Fallen Favourite - Murray defeat should not spell panic
In the search for perspective following Andy Murray’s fourth-round exit at the Australian Open, it is worth rewinding six years to 2003.
Back then, a 21-year-old Roger Federer – seeded sixth - suffered a five-set defeat by 10th seed David Nalbandian at exactly the same stage in Melbourne.
It prompted one British newspaper journalist to write that the Swiss was "fast taking the Tim Henman mantle of a talented choker".
Federer, as if anyone needs reminding, went on to win the first of 13 Grand Slams (and counting) at Wimbledon later that same season.
Along the way, he has played poor matches and still won: only on Sunday, the world number two was scraping past Tomas Berdych despite dropping the first two sets.
Federer, along with Novak Djokovic, had expressed surprise that Murray had been installed as joint favourite for the title, and the world number two has become increasingly annoyed at having to answer questions about the Scot as the tournament has progressed.
Murray may have had an unbeaten start to the season and been the form player of the last six months, but Grand Slam tournaments, Federer argued, are a "different animal".
So it proved.
No one can blame the bookies for tipping a player who had lost just five matches since Wimbledon.'
Troubled by illness – on which he refused to blame his fluctuating performance against 14th seed Fernando Verdasco – Murray could not even beat his previous Australian Open best.
His critics – many of them on here on 606 – claimed he was overhyped by the British media and the bookmakers.
But it was the Australian Age newspaper which chose to print a picture of Murray on Saturday under the headline: "Can He Do It? Yes He Can."
And no one can blame the bookies for tipping a player who had lost just five matches since Wimbledon, a run which featured two wins over Djokovic, three over Federer and one over Rafael Nadal.
But only the Nadal win came in a five-set match and it was closely followed by defeat in the US Open final by Federer.
He wasn’t quite ready to win his first Grand Slam title then, and it emerged in Melbourne that he perhaps still lacks that maturity which only comes with the big-match experience.
Murray, showing flashes of the sort of petulant behaviour which scarred the early stages of his career, suffered an aberration against an in-form player on Monday.
It happens, and Murray – a voracious student of the game - will learn from it.
Indeed, amid the obvious disappointment of his early defeat, it was Murray who managed to put it into some kind of perspective.
"I'll go and speak to my coach, the guys that I work with, and see if there's things that I could have done better, things that I can improve," he said.
"But, I mean, for me it's not a disaster. I'm still playing well. I lost to a good player in a very close match. I'll have more chances to win Grand Slams."
Federer would attest to that. He prevailed in his 17th Grand Slam tournament. Murray has just lost in his 13th.
