Darren Cahill’s is one of the more reasonable and rational voices in tennis, both as a TV analyst and as a coach. Typically, the ESPN commentator and current mentor to world No.2 Simona Halep, expressed what many were thinking when he advocated a change to the way the late withdrawal of a player ranked in the top four affects grand slam seeding machinations.
Andy Murray announced on Saturday that his injured right hip would prevent him from contesting the event he won back in 2012. The US Open draw was completed on Friday, with Murray as the second seed in an injury-depleted men’s field, and the senior member of a bottom half that appears considerably weaker than the top.
RELATED: Five players that need to perform at US Open 2017
Feel sorry for #AndyMurray but he just ruined the US open draw. Would have been better for #Fed #Rafa to be in opposite halves.
— Todd Woodbridge (@toddwoodbridge) August 26, 2017
The logical course, as Cahill and company have articulated amid a soundtrack of the generally unimpressed, would be to elevate No.3 Roger Federer into the vacancy created by Murray’s no-show, Instead, the rules dictate that the senior seed in the 5-16 seeding band (in this case No.5 Marin Cilic) is pushed up into the top four, and the highest seed in the 17-32 group (No.17 Sam Querrey) gets bumped up. Further down the food chain, unseeded Philipp Kohlschreiber has filled Querrey’s spot and lucky loser Lukas Lacko booked a main draw start.
Murray had every right to leave his decision to play, or not, until the last moment, regardless of the ramifications for the rest of the field in New York. It is the system, not the Scot, that’s at fault.
Or in Cahill’s words via social media when asked why the obvious solution was not implemented: “that would make too much sense”. Moving No.3 (Fed), to No.2, then bumping No.5 (Cilic) to Fed’s No.3 then shifting the No.33 from outside the seedings altogether into No.5 makes for a fairer draw that doesn’t “screw’ the major players in the reshuffle, he said.
that would make too much sense. 3 to 2. 5 to 3. 33 to 5. Fairer draw and doesn't screw the player ranked 3 or 5.
— Darren Cahill (@darren_cahill) August 26, 2017
These are the grand slam rules. No-one is suggesting Lacko simply take Murray’s slot in the draw, or that the whole thing be junked and done again. But an improvement would surely be to create an extra “sub-band” within the leading quartet that allows the No.3 and No.4 to be elevated if one of the top two withdraws.
RELATED: US Open 2017: Everything you need to know
That it was not possible in this case leaves a crush of contenders, including title favourite Federer and world No.1 Rafael Nadal, along with former winner Juan Martin Del Potro, Cincinnati champion Grigor Dimitrov and danger-to-anyone Nick Kyrgios all squeezed into the top half.
The veteran Swiss star and the young Aussie one are seeded to meet in a round-of-16 showstopper that does not need to come that early, and wouldn’t, if Federer was now where Murray had been. And a first Flushing Meadows showdown between Roger v Rafa can only be an appetiser in the semis, rather than the main course on finals day.
All of this might be a good result for Cilic and his neighbours sitting below the draw’s equatorial line. But in the interests of the tournament, and common sense? Not so much.
22 August 2017
Finally! After years of watching coaches wander on to court and say nothing particularly i... More
23 February 2016
Tennis is a funny old game. People love you one minute and then want to drop you the next;... More
1 June 2016
Comparing tennis today to the game of the past is like comparing a boxer and fencer. There... More
15 September 2016
The greatest champions, goes the old adage, are those who leave their sport better than th... More