Lol, people keep asking about Jamie Murray and Aucks teaming up.

The problem is that they both like to play on the ad side and for that reason they don't play together on the tour....on the pro tour and especially at the top of the game it's quite a change to switch sides, especially tactically.

Rusedski is at his best when playing on the deuce side (which is v unusual for a leftie), that's where he played with Henman in their DC matches. Henman also prefers the ad side but he's versatile and experienced enough to adapt...especially as he hasn't got used to playing 1 side.

-- Edited by ultimateshedman at 10:57, 2007-03-21

So Greg and Stretch sounds like the ideal team

ultimateshedman wrote:

---

Or the Murray bros, Andy prefers to play on the deuce side.

---

That looks like total reliance on Andy, who will definately be playing singles on Friday.  Potentially he could end up playing 3 x 5 set matches in 3 days, and Brad might have something to say about that!

I'm not sure about Greg. There is no doubt that he has been a stalwart of DC over many years, so you can argue he 'deserves' to get his wish of a last DC, and personally I would quite like to see it, BUT the decision should be based on what is best for the team both in that particular tie, and more long term.

Is Greg the best choice for the tie or the team (long term)? In truth I doubt it. Lloyd has decided to include Greg in the squad, although that does seem to go against his previously declared intention of looking to the future. Sad though it may be, I cannot see Greg being a playing part of the team in the future.

Liverpool clashes with Queen's.

mike55 wrote:

---

I agree, that would be a fitting send off for him, but I can't see how picking Greg will help us win the DC tie or help the long term development of the team. It may seem harsh, but Lloyd can't afford to be swayed by nostalgia.

---

I know what you mean and I agree with it to an extent, but this is Britain we are speaking of. We defied all logic and managed to lose to Israel! Will it hurt us that much if we lose this tie in the name of giving a farewell to Greg?

We must remember that he has given more to British tennis and Davis Cup than any other player. He constantly encouraged our rank and file guys to do better and gave everything to the cause of Davis Cup glory. And he has never been appreciated for his efforts and has instead been targeted by a lot of abuse in the past.


I know that hardly anyone will agree with me, but I think that the farewell of the highest ever ranked player of the country, the second best player of the country and the only Grand Slam finalist of the country is as important as a Davis Cup tie that's played outside the world group, if not more important.

We have always found unique ways of losing ties and it won't be much if we remain stuck here for another year - there'll be plenty of opportunities. But there'll be just one Greg Rusedski.

I do not dispute what Greg has done for the DC, but I am sure he would be absolutely horrified by any suggestion that the teams success could or would be sacrificed for him. From his perspective, what would be the point of all that effort over so many years, if we're prepared to throw a tie away. I think he would be left asking himself 'why did I bother?'. Also losing the DC tie wouldn't be much of a send off either.

Regarding our prospects, yes, provided they are fit Andy & Tim should get us through on the singles by themselves, without worrying about the doubles. But say one of them gets injured in their first singles match and retires, then we could be in trouble if we don't have a robust plan B. Ending day one at 1-1 with either Andy or Tim missing would mean that the doubles would suddenly become important (assuming we are actually bothered about winning of course rather than putting on show matches).