No major results from yesterday at Wimbledon due to rain disruptions, but a quick word about Andy Roddick.<br /><br />Aside from his 1st round match against Jimmy Wang, he has been on Court 2 and then exclusively on Court 1. His semi against Ancic was also moved there to speed things along. If he gets to the final, it will be only his second match on centre.<br /><br />Now, this is not unusual – David Nalbandian got to the final in 2002 without once seeing the centre court grass, but for a player like Roddick – #2 in the world, US Open champ, a massive draw worldwide – it’s a bit strange. It’s not like he hasn’t got a grass court game, either. He was at the semis last year, and has won Queens twice. Every player who has won Queens twice or more has taken Wimbledon at some stage (with the exception of Lendl).<br /><br />But do you hear him complain? Not once. True, Court One is a lovely arena, with only 2,381 seats less than Centre, but it’s not the same. Plus, he has often been on Court One while Henman has been on Centre, therefore having to endure the screams and shouts of the crowd on Henman Hill just outside in front of the big screen. <br /><br />Roddick should get to the final – and if he does, he will deserve the biggest stage of all.

We can all breathe a sigh of relief and thank Davenport, Sharapova, Serena Williams and Mauresmo for giving women’s tennis something to talk about. Two excellent matches, and players giving their all.<br /><br />Mauresmo must be devastated. She had the beating of Serena. The way to play the Williams sisters is to deny them consistent pace, use the slice, and take the net. They can’t get in a groove on their groundstrokes then. Mauresmo’s game plan was perfect, and her execution of it very very good – just not quite good enough. When it mattered, her back got stiff, her serve was slower and Serena scraped home.<br /><br />I just hope Sharapova has taken note. However, Sharapova is probably too young to have developed Mauresmo’s court craft. It could be a one sided final.<br /><br />On the men’s side, I’ll be highly surprised if it’s not a Federer/Roddick final.

One word all over the papers today: Henman. Plus the usual companions: disappointment, “end of the dream”, and so on. So let’s just say the better player won. Welcome to the big time, Mario Ancic.<br /><br />Actually, take away the British-centric anguish for a second, and it’s a great story. The old guard of Croatia, Goran Ivanisevic, comes to play a farewell Wimbledon after his glorious win three years ago. In the space of a week his heir-apparent makes a run to the semis (or perhaps further), beating one of the favourites for the title on his own patch along the way, much like his hero back in 2001. Even if you are not a Croat, there is something poetic about it.<br /><br />On the women’s side, much has been made of the lack of quality of the matches. Serana W vs Capriati was a big let down. More of a shame is that Capriati seems to blame the media hype for her performance. See <a href=http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/news/interviews/2004-06-30/200406301088600125157.html>http://www.wimbledon.org/en_GB/news/interviews/2004-06-30/200406301088600125157.html</a><br />If she really thinks that she is under pressure, she should talk to Tim Henman. Or Amelie Mauresmo at the French. Or Agassi and Sampras, who relished their rivalry, and were happy for everyone to talk it up.<br /><br />The lack of quality in the women’s matches is nothing new. For years there has been a dearth of excitement until the semis at the majors. Why? I have no idea. But look back over 5, 10 or 30 years and it’s the same story. True, there is occaisonally the big upset early in a tournament, but they are so rare you can pretty much list them on one hand. Here they are:<br /><br />Graf vs McNeill<br />Hingis vs Dokic<br />Venus Williams vs Sprem<br /><br />Any more?

Well, it was supposed to be a bad women’s tournament. Wimbledon would miss the Belgians, the Williams were too good, end of story.<br /><br />Instead, we have an open field, with contenders everywhere. It could well be Mauresmo’s chance to land a major, which would be overdue and very welcome. Or Davenport’s last hurrah. Or Capriati, if she can overcome Serena today (a massive match). Or Serena could land her 3rd title in a row after a long injury layoff. Whatever the outcome, however, there is a new star. <br /><br />Maria Sharapova is a tabloid’s wet dream. She is tall, blonde, pretty, hits the ball extremely hard and makes strange little gasps and grunts. And she is 17. <br /><br />Not far behind is Golovin, who lost to Serena yesterday. Only 16, she was subjected to a pathetic critique of her hipster-style shorts by John Barrett and Virginia Wade. The oldies were surprised, to say the least. Frankly, she looked far better than Serena in that silly dress, and her shorts are actually far more modest than most tennis skirts, which always give in inadvertant flash of the knickers. And who the hell is Virginia Wade to comment on fashion? The clue is in the name.<br /><br />Tennis has been about the commoditisation and objectification of players ever since Borg was surrounded by screaming teenage girls. Players are there to sell products, tickets, and if they turn us on, so much the better. We are complicit in the process.<br /><br />The papers will love Sharapova, especially if she beats the less glam Devenport to get to the final. Men will find her sexy, and the fact that she is only 17 will be OK, because she is untouchable – surrounded by an entourage, in the papers and on a pedestal.<br /><br />There. A blog about sex in tennis and I haven’t even mentioned Kournikova.

Ah, the BBC. As part of the wimbledon fortnight as strawberries and cream, etc etc. In truth, the BBC have upped their game the last few years. <br /><br />Firstly, they have got some great commentators in. McEnroe and Tracey Austin stand out especially. Andrew Castle and Chris Bailey keep the ship steady. Boris Becker and Pat Cash once had a tendency to not bother finishing their sentences, but they have improved in the past few years out of sight. Old John Barrett must be looking over his shoulder, and thank God Virginia Wade’s droning voice is now a rarity. Michael Stich put in a good performance yesterday too. Another two they might try to pick off Eurosport are Mark Petchey and Lief Shiras, who are an excellent combo.<br /><br />Secondly, the interactive service is brilliant, especially early in the tournament. Skipping between matches, you can drop in here and there for set point after set point. Great fun. And nicely designed, too. <br /><br />Lastly, Sue Barker is now a seasoned host. She knows the game so well, and her links are concise and informative. The only shame is that McEnroe hops back to CBS for the second week. But he still does the highlights show, which John Inverdale runs with his usual smoothness.<br /><br />Oh, and there are no ads. Sometimes you just have to love the BBC. The Wimbledon team could teach the football panel a thing or two.

Amongst the delight of getting such a passionate crowd into Centre Court for the third ‘People’s Sunday’, a few words of warning:<br /><br />- Number 1 court was only about 1/3 full, despite the billing of Capriati and Roddick/Dent. Roddick is number 2 in the world and the US Open champion, for heaven’s sake. Where were the fans? Either the price for tickets (�35 for centre, �30 for #1) was too high, or people really are just interested in Henman. Which is a surprise – the first people’s Sunday in 1991 was a sell-out to see Connors and Sabatini, plus #1 court was also packed. So what if Henman hadn’t been playing? Hmm.<br /><br />- Cheering and flag-waving and chanting at the change of ends is fine. But one or two “fans” went over the top. Best example was during the last game of the match, when Henman hit a defensive lob. Arazi had a long time to think about his smash, and the crowd were silent. Then one idiot yells out “CHOKE” just as he hits the ball. Predictably, it goes in the net. Perhaps he would have missed anyway. But it was very ugly. Another crowd member kept screaming during the rallies for seemingly no reason. Shame. Stewards ejected one or two of the worst offenders, but people should have a bit more respect for the players.<br /><br />On a brighter note, there were almost no mobile phones going off. Seems that the corporate crowd can’t find the ‘slient’ mode like the rest of us.

I haven’t looked at the press yet, but who needs to? The same articles that appeared after other penalty shootouts will be recycled ad nauseam.<br /><br />The only point worth making is that Portugal deserved to win. They played attacking football, wanted to win, and it would have been a travesty if they had gone out of the tournament. England spent most of the game hoofing the ball up the pitch to clear the lines, only to be backed up again and again. Only once we went behind in extra time did we look like scoring, given that we actually had to.<br /><br />The disalowed goal will also be picked over, but Portugal had a shot cleared off the line that looked like a goal. We were not robbed, despite what the tabloids will say.<br /><br />Rooney’s injury was a blow, given the way he has played recently, but I’m not sure he would have made any difference. England will never win a major championship playing like this, and we should have no complaints.

I hate to be negative, given that I am a huge tennis fan, but there are certain aspects of Wimbledon that really annoy me. In no particular order, they are:<br /><br />- people who think its the only tournament in the world. Thank christ Tim Henman got to this year’s French Open semis. Some Brits realised that there are 3 other grandslam tournaments. Sure, it’s important, but frankly, the US open is probably harder to win.<br /><br />- On the subject of Henman, the perception he is a choker. He should have won a slam by now, but even if he retires tomorrow he has had a good career. Who else has Britain produced in the last 30 years? Jeremy Bates? Case closed.<br /><br />- The timing. The French Open is barely over and the next slam starts up. If tennis wants to stay interesting, you need a contrast of styles. Cramming the grass season into what is basically 4 weeks means the tour is dominated by baseliners who flourish on clay. Move the French back a week, Wimbledon forward a week or 2, make Queens a masters event (second tier to the slams) and then people like Moya, Kuerten and so on will have to play on the grass. Actually, Moya is playing this year, and you can hardly blame Kuerten for winning the French 3 times and then not giving much of a show on the grass. But anyway. <br /><br />- People in those ridiculous Union Jack hats. They should be banned. They cheer at all the wrong points. <br /><br />- Anyone who leaves their phone on without setting it to silent. Any fool who can use a mobile can switch the ringer off. If you need to be in contact, put it to silent or stay in the office.