Wimbledon 2018: Anderson Tops Isner After Epic 6-Hour S/F Thriller; Curfew Cuts Into Djokovic-Nadal Clash

Agencies
July 14, 2018

London, Jul 14: To say that Kevin Anderson won this interminable Wimbledon semifinal, and that John Isner lost it, didn't really seem fair. To Anderson, anyway.

They had played on and on, through 6 1/2 hours of ho-hum hold after ho-hum hold, during the second-longest match in the history of a tournament that began in 1877, all the way until the never-ending serving marathon did, finally, end at 26-24 in the fifth set Friday, with Anderson claiming the most important of the 569 points — the last.

So when Anderson left Centre Court, well aware that his 7-6 (6), 6-7 (5), 6-7 (9), 6-4, 26-24 victory earned him the chance to win his first Grand Slam title at the age of 32, the South African said: "At the end, you feel like this is a draw between the two of us."

He continued: "John's such a great guy, and I really feel for him, because if I'd been on the opposite side, I don't know how you can take that, playing for so long and coming up short."

Only one match at Wimbledon ever lasted longer: Isner's 2010 first-round victory over Nicolas Mahut, the longest match in tennis history. It went more than 11 hours over three days and finished 70-68 in the fifth on Court 18, which now bears a plaque commemorating it.

Friday's contest lasted so long, the day's second semifinal didn't finish.

Novak Djokovic was leading Rafael Nadal 6-4, 3-6, 7-6 (9) in a compelling showdown filled with entertaining points that was suspended as soon as the third set concluded at just past 11 p.m., the curfew at the All England Club.

Some people in the stands booed the decision to halt the match after a fantastic tiebreaker in which Nadal wasted three set points at 6-5, 7-6 and 8-7. Djokovic cashed in on his second when Nadal's backhand found the net after an 18-stroke exchange.

Because Nadal and Djokovic didn't begin playing until after 8 p.m., the retractable roof above the main stadium was shut between the matches and the arena's artificial lights were turned on. Now they'll come back Saturday to figure out who will face Anderson in the final, resuming at 1 p.m. local time, under the roof.

The women's final between Serena Williams and Angelique Kerber will then follow. That creates an unusual situation: Instead of a standard 2 p.m. start, Williams and Kerber won't know exactly when their match will begin.

Anderson will certainly appreciate the chance to put his feet up ahead of Sunday's final, while Nadal and Djokovic — who have a combined 29 Grand Slam titles between them, five at Wimbledon — push each other some more.

Anderson's fifth set alone lasted nearly 3 hours as his semifinal became a test of endurance more than skill.

"He stayed the course incredibly well," said the No. 9 seed Isner, a 33-year-old American playing in his first major semifinal. "Just disappointed to lose. I was pretty close to making a Grand Slam final and it didn't happen."

Anderson finally earned the must-have, go-ahead service break with the help of a point in which the right-hander tumbled to his backside, scrambled back to his feet and hit a shot lefty.

"That definitely brings a smile to my face," said Anderson, the runner-up to Nadal at last year's U.S. Open. "At that stage, you're just trying to fight in every single moment, and I was like, 'Just get up!'"

The No. 8 seed Anderson eliminated eight-time Wimbledon champion Roger Federer in a 13-11 fifth set in the quarterfinals Wednesday. Between that and the energy-sapper against Isner, it's hard to imagine how Anderson will have much left for his second Slam final.

Wimbledon doesn't use tiebreakers in the fifth set for men, or third set for women, so there's nothing to prevent a match from continuing ad infinitum. Both Isner and Anderson said they'd like to see that change.

At one point in the fifth set, a spectator shouted, "Come on, guys! We want to see Rafa!"

The 6-foot-8 Anderson and 6-10 Isner go way back, to their college days, Isner at Georgia, Anderson at Illinois. In the pros, Isner had won eight of 11 previous matchups. But this one was as close as can be.

There wasn't a whole lot of intrigue, or momentum shifts. The serving, though, was something else. Isner pounded his at up to 142 mph; Anderson reached 136 mph. They combined for 102 aces: 53 by Isner, 49 by Anderson.

"The effort they both put in and the performance and the guts, the way they competed — a lot to be proud of," said Justin Gimelstob, one of Isner's coaches.

Both failed to seize early opportunities. Isner wasted a set point in the opener. Anderson served for the third at 5-3, got broken, and then had a pair of set points in that tiebreaker, double-faulting one away.

By the latter stages, with break chances so rare, murmurs would spread through the Centre Court stands whenever a game's returner got to love-15 or love-30.

Could we be about to see the sixth and last break of a match that would end up with 90 holds?

Repeatedly, the answer was, of course, "No," even when Anderson held break points at 7-all, 10-all and 17-all. The 10-all game ended with Isner hitting a forehand passing winner on the run to hold, then letting his momentum carry him directly to his sideline chair, where he plopped himself down.

By the end, he was looking exhausted, leaning over to rest a hand on a knee between points.

"I feel pretty terrible," Isner said afterward. "My left heel is killing me and I have an awful blister on my right foot."

He never got a break point in the fifth set. Anderson finally came through on his sixth for a 25-24 lead, when Isner wearily put a backhand into the net.

Then Anderson served out the victory, with Isner sailing a forehand wide on match point.

Soon, they were meeting for an embrace.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 15,2020

New Delhi, May 15: Former England skipper David Gower feels Sourav Ganguly has the right "political skills" to lead the ICC one day and he has already displayed that as BCCI president, which is a "far tougher job".

The elegant left-hander is very impressed with Ganguly's leadership abilities and believes that he has what it takes to head the global body in the future.

"One thing I have learnt over the years is that if you are going to run BCCI, you need to be many, many things. Having a reputation like he (Ganguly) has is a very good start, but you need to be a very deft politician.

"You need to have control of a million different things," Gower said ahead of "Q20", a unique chat show for the fans presented by 'GloFans'.

Gower reckons being president of the BCCI is the toughest job imaginable in world cricket.

"And of course, you need to be responsible for a game that is followed by, I mean, should we say a billion people here in India," he said.

"We all know about the immense following for cricket in India. So it is indeed a wonderful thing to behold. Sourav has the toughest task imaginable in charge of BCCI, but so far I would say the signs are very good.

"He has listened, given his own opinion and has pulled strings gently," he said.

Political skills are a must in administration and that's where Gower finds his fellow left-hander ticking all the boxes.

"He is a very, very good man and has those political skills. He has the right attitude and can keep things together and will do good job. And if you do a good job as BCCI chief in the future, who knows?

"But I would actually say the more important job, to be honest, is running BCCI. Being head of ICC is an honour, there is a lot that can be done by ICC, but actually look at the rankings, look at where the power is heading up. BCCI is definitely the bigger job," he said.

On the cricketing front, Gower believes World Test Championship has given the format much-needed context.

"The idea of this World Test Championship has come about for one very simple reason that people are worried about the survival of Tests. Back in the seventies, eighties, I don't think we needed context to be fair.

"Test cricket was very much more obviously the most important format and if there was anything to be judged by, it was the performances in Test matches both as an individual and as a team.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
March 2,2020

Mar 2: Indian captain Virat Kohli was left frustrated and deflated as New Zealand won the second Test inside three days in Christchurch on Monday to sweep the series.

India started the day at 90 for six and were all out for 124, before New Zealand chased down the required 132 to win for the loss of three wickets in 36 overs.

It ended a disappointing tour for India and Kohli as New Zealand, who won the first Test by 10 wickets early on day four, wrapped up the series with ease.

New Zealand are now unbeaten in their last 13 home Tests, winning nine of them, and in the past decade their record as hosts is played 39, won 20, drawn 13 and lost five.

In the latest series, on traditional New Zealand green wickets, India managed scores of 165, 191, 242 and 124, reflecting the low contributions from Kohli of 2, 19, 3 and 14.

Kohli came to New Zealand as the world's top Test batsman and oozing charm as he described New Zealand as the “nice guys” of cricket.

But during the series he lost his top ranking to Australian Steve Smith and when Kane Williamson went for three in the first innings of the second Test the pressure showed when he gave the New Zealand skipper a very animated send-off.

There was further evidence of frustration when he was caught on camera yelling an obscenity at a group of New Zealand supporters on Sunday.

The end came quickly for India on day three as Tim Southee and Trent Boult tormented the batsmen with their variety of inswing and outswing deliveries targeting both sides of the stumps.

Hanuma Vihari was the first to fall, in Southee's second over, when he turned a legside delivery too fine and was caught by BJ Watling diving to his left.

Five balls later and with no addition to the score, India's other overnight batsman Rishabh Pant was caught behind off a Boult delivery that swung away.

Mohammed Shami was caught for five by Tom Blundell at deep mid-wicket and Jasprit Bumrah was run out when trying to give the strike to Ravindra Jadeja, who was unbeaten on 16.

Boult and Southee signed for most of the dismissals with Boult taking four for 28 and Southee three for 36. The swing pair accounted for 25 of the 40 Indian wickets in the series.

There was enough seam and swing available for India to keep the New Zealand batsmen guessing but Bumrah and Umesh Yadav were unable to apply consistent pressure and Mohammed Shami was troubled by a sore shoulder.

New Zealand coasted through a century opening stand by Tom Latham and Blundell before losing three quick wickets.

Latham notched his 18th half-century and second of the Test before he was caught behind off Yadav for 52, Kane Williamson had a short stay for five, and Blundell went for 55.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 19,2020

Jun 19: The BCCI is open to reviewing its sponsorship policy for the next cycle but has no plans to end its association with current IPL title sponsor Vivo as the money coming in from the Chinese company is helping India's cause and not the other way round, board treasurer Arun Dhumal said on Friday. Anti-China sentiments are running high in India following the border clash between the two countries at Galwan valley earlier this week. The first skirmish at the India-China border in more than four decades left at least 20 Indian soldiers dead. Since then, calls have been made to boycott Chinese products.

But Dhumal said Chinese companies sponsoring an Indian event like the IPL only serve his country's interests.

The BCCI gets Rs 440 crore annually from Vivo and the five-year deal ends in 2022.

"When you talk emotionally, you tend to leave the rationale behind. We have to understand the difference between supporting a Chinese company for a Chinese cause or taking help from Chinese company to support India's cause," Dhumal said.

"When we are allowing Chinese companies to sell their products in India, whatever money they are taking from Indian consumer, they are paying part of it to the BCCI (as brand promotion) and the board is paying 42 per cent tax on that money to the Indian government. So, that is supporting India's cause and not China's," he argued.

Oppo, a mobile phone brand like Vivo, was sponsoring the Indian cricket team until September last year when Bengaluru-based educational technology Byju's start-up replaced the Chinese company.

Dhumal said he is all for reducing dependence on Chinese products but as long as its companies are allowed to do business in India, there is no harm in them sponsoring an Indian brand like the IPL.

"If they are not supporting the IPL, they are likely to take that money back to China. If that money is retained here, we should be happy about it. We are supporting our government with that money (by paying taxes on it)."

"If I am giving a contract to a Chinese company to build a cricket stadium, then I am helping the Chinese economy. GCA built the world's largest cricket stadium at Motera and that contract was given to an Indian company (L&T)," he said.

"Cricketing infrastructure worth thousands of crores was created across country and none of the contract was awarded to a Chinese company."

Dhumal went on to say the BCCI is spoilt for choice when it comes to attracting sponsors, whether Indian or Chinese or from any other nation.

"If that Chinese money is coming to support Indian cricket, we should be okay with it. I am all for banning Chinese products as an individual, we are there to support our government but by getting sponsorship from Chinese company, we are helping India's cause."

"We can get sponsorship money from non-Chinese companies also including Indian firms. We can support our players any way but the idea is when they are allowed to sell their products here, it is better that part of money comes back to the Indian economy."

"The BCCI is not giving money to the Chinese, it is attracting on the contrary. We should make decision based on rationale rather than emotion," he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.