Rafa glory in epic Australian Open final
With a tear, a hug and an on-court performance he will undoubtedly regret, Roger Federer has had to accept he is the world’s second best tennis player.
And his chances of reclaiming the supremacy he held for a record four and a half years is surely remote unless injury halts Rafael Nadal.
The game’s greatest money winner lost his Australian Open final early on Monday to a 22-year-old whose place as the world’s best player is as clearly defined as Federer’s place as the second best.
Nadal beat Federer 7-5 3-6 7-6 (7-3) 3-6 6-3 in the first Australian final in 20 years to go to five sets and only the second ever to go the full distance.
The match that promised to be an epic probably became more, particularly for Nadal.
The Spaniard played his final two matches of the Open on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday, the semi-final and final taking a combined 9 hours 37 minutes.
But any notion that his semi-final would take a physical toll was to prove mistaken.
Nadal finished the match as physically sound as his opponent.
Mentally, he was in better shape.
Federer, as he did when he won the second of his three Australian Opens in 2006, broke down at the presentation, this time as he received the runner-up trophy.
“It hurts me to lose,” he said.
“It just overwhelms you and you can’t go into the locker room and have a cold shower.”
“I don’t want to have the last word. This guy deserves it. You played incredible. You deserved it, man,” Federer told Nadal.
“I’d like to thank the legends for coming out. You know how much it means to me.”
Then Nadal suggested in his gracious victory speech that Federer may well join the pantheon of the men whom he idolises so much.
“I know how you feel right now, it’s really tough,” he said.
“But you remember you are a great champion. You are one of the best of history.”
With his trophy under one arm, he threw the other around his rival in a moment that was more uncomfortable than touching, but nevertheless well meant.
It at least calmed the loser enough to say his “thank yous” and collect a cheque for A$1 million.
Nadal got one for A$2 million and extended his lead in the rankings.
Until this morning, Federer seemed only a match or two away from deposing Nadal from the position he claimed last August.
But the Spaniard proved here his defeat of Federer at Wimbledon last year and at the past three French Opens is a true reflection their relative abilities.
Nadal also showed that he is a champion who has gained acceptance with every tournament – for all his grunting, his questionable wardrobe and his constant difficulties with his underwear.
And with his first grand slam win on a hard court, along with his total dominance on clay and his obvious liking for the Wimbledon grass, he has the best chance of any player in 40 years to do what Laver did and sweep all four grand slams.
Factbox of Australian Open men’s champion Rafael Nadal (prefix denotes seeding):
RAFAEL NADAL (ESP)
Age: 22
Ranking: 1
Plays: left-handed (two-handed backhand)
Career prize money: $US20,814,797 PLUS $AUD2 million
Career titles: 32
Grand slam titles: 6 Nadal (Australian Open 2009; French Open 2005-08; Wimbledon 2008)
Career win-loss record: 338-78
Australian Open win-loss record: 21-4
ROAD TO TITLE
1st rd: bt Christophe Rochus (BEL) 6-0 6-2 6-2
2nd rd: bt Rocko Karanusic (CRO) 6-2 6-3 6-2
3rd rd: bt Tommy Hass (GER) 6-4 6-2 6-2 6-2
4th rd: bt 13-Fernando Gonzalez (CHI) 6-3 6-2 6-4
QF: bt 6-Gilles Simon (FRA) 6-2 7-5 7-5
SF: bt 14-Fernando Verdasco (ESP) 6-7 (4-7) 6-4 7-6 (7-2) 6-7 (1-7) 6-4
F: bt 2-Roger Federer (SUI) 7-5 3-6 7-6 (7-3) 3-6 6-2
HEAD-TO-HEAD
Nadal leads Federer 13-6 (5-2 at grand slams)
2004 Miami, hard, Nadal 6-3 6-3
2005 Miami, hard, Federer 2-6 6-7(4-7) 7-6(7-5) 6-3 6-1
2005 French Open, clay, Nadal 6-3 4-6 6-4 6-3
2006 Dubai, hard, Nadal 2-6 6-4 6-4
2006 Monte Carlo, clay, Nadal 6-2 6-7(2-7) 6-3 7-6(7-5)
2006 Rome, clay, Nadal 6-7(0-7) 7-6(7-5) 6-4 2-6 7-6(7-5)
2006 French Open, clay, Nadal 1-6 6-1 6-4 7-6(7-4)
2006 Wimbledon, grass, Federer 6-0 7-6(7-5) 6-7(2-7) 6-3
2006 Masters Cup, Shanghai, hard, Federer 6-4 7-5
2007 Monte Carlo, clay, Nadal 6-4 6-4
2007 Hamburg, clay, Federer 2-6 6-2 6-0
2007 French Open, clay, Nadal 6-3 4-6 6-3 6-4
2007 Wimbledon, grass, Federer 7-6(9-7) 4-6 7-6(7-3) 2-6 6-2
2007 Masters Cup, Shanghai, hard, Federer 6-4 6-1
2008 Monte Carlo, clay, Nadal 7-5 7-5
2008 Hamburg, clay, Nadal 7-5 6-7(3-7) 6-3
2008 French Open, clay, Nadal 6-1 6-3 6-0
2008 Wimbledon, grass, Nadal 6-4 6-4 6-7(5) 6-7(8) 9-7
2009 Australian Open, hard, Nadal 7-5 3-6 7-6 (7-3) 3-6 6-2
Recommend this story.
- Explore:
- Australian Open, Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Tennis
February 2nd 2009 @ 7:21pm
Boss said | February 2nd 2009 @ 7:21pm | Report comment
Benjamin,
It’s perefectly logical for emotion to come into something you love, and I have acknowledged how in awe of the game Roger is.
I just think Roger might have liked to have a bit more respect for Rafa’s career, as it were last night in particular, as well as his own heroes like Laver. It appeared a little selfish.
He didn’t realise it wasn’t his moment – or else he would have been far more gracious and acknowledged Rafa’s victory as per program. All Grand Slam finals and general sporting presentations ask the runner up to speak first, that of which Roger could not manage. Consequently Rafael was presented the trophy before Roger was able to speak, and had he not made that effort, it would go down as one of the worst displays of sportmanship ever!
Oneside,
These two men are the biggest players in world tennis, and two of the worlds most heralded athletes. They have feats to their names not many others could lay testament to. If Tiger Woods played at/and or CRIED after losing the Australian Open Golf tournament I think it might stir debate in the sporting world? Australia was blessed to host such a final, and while the headlines tomorrow might go back to Rugby League, if Federer shows that kind of emotion again, and/or those two players play again I think we might know something about it down under? They’re kind of a big dea!
February 2nd 2009 @ 7:27pm
Sam said | February 2nd 2009 @ 7:27pm | Report comment
I’ve never really liked Federer too much.. He’s a nice bloke, but under the surface he is a bit arrogant, and also a sore loser to some degree. You will always that look on his face at some stage during a match.. Maybe because he is Swiss we tend to feel for him. Great player, but has to accept he will have to overtake Sampras the hard way. Saying that I hope he does it this year. He is a more complete player than any other.
February 2nd 2009 @ 8:00pm
Anthony m said | February 2nd 2009 @ 8:00pm | Report comment
Great to watch two champions play each other in another epic battle!. But roger, get a grip mate! You gotta get the tears out of your game buddy. Champions take losing in their stride.
February 2nd 2009 @ 8:01pm
onside said | February 2nd 2009 @ 8:01pm | Report comment
Boss
I agree with you.I think these two men are truly beautiful men and athletes.
The point I struggle to make is just how little notice Australians take of
sport that is either 1. not under their noses at home or 2.Australians are
not involved when matches are played overseas.All this despite repeating
the mantra that Australians are really interested in sport.
February 2nd 2009 @ 8:05pm
The 1 and Only Master said | February 2nd 2009 @ 8:05pm | Report comment
Onside,
Please enlighten us as to which countries live up to your expectations of following sports not under their noses or not involving their on country men and women
February 2nd 2009 @ 8:31pm
Colin N said | February 2nd 2009 @ 8:31pm | Report comment
“I’ve never really liked Federer too much.. He’s a nice bloke, but under the surface he is a bit arrogant, and also a sore loser to some degree.”
That’s a bit of a ridiculous statement to make. When you consider that most top sportsmen need a certain amount of arrogance to succeed at the top, of course they may appear at times like a ‘sore loser.’ It’s just their nature.
Anyway, the game was great, but I agree with Spiro. What I think Murray did well against Nadal is mix the pace up well, unlike Federer.
I believe Nadal can beaten in a few ways. Verdasco had the perfect game plan – hit the ball as hard as you can! And when Nadal is passive, or perhaps isn’t timing the ball particularly well, he can be beaten fairly easily, as Tsonga proved last year and Verdasco almost proved this year.
Like Nadal, Federer tends to put a lot of topspin on the ball. Players like Tsonga and Verdasco hit the ball flatter and Murray uses the pace of the ball well. I think it’s Fereder’s sheer shot making talent that makes him compete with Nadal, rather than what he doe tactically.
February 2nd 2009 @ 9:55pm
onside said | February 2nd 2009 @ 9:55pm | Report comment
The 1 et al
yep your right.Its the order of things.That said its healthy to hold the mirror up and truly question feigned interest
However viewers seem to watch soccer all year round even though Australians may not be invovled .EPL is
popular,and maybe golf.People watch a lot of golf regardless of the participants. Other mainstream sports like
Cricket,Rugby and Tennis dont seem to be able to attract attention purely for the game itself .I use the word SEEM
because I dont know.Gut feel is an imprecise benchmark.But there seems to be a broader interest in newspaper
reports about international golf and soccer than there is about other sports.Lots of people will discuss a golf
tournament played overseas.Likewise the major international soccer leagues are wel l supported particularly
the EPL.Kids wear say Man U/Chelsea/Arsenal strips for example.Despite the quality of some rugby played
overseas you dont see kids wearing strips.They dont even know the players even though they like the game.
February 3rd 2009 @ 12:16am
Robert B said | February 3rd 2009 @ 12:16am | Report comment
I disagree completely that Roger was being a bad sport, for all he had at stake it’s so understandable how he was unable to keep his emotions in check despite his best efforts. If anything his genuine comments shortly after, “I don’t want to have the last word; this guy deserves it.” So, Rafa, congratulations. You played incredible. You deserve it, man. “(You) played another fantastic final” illustrates his sportsmanship. Furthermore don’t forget that when Nadal lost the 2007 Wimbledon final to Federer he was inconsolable and that’s why his words to Roger are really genuine, ” Roger, sorry for today. I really know how you feel right now.” Both are class acts.
February 3rd 2009 @ 10:41am
Boss said | February 3rd 2009 @ 10:41am | Report comment
“For all he had at stake” – what about all the countless dreams lost in the 13 grand slams Federer already holds, (as aforementioned)
He couldn’t have had the last word, it’s not the duty of the Runner Up to decide when to speak.
He (Federer) could have said exactly what he eventually did before Rafa held up the trophy, hard as it may have been, I’m pretty sure Rafa spoke before Federer held up the 2007 Wimbedon Trophy.
Sport, like everything is relative, winning 2007 Wimbledon might have meant as much to Rafa at 20 years old as Federer’s 14th Grand Slam at 26.
That’s why Rod Laver nodded during Nadal’s speech, and not Federers!
February 3rd 2009 @ 11:06am
Robert B said | February 3rd 2009 @ 11:06am | Report comment
“What about all the countless dreams lost in the 13 grand slams Federer already holds” – exactly so it would be understandable if those challengers got emotional too. Eg. Marcos Baghdatis.
“He couldn’t have had the last word, it’s not the duty of the Runner Up to decide when to speak.” – Nevertheless clearly Roger didn’t want to have the limelight because Rafa deserved being the winner, highlighted by Roger’s comments after he could compose himself. You’re being way too harsh and to say it goes down as one of the worst displays of sportsmanship ever…..is in my view completely wrong.