The press needs to give tennis more coverage, all you hear is football, football, what sport do you think people are going to pick?

As Bethan says, it's a tricky one!   My recollection is that Draper was aiming for at least five Brits in the top 100 by 2012, Olympic year for London, & Paul Annacone made a similar utterance!  Can't see it happening myself, more's the pity!

The "29-0" headline actually originated Down Under (surprise, surprise!) &,  equally unsuprisingly, was picked up here.  I've been meaning to post this article from London Lite which I read on the train home last Tuesday, but been sidetracked:

Draper: Murray is still 'world class'

James Olley, 15th January 2008

British tennis chief, Roger Draper, today mounted a fierce defence of Andy Murray, insisting the Scot is still "world class" despite his first round exit at the Australian Open. Murray will drop out of the world's top ten after his four-set defeat to Frenchman, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, but LTA chief, Draper said: "It is absolute nonsense to claim that Andy's standing in the sport has been affected by the defeat. Anyone who knows anything about tennis recognises Andy is a world-class player who lost to a very good French player performing outstandingly well. Andy was not at his best, but the defeat has not affected my view that we have a genuine world-class playeron our hands who will very quickly bounce back from this."

Following Jamie Baker's loss to Ivo Karlovic, Britain has no singles representatives left in Melbourne - a fact not lost on the Australian media. One headline read "France 29 Britain 0", referring to the number of players left in the men's and women's singles at the start of today's play. "The comparison with France is a stick that is used to beat us on a regular basis and I freely admit that they are 10 years ahead of us," Draper said. "That is why we have gone back to basics to esnure that we have the structure and young talent to produce more players. To compare us with France at the momentis like comparing apples and pears."

Draper also dismissed the view that Murray's defeat would undermine his confidence for Britain's Davis Cup world group clash beginning on 8 February in Argentina. "Andy will spearhead the team and he can beat anyone in the game," he said.

Murray must carry an inexperienced team containing brother Jamie, Alex Bogdanovic, Baker and either Ross Hutchings [sic] or James Auckland.

The article was accompanied by a small colour picture of the offending page of the paper which ran that "29-0" headline, the Melbourne-based The Age.  It is (or was - it may now have gone "compact") a broadsheet with a status not unlike that of our Times & a reputation for responsible jounalism, so I was a bit surprised to see it having a go like that. Still, it was confined to the front of its sports section & which Aussie worth his/her salt can resist having a dig when one of our boys or girls comes a cropper on the sporting front? 'T would doubtless have been a hundred times better, though, had it been one of the unseeded Aussie players who had dumped out Andy in that fashion!

The article also prompted me to do something I've never thought of trying before, visit the paper's web site (in case anyone's interested). There I discovered the article which used that headline as a hook & reassuringly, it actually takes a more measured view than such a disparaging headline might imply. I think so anyway, but judge for yourselves:

Britain knows the score zip

Jake Niall

January 15, 2008

HERE'S a measure of what Andy Murray's defeat yesterday by a Frenchman meant for their respective nations: his conqueror, Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, is one of 29 French remaining in the men's and women's singles draw. The United Kingdom has none. France 29, Britain 0, is a pretty devastating scoreline in a comparison between two grand slam nations, and the score is even more damning for English tennis when one considers that the two Brits who bit the Plexicushion yesterday, Murray and qualifier Jamie Baker, are Scottish. So whereas Tsonga's victory over a highly ranked opponent is a bonus for the French who have nine men in the top 50 Murray's loss cruels Britannia, which has about three times the media presence here as its cross-Channel rival.

In the two years since he went out in the first round at Melbourne Park, 20-year-old Murray has become accustomed to the great expectations that accompany him, especially at grand slams; in 2006, the then teenager became teary and lashed out at the vast English media pack, suggesting they demanded too much of him. There were no such histrionics last night. Murray took this first-round exit on the chin. "I don't think it's the end of the world," he said. "I mean worse things could have happened to me out there it wasn't I feel I got completely outplayed at the match." The ninth seed blamed "silly shots", a poor start, some net cords and a touch of misfortune for his conquest by Tsonga, who prevailed in a fourth set tiebreaker, despite cramping that prompted him to seek medical help after Murray swept him 6-0 in the third set.

It was poor shot selection , and a passive game-style that contributed most to his undoing, as Tsonga attacked, rushed the net and Murray failed to pass him. As Murray acknowledged, the Frenchman "was dictating all the points" in the first two sets. "I didn't really hit any winning passing shots and I wasn't getting much angle on them," said the Scot, whose failure to kill points was a feature of this match.

This time last year, Murray was bracketed alongside his Serbian contemporary Novak Djokovic. In 2007, Djokovic made the quantum leap to be the world No. 3, reaching a US Open final and the semis at Wimbledon and Roland Garros, while Murray moved up the rankings less dramatically, from 17 to 11 at year's end, and then entering the top 10 (No. 9) last week. Murray's past year was commendable, however, considering he missed more than four months with wrist and back injuries and did not play at either Wimbledon or the French Open. He finished the year with a surge and came to Melbourne on a high, having won at Qatar a week ago, defeating world No. 4, Nikolay Davydenko, en route to the title.

Murray had parted company in November with coach Brad Gilbert, the former mentor of Andre Agassi and Andy Roddick and whom Britain's Lawn Tennis Association was paying a reported £750,000 a year to coach Murray; no longer wanted by Murray, Gilbert remains on the LTA payroll, despite the absence of any serious players to coach. Murray, who replaced Gilbert with two coaches, said last night he intended to "stay in the top 10" this year. "That's obviously something that is tough to do and at my age is a really good effort, you know, if you can stay there, be among the best players in the world." Murray said he had shown he had the "potential to challenge for grand slams in the future", but his inexperience had shown yesterday. "The more slams I play and the more big matches I play, I'll learn from them and won't the mistakes I did today."

Millions of Brits, the LTA and a fleet (street) of tennis journalists are counting on it.

*  For the record, The Standard had also harped on up the "29-0" theme the previous day...

P.S.  For what it's worth, I, too, think Roger Draper is doing a pretty creditable job in very difficult circumstances. They surely don't come much more difficult than having to deal with the entrenched "stuffed shirt" mentality of British sports officialdom...!

-- Edited by Stircrazy at 14:04, 2008-01-20

I have been impressed with Roger Draper's first 2 years - after all he is not a magician, however, I have never understood the spending of £3/4 million on a coach for effectively one player (and others providing they go to California at further expense), that money could have provided lots of kids with 'racquets and court time' instead of charging them to play tennis thus keeping it a sport for the privileged.

The 'poor Eastern Europeans' are often quoted as examples but it is easy to state that without evidence, for example how many parents will put up a couple of tennis courts for thier kids outside their pizzeria (Djokovic) or how many kids in the UK get given $1/2m by an entrepreneur at the age of 14 to go and play tennis (Ana Ivanovic) - even Andy was not that lucky (as far as I know!), how many parents would move to Florida with their 9 year old so she could go to tennis academy? (Sharapova), after all how did her father know she was going to be 6'2" and that good? Furthermore I would be very surprised if the French oand Russian governments do not support the sport of tennis  - All Eastern Europeans are NOT poor! and of course Spain has the weather on it's side for encouragement.

-- Edited by mjd at 00:47, 2008-01-21

helki wrote:

---

 I know I'll get slated for this but I've been a little disappointed by the lack of progress from some of the senior players this year. Why should it have happened? As a relative newcomer to following players' progress I'd welcome an explanation.

---

If by "this year" you men 2008 then I think your being a little harsh: it's not even a month old

I realise you really mean 2007 and I don't think you'll get slated, in fact I think most of us would probably agree with you (we might disagree on the specific players but that's another question). I defintely share your disappointment. But I can't provide an explanation I'm afraid.

In response to helki's and imoen's posts above, I'd like to offer a thought, though, like helki, I'm sure I'll be slated, too, for the icon-smashing involved. (Beside which, I don't have access to the sort of inside information which many of our members seem to have, so I'm probably simply wrong!)
A year or so ago, we had three 'class' singles players in Murray, Henman and Ruzedski, with a small group - Bogdanovic, Bloomfield, Goodall, Baker - showing real promise behind them, and another three guys, Mackin, Lee and Childs, sitting in the Challenger belt, Alan having just qualified for the AO. The LTA then spends zillions importing a bunch of high-profile foreign coaches, and the coaches become the story instead of the players. What happens? (- and I'm not really advancing a cause and effect theory, simply because, as I said, I don't have insider status, I'm just a fan.) Henman, Ruzedski, Mackin, Lee , Childs - and James May - all retire. Bogdanovic, Bloomfield and Goodall all slide steeply. Who's left - Murray and Baker. Murray missed so much tennis over the middle months of the year that it was difficult to tell how his game was progressing but, once he was up-and-running properly again, he dispensed with his 'LTA' staff; Baker has aye been his own man, having little, if anything, to do with the LTA system, keeping his own counsel and that of his own coaches. The result - Murray, apart from the AO blip (and seeing how Tsonga is slicing through the draw, that result may not have been as bad as we thought), is clearly back to top ten stature; Baker is now effectively, though not yet on paper, the British no. 2 (if he hadn't foregone points this week in favour of Davis Cup preparation, he might just have squeezed past Bogdanovic, in spite of the 45 dropping off his count).
When Andy ditched BG, and the LTA announced they were giving Alex into BG's care, I felt very uneasy - I, like everyone else here, apparently, am a Boggo fan, and I wasn't convinced BG was/is the answer; I've seen no evidence yet to ease my anxieties, though I live in hope.
Convince me I'm wrong, guys, please.

-- Edited by DJ at 12:05, 2008-01-21