off topic but related with murray.
as i know scotts and brits are totally different people with their own governemet,flag,national anthem ,culture etc..
but why they say the british No 1?all this murray-mania in england is unbelievable

He's the British number 1 because he is British: Scotland is a part of Great Britain.
Yes Scotland has its own flag etc, but so do Wales and Northern Island.
People seem to get confused by this: players aren't playing for Scotland or England or Wales or Northern Island, they are playing for Great Britain (which consists of all four sub-nations).

off topic but related with murray.
as i know scotts and brits are totally different people with their own governemet,flag,national anthem ,culture etc..
but why they say the british No 1?all this murray-mania in england is unbelievable



I’m not supporting that miserable Scotch git. For a start, he’s Scotch. And he’s miserable. And I hate tennis.

My opinion of him will, of course, change if he wins the tournament. Then he’ll be a fine British lion giving Johnny Foreigner what for in one of the finest sporting competitions in the world.

lol that tends to be the consensus!

When Murray wins he's British, when Murray loses he's 110% scottish! lol

Scott

I am currently watching the Murray-Wawrinka match, and a few minutes ago I couldn't believe what was going on:
Murray was serving, but the ball went out and flew into the crowd, where it was catched by a man.
The man threw it back on the court during Murray's second serve, and the umpire decided Murray had a first serve again.

I hope you know what I mean, some may have watched it as well.

My did he get a first serve again??
It's the same after a challenge on the 2nd serve called out proves the serve has been in. Then you get a first serve again. This is such an unfair rule!!

Yes I saw both points. I think the first rule is ok because Murray had begun his service swing and was therefore disrupted quite a bit by the ball being thrown back into the court. After that kind of a distraction it would be very easy to serve a double-fault.
The second one is quite harsh, I agree. Although in saying that, Hawk-Eye can sometimes take a while to operate and so a player probably needs the two serves again otherwise once again a double-fault is probable (and after all it is not either players fault in this instance, its the lines-persons' / umpires' fault).

Results Quarterfinals:

Andy Roddick(USA)[6] bt. Lleyton Hewitt(AUS) 6:3 6:7(10) 7:6(1) 4:6 6:4
Andy Murray(GBR)[3] bt. Juan Carlos Ferrero(ESP) 7:5 6:3 6:2

Tommy Haas(GER)[24] bt. Novak Djokovic(SRB)[4] 7:5 7:6(6) 4:6 6:3
Roger Federer(SUI)[2] bt. Ivo Karlovic(CRO)[22] 6:3 7:5 7:6(3)


Upcoming Semifinals:

Andy Roddick(USA)[6] vs. Andy Murray(GBR)[3]
Tommy Haas(GER)[24] vs. Roger Federer(SUI)[2]

FINAL:

Roger Federer(SUI)[2] bt. Andy Roddick(USA)[6] 5:7 7:6(6) 7:6(5) 3:6 16:14


Although I respect Roger for his achivements during his whole career and as a great player, I think today not the better player has won the title. Andy would really have deserved it. He played such a great tournament and had the clearly tougher draw.
That loss will stick in his mind for a really long time I'm afraid.

Although it may sound weird, but in the end Roger won because of his serve (50 aces) and because Andy was completly empty at the end of the match.

Congrats to Roger and his 15th GS, but IMO Andy would have deserved it more.

It's absolutely eviscerating for Roddick to have played so well and to have fought so hard and still lose.
Roddick will be haunted by that volley he missed at 6-5 in the second set tiebreak because making that would have put him two sets up and he'd have been in a great position to win. Having said that Federer missed a relatively easy forehand at BP at 5-5 in the first set, although it was only overturned by hawkeye, and if he'd made that then he'd almost certainly have served out the first set and could have won far more easily than he did.

Roddick did show great resilience to fight back because he looked finished at the start of the fourth but he broke Federer to take it into a fifth. Roddick had a great chance to win at 8-8 when he was 15-40 but Federer came up with some great serves to hold on and Roddick didn't really have a good chance on the Federer serve again. Federer did have the advantage of serving first in the fifth which really helped him as the pressure was always on Roddick to hold to stay in the match and in the last few games Federer was making inroads into Roddick's serve and getting to 30 and deuce and Roddick was getting fewer aces and service winners as he tired while Federer's serve was still immense. Federer was holding fairly easily while he could put pressure on Roddick's serve. Roddick also tired as the effort of his two previous matches caught up with him. Broken only once and Roddick loses when it happens.

I've got to say that Roddick showed a lot of dignity in the on-court interview and the presentation because he was absolutely distraught. This is going to hurt him for a long time. If he plays like he did then he can definitely win another slam; at the same time, he played probably as well as he could and still didn't win.

No Roland Garros-Wimbledon double for 28 years and now there's been two in a row. Federer's achievements over the years have just been incredible.

I forgot to mention... I thought it was pretty arrogant and disrespectful to Roddick when Federer walked onto court to collect his trophy wearing a jacket with the number 15 on the back! Clearly anticipating prior to the match that he was going to win.
well, the Jacket was given to him from his sponsor Nike. They also created a TV spot with several tennis legends congratulating Roger for his 15th title, which was definately produced before his win