Bitterly disappointed a few weeks ago after having lost yet another Australian Open final—the fourth of his career—Andy Murray implied that Novak Djokovic had engaged in a bit of distracting gamesmanship during their clash for the championship. After the two split a pair of tiebreakers, Djokovic looked physically wobbly, but he rebounded magnificently to win the third set, and he pulled away impressively to sweep 12 of the final 13 games in a four-set victory.
When Murray was asked if he thought Djokovic was deliberately misrepresenting his state, the Scot told the reporters assembled for his post-final press conference: “I don’t know. I don’t know. I have no idea. . . I hope that wouldn’t be the case.”
“I don’t know” is very different from “I doubt it.” Or from “I don’t think so.”
It was a surprising reaction, considering how close these two men were as junior players, and even as full-fledged pros: At least until Djokovic’s glorious 2011 season, he and Murray were considered a kind of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid operating in the world where the law was in the hands of Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal.
Thus, Murray’s reaction laid the foundation for a potential controversy. But when Djokovic was asked in the same room later if gamesmanship ought to be an issue between friends, he took the high road: “I'm not going to talk bad things about him in the press or find any excuses or something like this. In the match like this a lot of emotions go through, a lot of tension. It's not easy to keep the concentration 100 percent all the way through.”
Never mind this turning of the other cheek, or the even-handed dismissal of so unpleasant a charge. Djokovic actually ends up making an excuse for Murray’s loss of form and subsequent veiled accusation—how else can you interpret the Serb’s remark about the challenge of remaining fully focused?