• What the Deuce

Britain's 74-year wait continues

Andy Murray played in his second Grand Slam final in Melbourne © Getty Images

Enlarge

Related Links

• News: Argentines triumph in Chile, Melzer through in Zagreb
  
• News: Murray up one in rankings as Nadal drops to fourth
  
• News: Awesome Federer too good for Murray
  
• News: Murray ready for Federer battle
  
• News: Flawless Federer storms into Australian Open final
  
• Profile: Juan Martin Del Potro | Roger Federer | Andy Murray | Rafael Nadal

Andy Murray carried the hope of the nation on his shoulders as millions forfeited their Sunday morning lie-in to watch the Scot attempt the nigh-impossible. To make history certainly; to end Britain's 74-year drought for a men's Grand Slam champion, but more crucially, to beat Roger Federer.

The Australian Open is traditionally the hardest to call; it comes just two weeks into the new season and while some players will return fresh and invigorated from their winter break, others will struggle to find the form they enjoyed just a month previously. While Juan Martin del Potro was a perfect example of the latter, Murray looked in ominous form, storming through his opening matches barely breaking into a sweat, let alone dropping a set.

Being seeded fifth rather than fourth was actually a blessing in disguise for Murray. While much was made of a potential quarter-final clash with defending champion Rafael Nadal, it was the fourth seed Del Potro who had the trickier route to the final. A second-round clash with James Blake took its toll on the US Open champion, who eventually fell to Murray's semi-final opponent Marin Cilic in five.

Murray's match against the big-serving American John Isner was tactically spot on, and again against Nadal he stuck to his game plan and executed it to perfection. Nadal's retirement with a knee injury took away from a thoroughly deserved victory. Critics will argue Nadal would have beaten Murray if he had been fully fit, and though it is hard to say just how much the Spaniard was hampered by his knees, he seemed to be moving well enough in the opening sets and in his previous matches in Melbourne.

Clearly in good physical condition, Murray also seemed to be mentally stronger. After going a set down to Cilic at the US Open last September, Murray crumbled and handed the Croat the match in straight sets. But this time Murray was more confident and, despite dropping the opening set, he never looked in any danger of defeat.

Even Murray began to believe he could win. Going into the tournament he had remained typically coy on the subject, saying, "If I play well, then I can I win Australia for sure," which is not exactly blowing your own trumpet. But after beating Cilic to reach his second Grand Slam final, the belief was there: "I have a game that can cause Roger problems," he said. "I know what to expect. It's up to me to play my best."

Andy Murray is playing in one of the strongest periods of men's tennis © Getty Images

Enlarge

Murray believed. Britain expected. Even ESPN.co.uk editor Alex Livie thought it would happen. Against any other player, Murray would have won that final. But he came up against a man who does not like to lose. Federer's record in major finals is stunning. In 22 Grand Slam final appearances, he has won 16 of them. Only two men have ever beaten him in a final, and Murray failed at his own second attempt.

Tennis captures the imagination of the British public once a year at Wimbledon. Fans sit expectantly on Murray Mount and every year they leave disappointed. But Murray's performance in Melbourne grabbed the attention of the casual tennis fan. And in the true spirit of Wimbledon, the Brits went home empty handed.

Murray may have been beaten, but he was not humiliated. Far from it. Yes, he bottled it serving to take the match to a fourth set, and his serve remains a weakness, but he hit fewer unforced errors than the best player in the world, playing in what he described as one of the best matches of his career. Murray knows what it takes to beat the best and he remains arguably the most tactically astute player on the tour.

In any other era, Murray would be a Grand Slam champion. Between the years 2000 and 2003, no player won more than one Grand Slam in a calendar year and the draws were wide open. It is always hard to compare Michael Schumacher and Ayrton Senna, Pele and Lionel Messi, but it would be fair to say that Murray could have beaten the likes of Lleyton Hewitt, Thomas Johansson and Juan Carlos Ferrero. Even in the Agassi-Sampras era he could have sneaked a hard-court title - Agassi was awesome but inconsistent and even Sampras had off days.

Murray is blessed and cursed to be playing against the greatest player ever to have graced a tennis court. The disappointment of Sunday's defeat will be a hard one to swallow for Murray, knowing that even playing at his best he would not have beaten the Federer that came out on court to win his 16th Grand Slam, but Murray will be able take a great deal from his performance and believe that next time he can go one better.

Bring on Wimbledon...

© ESPN Sports Media Ltd.