Rafael Nadal has helped us forget that there was once a time when tennis’s kings of clay used to neglect the lawns of Wimbledon. Joe Hodgson pays tribute
There is a television interview with a 16-year-old Rafael Nadal where is he asked: “What is the tournament you’d most like to win?” To which he replies, without pause for thought: “Wimbledon.” Before adding: “But it’s very difficult, I need to work hard.”
The first part of this answer is interesting because, at the turn of the century, when this interview took place, the tennis world was less unified than it is now. The clay season, particularly, was almost an island unto itself, dominated by players such as Gustavo Kuerten and Juan Carlos Ferrero.
These clay kings also espoused the ‘grass is for cows’ philosophy; they did not especially care about Wimbledon and rarely ventured beyond the first week at SW19.
This selective approach to the game would change with the arrival of Roger Federer. He wasn’t just coming to control one tournament, one surface; he was coming for them all.
It is often overlooked that Federer had already won three clay court Masters titles before Nadal won his first French Open in 2005. From that point on, of course, Nadal quickly became an unstoppable force on clay – but he shared Federer’s multi-disciplinarian desire.
He was never going to undervalue Wimbledon. If I may paraphrase: grass, actually, is for GOATs.
Nadal, with his straggly long hair barely tamed by a bulky bandana, intimidating bronzed biceps exposed by a sleeveless shirt, was the personification of brawn.
Which brings us to the second part of his interview answer. Nadal knew that, despite his enormous talent, glory would not come as easily to him on grass as it did on clay. The surface wasn’t as welcoming to his clubbing baseline approach; he was going to have to work for it.
That said, by July 2006, Nadal was already a Wimbledon finalist; defeated in four sets by Federer. The following year he was defeated again in the final by Federer, this time in five sets. And then came the famous 2008 Wimbledon final, also between Nadal and Federer.
Many call this match the greatest in tennis history, and it is hard to contest the billing. There is something almost too perfect about the build-up, the match itself, and its legacy.
Federer arrived at the final without dropping a set. Grass was still his surface. Although Nadal had been inching closer, Wimbledon remained a Swiss castle.
The contrasting playing styles and personalities of the combatants were effortlessly reflected in their attire. Federer took to the court in immaculate white trousers and a cream and gold monogrammed cardigan.
Finesse in human form. Nadal, with his straggly long hair barely tamed by a bulky bandana, intimidating bronzed biceps exposed by a sleeveless shirt, was the personification of brawn.
But these two differing approaches – to fashion and physique – combined to create a sporting spectacle like no other. And the players could only be separated following five hours of thrilling pugilism, Nadal edging the victory, 9-7 in the fifth set.
He knew it would be difficult, he knew he would need to work hard. But he had achieved his ultimate dream.
For Federer, conversely, it was the end of the dream. His ‘Camelot era’ was over.
He had won an extraordinary 12 Grand Slams in five years, but he would never dominate tennis in the same way again. Nadal had raised the bar; had shown that the imperial Swiss was fallible, even on his best surface, and that his stylish exterior could be muddied and dulled with sufficient, persistent, precise enough force.
But despite creating history at Wimbledon, Nadal’s time as the supreme being in south-west London would be short-lived.
Another player was about to raise the bar further still, and stake his claim on the GOAT label.
Joe Hodgson is a regular contributor to The Fitzdares Times in print and online.
