Spectator wrote:

---

A good run nonetheless. From the radio commentary it sounded as if Peers was very tight, and Murray was having to cover a lot. Is that what those of you who were able to watch would say? Also sounds as if Herbert was the man of the match - which given what happened at the AO must be very positive for him.

---

Have to confess that I didn't see every game, but I would say that was a fair assessment.

Spectator wrote:

---

A good run nonetheless. From the radio commentary it sounded as if Peers was very tight, and Murray was having to cover a lot. Is that what those of you who were able to watch would say? Also sounds as if Herbert was the man of the match - which given what happened at the AO must be very positive for him.

---

 I didn't see the whole match but from what I saw there was no doubt that Herbert was the best player on court and Peers was the worst.

Gutted.

That final point was absolutely spectacular.

Yep, I didn't think if was the toughest choice for the French to fully cover the doubles rather than the final singles match.

Although we took issue with Gilles Simon in a patriotic way, there was truth in him talking about an "unbalanced British team", and what it did allow the French to be was confident that 2 singles players ( 2, not 3 ) could take care of our second singles player and to thus be able to throw everything at the doubles, and that wasn't Mahut & Tsonga ( poor Mahut publicly taking the blame for that pair not gelling ).

But I liked their choice anyway  

-- Edited by indiana on Saturday 12th of September 2015 06:37:45 PM

Yes, Clement's position is rough. Hard to avoid the "what ifs" ....

One French language commentator was suggesting that the decision not to go with Mahut/Herbert may not have been wholly Clément's. Don't know whether there's anything at all to that ... and whether it is accurate or not, it's irrelevant, since a captain has to take responsibility and bear praise or blame for whatever happens. But interesting.

Whatever the case on that front, Tsonga/Gasquet's "L'équipe c'est moi" routine in calling for his head has not been going down well, as per the tweets and interviews from other members of the team.

And whoever's error it was, like Indiana and all, I'm quite grateful for it!

On a happier British note, I'm glad it wasn't Jamie Murray who was the weak link - it would have been hard to go straight from a loss where he was into the DC. And I also think it's highly likely that they'll now make the O2.

And I loved Mr Murray's post-match comment about now understanding what his older brother had been through!

I remember watching this year's Wimbledon mens doubles final and feeling very sorry for Jamie as he was unable to carry his team single handedly against a very strong pairing. John Peers simply didn't turn up on the day. It was actually awkward to watch with the home crowd so wanting Jamie to win, and him being let down spectacularly.

I'm tempted to say that the same thing happened again today. John Peers was a shadow of the player we know he can be. Jamie, once again, played very well.

We all know that during the course of any match and certainly over the span of a tournament, each player will carry the other for periods of time. Players get "hot" or "cold". It usually balances itself out. But to say that Mr Peers had a bad match again would be about the kindest way of putting it.

Overall tremendous progression, 2 GS Finals in a row.....but what might have been......third time lucky!