Phil Harrison: Leave Murray to himself as he continues grand slam mission

And the usual, predictable doubts over Andy Murray’s ability to close out a major tournament will continue to be aired and written over the coming weeks, right up until his chances are built right back up again in a couple of weeks’ time when Wimbledon returns.

Friday’s straight sets semi-final defeat to Rafael Nadal at Roland Garros was the latest setback for Murray when facing one of only three players in the world who can justifiably claim to be slightly more than his equal when it comes to the grand slam showdowns.

For large chunks of the match, Murray was comfortably a match for his Spanish opponent. It seemed that, at the vital moments, Nadal had that little bit extra which enabled him to take the points that really mattered in three extremely close sets, showing the kind of class and temperament that had enabled him to lift the French Open title five times prior to his latest meeting with Murray.

So while there is the obvious disappointment to be endured by Murray – who also had to cope with a seemingly never-ending injury curse for most of his tournament – there were still plenty of positives for him to take out of his latest visit to Paris.

The most obvious plus point was his ability to come back when seemingly down and out – almost twice – against Serbia’s Viktor Troicki in the fourth round.

The victory was claimed while he nursed a troublesome ankle injury and highlighted once again the fighting quality that has rarely been doubted in the British No 1.

Of the top three players in the world, it is Nadal – a year older than Murray – who holds the most convincing advantage over the Scot, his 10 wins dwarfing Murray’s three in the 13 meetings between the two. Two of Murray’s triumphs have come in grand slam events, the semi-finals of the 2008 US Open and the quarters in the Australian Open two years later.

Of his other main rivals, twice Roger Federer has beaten Murray in a grand slam final – both times in straight sets and their only big four showdowns – but the head-to-head record between the two actually puts Murray ahead by two in 14 meetings.

Novak Djokovic – whose startling 43-match unbeaten run was finally brought to an end by Federer in Friday’s other semi-final in Paris – holds the upper-hand with six wins over Murray’s three, the most notable coming earlier this year when he triumphed against his close friend and rival in the final of the Australian Open.

But the odds on Murray lifting that all-important grand slam title continue to narrow. Despite his impressive recent showing in Paris, Federer is close to entering the rump of his career, at least at the top of the men’s game, a situation which will soon leave just the triumvirate of Nadal, Djokovic and Murray fighting it out among themselves, with no other obvious candidate on the horizon looking likely to challenge that elite group, at least on a regular basis. All that will be required is for Murray to join his top three rivals on the list of grand slam winners.

But will Murray forever be labelled with the same ‘nearly-man’ tag enjoyed by his predecessor as British No 1, Tim Henman? The former world no 4 always seemed so close to finally ending Britain’s long wait for a grand slam winner, particularly at SW19, without being able to go that extra yard and make his childhood dream a reality.

But make no mistake, Murray is a completely different proposition altogether, and not just because he has already made it to three more grand slam finals than Henman ever did.

It is only a matter of time before the oft-described ‘surly Scot’ lifts a meaningful trophy – he is still only 24 years old. The crying shame, however, is that when that magic moment does arrive, as it surely will, the cheers are likely to be muffled rather than echoed across the land.

The problem with Murray for some people – more so, perhaps, south of the Scottish border – lies in his perceived miserable nature. Who knows, when he does finally land that first grand slam it may enable him to relax more and become more comfortable with all the media attention he receives. But, if not, so what?

Do we really need our sporting heroes to be perfectly happy and charming whenever a microphone or dictaphone is shoved in their face?

Surely a touch of the ruthlessness and ‘surly’ disposition that comes with a winning mentality is what was missing from Henman’s approach, making him appear happy with his lot in failing to progress beyond the last four stage at any of the four grand slam events, an accomplishment he managed four times at Wimbledon.

Murray is renowned for being ‘dour’ and while some would claim that his handling of the media could do with some coaching in order to give him a more likeable nature, others, including myself, find it refreshing that he seems happy to continue being himself.

The fact he comes across as a man on a mission has to be applauded and, as the pressure intensifies on him to what must seem an almost unbearable level in the build-up to this year’s Wimbledon, one can only imagine how tiresome he will find all the column inches and screen minutes there will be devoted to his chances of ending the home nation’s 75-year wait for a men’s singles champion (this column included, obviously).

You never know, in four weeks’ time, those column inches and that air-time could be devoted to celebrating Britain’s oh-so-long wait for a men’s champion.