fighting for slam wins or even Masters titles are behind him. Listen to his comments - he's desperate to get back competing so I don't buy this 'happy' stuff.

prostaff85 wrote: ... I guess it all comes down to motivation now ...

I don't think Murray's motivation could ever be doubted.  His mental attitude has been doubted at times, but not his motivation.  He used to put himself through a gruelling training regime, and was often fairly innovative in it, to improve his physical strength, his flexibility, his ability to rapidly change direction and his stamina.  

He has a congenital issue with one of his knees (split patella I think), his movement has always been rapid but a bit clunky (so putting pressure on his joints).  I think he has probably got the most out of his physical ability.  

I think the only issue was his mental strength / mental focus in the early part of his career at the majors against Nadal and Federer, where at times he seemed to be either a little overawed or just bamboozled by them. He would tend to start off strong against them but then fade. But he never really had such trouble when meeting them in non-major competitions. Against Djokovic he always gave a good account of himself.

Any British tennis fan over the age of 30 will remember the pre-Murray era of Henman and Rusedski and those a bit older will remember the days of Andrew Castle (as a player not a commentator!) and Jeremy Bates.

No disrespect to those players, but we will only really appreciate what Murray's done for the game in Britain and a scale of his achievements when he finally hangs up his racket for good. For the best part of a decade Andy's been a genuine title contender in majority of slams he's played in. Henman, who was a regular top tenner and a class act, rarely reached latter stages of slams away from Wimbledon, and prior to Henman, during my lifetime at least it was v rare for a British male singles player to get further than 4th round at Wimbledon and past 2nd round at other slams.

The increased TV and media coverage Murray has brought to the game in this country should not be underestimated. I fear that once he's gone that there will be v minimal mainstream media interest in tennis in the UK outside Wimbledon.

Of course we have Kyle Edmund, who had a v creditable 2017, putting solid foundations to make further progress up the rankings, but realistically looking at the strength at top of the game, I feel top 15-20 will be as high as he goes - this in itself is a fantastic achievement but may look underwhelming to younger British tennis fans, who've been spoiled by Murray's achievements.

The tone of this thread feels a bit premature but maybe Craig is on the money here and that we're now heading into final months of Murray's career.

For me I think Murray's top achievements are in this order:

1. Winning Wimbledon title - 1st Brit to do so since Fred Perry in the 1930s! Murray handled the historical expectations around this superbly. A Brit winning Wimbledon was, not too long ago, the most improbable thing ever and I still keep having to pinch myself it really happened, not once but twice.

2. Reaching world number one - given the strength in depth at top of the game and the competition he faced, that was an immense achievement, although ultimately in hindsight it may have contributed to his career ending sooner than he would have liked (he played too much tennis in 2016).

3. The back-to-back Olympic singles titles - in years to come this may not be quite so unique as tennis is still a relatively recent addition to Olympics, but it is a great achievement nevertheless, particularly as he did it on 2 different surfaces.

4. Closely followed by Davis Cup - yes it was a team effort in the end, but some of Andy's exploits, winning 5 setters in both singles and doubles, landed GB with a v unique achievement in winning Davis Cup - I don't think we'll come close to winning it again in my lifetime.

5. Winning US Open - yes its Murray's best surface but it some respects its the toughest slam to win due to the increased competition (more players comfortable on the fast hardcourts than on clay and grass, and Aus Open tends to be too early in year for players to hit form.

I'm sure some may beg to differ with the order of my selections, but that's the beauty of Murray's career and what he has achieved.

Great post MrInvisible.

I haven't even begun to think where I rate each of Andy's achievements. Perhaps the most important win was not a slam win but his 2012 Olympic Gold at Wimbledon. It was his first win over Roger Federerin a really important match. I think that win gave him the belief and true confidence he had lacked before in those crunch matches.

Murray's main problem and eventual downfall was due to having to redline to achieve major success. After various failed attempts to dethrone Federer and Djokovic, Murray had to become more aggressive and this whilst gave him 3x majors and various other achievements - it has ultimately foreshortened his career. The top 3 where so great that the players below had to risk everything to break their stronghold.

I have the USO 2012 as the most important achievement - in tennis the biggest chasm is between slam winners and non-slam winners.  Sure, there are one-slam wonders, but to be a 'great' you have to join the slam winners club, and once Andy joined he earned the right to an entirely different status, which his achievements subsequently have shown suited him admirably.

I accept that since he and most of us are Brits his Wimbledon wins loom larger, especially 2013, and by winning there he further cemented his status, but for me that first step into the slam winners club was the biggest and most important for him and his legacy.

What is so great about Andy's career is that he has so much more to show for it than his slam wins: his regular appearances in every slam final, the fantastic DC win, the #1 ranking, two Olympic golds including before a home crowd at SW19, the many Masters tournaments, and making himself a force on clay - all achieved during a period of dominance by three of the best players ever.

It may be a bit soon to be writing Andy off, but at 30 and if he needs the operation presumably out of action for another handful of months, it will certainly be a long road back.

Agree with Barrystar's comment above - Considering Murray has played at the same time as probably the best player of the open era, the (now undoubted) clay court GOAT and a player in the next group of elite performers, his career record is very good indeed with achievements the vast majority could only dream of.

I think a comparison could be made to the golfer Nick Faldo - both showed terrific 'natural' talent as young players, but made the conscious decision to modify their games to give themselves a chance to win the biggest tournaments, and showed unbelievable levels of dedication in attaining this goal. Also similar to Faldo, I think Murray in the main is a player who is more respected than loved (the difference with Faldo being that he was more successful than the likes of Ballesteros and Lyle, who were the more loved, whereas Andy has always been in Federer and Nadal's shadow both in terms of achievement and adoration).

Hopefully not the end of his career and that he can recover well enough to at least challenge at the slams again. Doesn't look good though. From his statements over the past few weeks it is obvious that he has really missed competing and make every effort to come back. However if he cannot get near to full fitness and his top level again I think that he would be better retiring rather than regularly losing matches to players he would have beaten 9 times out of 10 previously and causing more damage to his body.

He has had an excellent career and through his dedication to be a top player has made the most of his talent. He has fully deserved everything he has achieved.

CC I have a feeling Murray will be back to contend again but this is indeed very worrying. If he is to go under the knife, you would have to think it will be a lengthy absence from the game.

what would make me more confident of Murray making a return to the top is his incredible determination and work ethic. While he cannot control the extent of the injury, you know if anybody is going to come back from something like this it is Andy.

If this is to be the end of his years contending at the top level, he has left an amazing legacy behind. For me he was one of the most tenacious competitors I have seen on court and when in full flow, he was so formidable. His return of serve was a stand out shot but he was very efficient off both wings and is among the best volleyers on the circuit.

When you look back at his career to date, his consistency and longevity at the top has been possibly his stand out achievement. While winning 3 slams and multiple master series are huge coups, it was his ability to keep reaching the semis and finals of slams year after year that was astonishing. Andy had to battle more adversity than any player that I can recall in his defeats to Federer, Nadal and Djokovic at slams and time and again over so many years and he just kept on battling and trying to find the answer.

While I was never a 'fan' of Murrays playing style, I hugely admired him as a player for his attitude and relentless commitment to improve. For me the shot that hurt him the most over the years was his second serve. He started to really improve it in recent times but back when he was at the peak of his powers, it was the one shot that the top 3 knew they could target and take advantage of. I also thought he could have been more aggressive in some of the key matches to really grab the bull by the horns and take the biggest titles.

However, I think regardless of what happens, Andy is a player who to the main extent can look back without big regrets. You could never question his commitment, his effort and his desire to keep improving. His legacy is assured and I would echo what CC said that we are unlikely to see a Brit contend like Andy has in my lifetime. You can also see the huge respect that Federer, Nadal and Djokovic have for Murray. Any time they took the court with him, they knew they had to be a the very top of their game and that he would never hand you the win regardless of what the score was.

I predict he has a comeback in him but regardless, Andy Murray take a bow !!!

So this is why the little rascal remained in Australia

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/tennis/42602401?isBumped=0&postFreq=0&isEmpty=0&isProfane=0&tooLong=0&charCount=0&isAwaitingProcessPreMod=0&isSubmitted=1&filter=none&initial_page_size=10&postId=129246260#comment_129246260

I like his pragmitism and yes I now think there could be a good couple of years left

I appreciate the comments on here, but actually Andy has enough effortless talent (his 'touch / feel' is surely on second to Roger and perhaps Dimi now) for him to be able to adapt his game and still achieve

Not saying he'd win some slams, but let's not write him off just yet, although we're surely going to have to wait until 2019

Yes, surgery for Murray in Australia. He says op has gone well and he hopes to return for the grass court season this year.
   Let's keep fingers crossed.

Obviously, I would love to think a fairytale comeback is on the cards and wish Andy all the best. We shall see but I can't help but think that he saw surgery as a last resort. He must have been told that was not the best move. Anyway here is hoping he can achieve his goal of being to play at the highest level watched by his daughter.

Feels a bit odd that he had surgery in Oz. Is this surgeon particularly renowned in the field? I wonder if he always had this plan potentially in mind when he travelled to Australia? Otherwise, does seem quite sudden.

We’ll just have to wait and see how he comes back. If his hip does recover well, the 12 months or so overall rest may well benefit him at this stage in his career. However, it’s a long time out at 30/31.

Having put forward the view based on the available (but limited) evidence that Murray's elite tennis career was likely over if he didn't have surgery (based on observations of his movement plus comments from former tennis players and orthopaedic surgeons), I am a little taken aback on the rapidity at which Andy Murray has now opted for surgery.

I am not entirely convinced that he properly rested himself when he decided not to go for surgery back in June 2017 when the issue was plain for all to see.  The information that was coming out from the Murray camp was that he was resting and hoping for recuperation for a very short period of time before straining his body again to get ready for the US Open (which he only pulled out a day before the tournament) and then afterwards had the match up with Roger Federer in his charity exhibition match and then afterwards working hard to get himself fit for the Australian Open.  

It seemed to me having decided not to go for surgery back in June 2017 Andy Murray didn't give his body enough time to rest and recuperate for the "natural healing" option / attempt (because he was actually working towards getting fit for tournaments & exhibition matches during that period).

Now that he has gone for surgery - he is now saying he is hoping to be on the court hitting balls in 7 to 8 weeks and seems to think he will back to full fitness in 14 weeks (as a guide) and ready for the summer.  Though Murray is saying the prognosis is very good - I just hope he doesn't rush his return.  If he took the whole year off competitively and recovered 95% of his movement in the process, that should give him a few years of competing at the elite level.

I don't really get these declarations of puzzlement

Clearly he was told that rest would be the best option and to try that first. He probably thought it had worked until he had to up the ante, when he realised that he couldn't make the US Open. Solution then - more rest

Then that that seems to be working better than the first time, but again this time when in competition (albeit a friendly) the realisation that he simply cannot do any of what he used to

Solution now - surgery

So why hang around?


Andy is rarely bullish, so I think that the surgery has gone better than expected (a surgeon would be honest with this) as maybe it wasn't as complicated when they 'had a look' at the issue

Of course he's still got a long road ahead, but let's just be thankful that he might see a road

I agree banbrotam.

He exhausted all other alternatives. Six moths of rest never solved the problem and surgery was the only option left open to him if he wants to carry on playing tennis at the highest level. Its a big risk but the alternative was to hang up his racquet.

Quite - it is so easy in life to confuse the clarity of a decision once made, and the anxious deliberation needed before making it.  Any sensible top level sportsman will avoid the knife if at all possible, but if a juncture is reached at which it becomes apparent that it's the only chance of prolonging a career (or gaining long-term health and fitness after the career), then eventually the decision makes itself.  The fact that the process of weighing up whether or not you have reached that point may be long and difficult and hedged about with uncertainties at times does not obscure the final moment of clarity.

That process must not, of course, be confused with those who quickly arrive at a clear and certain view without first having done the hard miles - for them the decision can subsequently unravel and uncertainty replace faux or lazy certainty.  One thing we know about Andy in more recent years is that he has shed his impetuosity and is an intelligent and considered guy.

I wish him luck - it is good to see that he is confident, it seems that he has known the surgeon for a very long time and that the discussions as to the nature of the surgery had been going on for some time, which is further indicative of his sensible approach to life - whilst pursuing option A he was giving option B a thorough shake down.

The BBC report says
"Other than the three-week break he took after his aborted attempt to play in the year's final Grand Slam, Murray says he has been practising virtually every day."

So, as Bertie is wondering - did he really give the rest option a chance to work?

My only queries would be quite how long Andy gave the 'rest and recuperation' phase, and how much he actually rested the hip. Certainly he must have been doing some physical work in August to try to be ready for the USO, and then there was the exho in December against Fed.

I suspect since Andy had been playing through some chronic pain in the hip for a long time (he said as much himself, but that something went more wrong in the RG semi final), it was difficult for him to gauge how well recovered he actually was (at least, as to whether he was recovered enough to recommence playing).

Obviously with hindsight, it seems that he should have gone through the surgery immediately after Wimbledon, and if so there's a chance he'd have been back on court now, but if the first medical opinion was that rest and recuperation should be sufficient then fair enough to give that a go rather than immediately going under the knife.

JuliusHMarx wrote:The BBC report says
"Other than the three-week break he took after his aborted attempt to play in the year's final Grand Slam, Murray says he has been practising virtually every day."

So, as Bertie is wondering - did he really give the rest option a chance to work?

We can only guesstimate/speculate, but I would think it far more likely that he did give it a proper chance than he didn't. He talked about MRI scans after his surgery - I would imagine that he had an MRI scan last year and that it revealed inherent difficulties which would not be cured 100% by rest, a problem which he could only ever 'work around', so that right at the start of the process the nature and size of the 'risk' that he'd need surgery was fairly well appreciated. If that's right, I'd not be surprised if the advice he was given was that if recuperation was going to get him back on tour within a reasonable time, and if he was going to be able to keep tabs on how it was working for him, the hip would have to be subjected to some degree of use during the recuperation period in any event. I can't see how total inactivity would work in such a scenario because it would not cure the underlying problem, you can't truly guage whether it's sufficient to play on tour until you build up the use again, and inactivity tends to lead to long-term stiffness which creates its own problems. Also, it's worth remembering that if the aim is to get him back on tour if possible, he's only got a fairly limited time to achieve that at his age. Again, it's only surmise, but I'd imagine that he pretty much knew that he'd need surgery towards the end of last year but at the beginning of this he was doing what he could to satisfy himself that there really was no other option. That may be why it looked more disorganised to us with our incomplete information than it would have appeared to him.

Yes I would say barry has that spot on.

Andy spoke at length about how surgery was always seen as his final option so now that he has taken that you can bet it won't have been taken lightly. All other options had been exhausted. For all we know his doctors told him to rest his hip by not playing matches but by all means stay active and not let it stiffen up due to inactivity. I am sure in his time off he has had regular scans and that has not shown any improvement hence his decision now.