With hindsight I guess there was an air of inevitability hanging over Wimbledon’s Centre Court yesterday afternoon as Andy Roddick and Andy Murray emerged into the sunlight for their Men’s Semi-Final match.

‘Plucky Brit falls at the final hurdle …’ [or should that be ‘at the one before the final hurdle’?] … the tag has applied to a long list of home-grown players since the Second World War and of course most recently – and memorably – to Tim Henman, a talented exponent of the tennis arts who (it seems) lacked the grit and ‘dog’ necessary to become a Grand Slam champion. The public’s London SW19 pilgrimage to witness his annual failure to emulate Fred Perry had become as permanent fixture in the summer sorting calendar as the Epsom Derby, the Lords cricket test, the Henley regatta and the Formula One Grand Prix.

Despite the evidence of yesterday I do not regard Andy Murray as an example of a chocker in the British tradition. A twenty-two year old modern tennis giant, who had been playing well, simply came up against a twenty-six year old who managed to produce one of the games of his life. Both knew that they would have to be at the top of their form in order to prevail – and yesterday Roddick was closer to his than Murray.

Last night on television various commentators & pundits were wheeled out to assess Murray’s disappointment and console both player & public with the mantra “His time will come”.

Well hopefully it might. But I am also conscious that, whilst all top sportsmen are constantly striving to improve their game, at any given time some will be making greater progress than others. Murray will have just turned twenty-three when the 2010 Wimbledon tournament begins and by then he will be glancing warily over his shoulder for any brilliant youngsters coming up behind. Mind you, he was probably doing that this year as well. It was just his ill-fortune that the prospect of an older guy like Roddick rising to the challenge probably hadn’t figured on his radar.