Wimbledon Is Andy Murray's Time

Andy Murray can never seem to get into the picture, the trouble with being No. 3 in a two-icon sport. So now that Rafael Nadal is out of Wimbledon with bad knees, the burning question in Great Britain is whether this gives Murray a chance?

But the thing people are missing is that Nadal or no Nadal, Murray was going to win anyway.

That's right: Andy Murray is going to win Wimbledon.

It's time.

Yes, Roger Federer will be there, playing for a record 15th major title, and also for a chance to regain the No. 1 ranking from Nadal.

Federer is great and all. But there is a learning curve to winning a major title, to winning most major sporting crowns, and Murray has followed it perfectly.

He's 22 now, has been through the ugliness of a first major-final loss, last year's U.S. Open, and has matured. He has control of his head now, gotten stronger and into shape, stopped over-thinking so much. He has relaxed, and is even turning to power when needed.

On top of that, he just became the first Brit to win on the grass at Queen's Club in 71 years. Federer skipped the tournament, saying he was exhausted from the French Open, and hasn't played on grass leading up to Wimbledon.

One more thing: Murray has beaten Federer four times in a row.

It's time, but Murray will have a mountain to climb. Remember Henman Hill? They call it Murray Mountain now.

See, Murray, who's from Scotland, is the Great Brit Hope, and that's a horrible label. Great Britain doesn't produce tennis players, so there's usually just one hope per era. Tim Henman, whose fans used to gather on the grounds at Wimbledon on what they called Henman Hill, has been replaced by Murray.


The pressure on British players at Wimbledon is nuts. And while Henman disagrees with this, it crushed him.

"I think a lot of people, ex-players, use it as an excuse why someone British has not won Wimbledon," Murray said, "but I personally do not think it makes any difference once the tournament starts."

How's that for a shot from British tennis present to British past?

Murray argues that in other sports, it's called homefield advantage.

The crowd goes nuts for someone, and it's considered a good thing that makes a team play better. So why not in tennis?

Well, several years ago, I sat at Court 14 at Wimbledon, watching Michael Chang play Brit Jeremy Bates. Chang started to lose and next thing you knew, fans were crowding into every crack in the stands, hovering over walls on nearby buildings, crowding corners. Word had spread across the grounds, and everyone who could get there came running.

This is not your normal homecourt support. Winning here is a social requirement, unfulfilled since Fred Perry won there in 1936.

And the fans and the pressure and the ghosts of failure are not out there in normal support, but rather in demand.

An ad in London reportedly shows Britons crowded around their TVs on championship point in the Wimbledon final, and then suddenly celebrating.

"It will happen," the narrator says.

They call it Murraymania now. Before that, Henmania.

The thing about Murray is that he has the game for this. He simply has not won The Big One yet.

"Federer was down two sets ... against Tommy Haas in the French Open, and if he would have lost that match, I would have gone to No. 2 (past Federer in the rankings), so it is not like I am a long way behind him," Murray said.

"If only I can get over the first hurdle of winning a Grand Slam ... "

It's time. But while a Murray run will play big in Great Britain, and make for a far more rowdy final even than last year's, I wouldn't say that will play big in the U.S. People will watch a Federer-Murray final to see if Federer breaks Pete Sampras' record, but a Murray win will seem like a disappointment in the U.S.

Murray is not ready to give tennis a third icon. But he is ready to get in the picture.

(Like what you read here? Follow me on twitter: @gregcouch)