· British newspapers focus, understandably, not on Djokovic’s success, but on Murray’s failure. The general assessment is, however, that a much better player won.
Guardian:
Any analysis of Andy Murray’s disintegration in Melbourne is rendered invalid if it ignores the excellence of the man who made his life a misery for two hours and 39 minutes in the final of the Australian Open. Novak Djokovic was, quite simply, sublime in nearly every department in beating Murray 6-4, 6-2, 6-3, including those areas of expertise Murray regards as his fiefdoms: baseline defence, a strong serve and bags of intuitive tennis. Djokovic bossed them all; Murray did not.
Djokovic’s climb up the ludicrously greasy pole of world rankings is significant, given the circumstances of his win here, his second Australian title and his second major, in the absence of Federer and Nadal. On top of his comprehensive win, one born of total commitment and self-belief, the Serb is overhauling Federer, an act of tennis blasphemy that is becoming more commonplace by the tournament. His assault on the summit was by some way the more convincing and he now sits just behind Federer, the god he reduced to a hitting partner in the semi-final, by a very gettable 85 points.
These are mere numbers. What matters more is the impression Djokovic left on the court of the Rod Laver Arena.
The Independent:
This is to say an authentic major tennis player who can reasonably challenge the great Rafa Nadal in the coming years.
Djokovic, for all his ability, hasn’t always looked a sure-fire champion in the making. Yet in the company of Murray yesterday, at times, frankly, it was a pretty much finished sportsman against someone who more than anything resembled, well, a rather screwed-up adolescent.
It was that while Djokovic has grown up, most visibly, his admirers say, in his leadership of Serbia to a Davis Cup triumph, which is said to be a huge source of his new comfort in his own skin.
The Serb stepped out of himself to embrace his nation’s cause in the famous old world competition and, we are told, was hugely rewarded by the experience.
Murray, on the other hand, expressed no interest in renovating the British cause. He had his own programme, his own priorities, and they were written in the unyielding stone of personal ambition. Fine and honest…
BBC: Djokovic too good for Murray in final
Novak Djokovic outplayed Andy Murray to win the Australian Open for the second time and end the Briton’s hopes of a first Grand Slam title.
Murray had been hoping to become the first British man to claim a major title since Fred Perry won the US Open in 1936, and Scotland’s first ever Grand Slam singles champion, but he was overpowered by the world number three.
Djokovic went into Sunday’s final a slight favourite having beaten reigning champion Roger Federer in straight sets in the semi-finals, and with the confidence of having won the Australian title in 2008. Murray, seeded fifth, has always claimed not to be affected by his nation’s clamour for a Grand Slam champion, but his own desire to land a major title after twice losing in finals brings enough pressure and he made a nervous start.
Eurosport: Djokovic crowned Australian Open champ
The third-seeded Serb, who also won the title in 2008, was the better player throughout and wrapped up the title after two hours and 37 minutes when Murray dumped a forehand into the net.
After reaching the US Open final last September, Djokovic has been on an incredible run of form and has now added a second Australian Open title to the Davis Cup title he won with Serbia last month.
With Djokovic producing a fantastic performance to beat Roger Federer in the semi-finals, the match promised much as Murray prepared for his first Grand Slam final in which he would not have to face the 16-times major champion.
But, despite the first two games taking nearly 20 minutes, Murray was never really in the clash with Djokovic running away with proceedings after taking a nervy opening set.
