
De Minaur shakes but cannot defeat determined Djokovic
De Minaur won the first set 6-1, stunning Djokovic, the Centre Court crowd, and millions watching on television.
But Djokovic was not going to let his own dream of winning a record 25th grand slam, eclipsing Margaret Court, slide away. He refocused and came back to defeat de Minaur 1-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 in three hours, 19 minutes to reach his 16th Wimbledon quarter-final.
"I didn't have many solutions in the first set," he said. "There were a lot of challenging moments for me.
"It was a tough game to close out the second set, I felt that was a momentum shift."
It was, but as late as midway through the fourth set de Minaur had a break and looked set to force a fifth only for Djokovic to up a gear and ruthlessly finish off the 11th-seed.
De Minaur had been waiting a year for this match, having been forced to withdraw from a quarter-final date with Djokovic last year due to the hip injury that dogged him through the back half of last year.
The 26-year-old had beaten Djokovic at Perth in the United Cup in the interim, but to do so at Wimbledon, where the Serb has won seven times, would be something else entirely.
But while he is a champion, he is an aging one: the 38-year-old was bidding to become the third oldest Wimbledon quarter-finalist after Ken Rosewall in 1974 and Roger Federer in 2021.
The latter was watching from the Royal Box, along with England Ashes veterans Joe Root and James Anderson, and must have been astonished by what he was watching as de Minaur swept the first set.
Djokovic double-faulted on the very first point of the match and while he followed that with an ace down the centre the tone had been set.
Troubled by a gusting wind the Serb continued to struggle with his serve dishing up four double faults in the set, getting fewer than half his first serves in and winning the point on only 18 per cent of his second serves.
He also made 16 unforced errors prompting former Wimbledon champion John McEnroe to state on BBC commentary, "I can't remember when I have seen him play a worse set than this, it's literally been years. It's incredible to see him play like this."
But that was to give insufficient credit to de Minaur. His first serve accuracy was even worse but there were no double faults and he backed his second serve to the extent he won 75 per cent of points on it.
His trademark scurrying seemed even more effective than usual, covering the grass with extraordinary speed but arriving at the ball with the composure and poise to deliver some superb passing shots and drop volleys.
While the first set was a mind-blowing walkover what followed was a lot more competitive. The sun came out, the wind dropped, and Djokovic found his rhythm.
But de Minaur was equal to the challenge. Djokovic claimed the second set but it took him more than an hour as the pair traded breaks of serve and he had to save a break point when serving for the set.
The third stanza was studded with magnificent shots from both, with each applauding the other. But Djokovic secured the first break, in the ninth game, and served out.
The Australian would not go quietly, snagging an early break to race into a 3-0 lead in the fourth set. But at 4-1 he failed to take a break point and that proved crucial.
The end came quickly as Djokovic broke, and broke again.
De Minaur was warmly cheered as he left court, with Djokovic leading the applause, but it was another case of so near, but so far.
For a heady half-hour Alex de Minaur was in dreamland, for three hours he was in contention, but ultimately he was unable to achieve what would have been one of the biggest wins of his career and knock over Novak Djokovic at Wimbledon.
De Minaur won the first set 6-1, stunning Djokovic, the Centre Court crowd, and millions watching on television.
But Djokovic was not going to let his own dream of winning a record 25th grand slam, eclipsing Margaret Court, slide away. He refocused and came back to defeat de Minaur 1-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 in three hours, 19 minutes to reach his 16th Wimbledon quarter-final.
"I didn't have many solutions in the first set," he said. "There were a lot of challenging moments for me.
"It was a tough game to close out the second set, I felt that was a momentum shift."
It was, but as late as midway through the fourth set de Minaur had a break and looked set to force a fifth only for Djokovic to up a gear and ruthlessly finish off the 11th-seed.
De Minaur had been waiting a year for this match, having been forced to withdraw from a quarter-final date with Djokovic last year due to the hip injury that dogged him through the back half of last year.
The 26-year-old had beaten Djokovic at Perth in the United Cup in the interim, but to do so at Wimbledon, where the Serb has won seven times, would be something else entirely.
But while he is a champion, he is an aging one: the 38-year-old was bidding to become the third oldest Wimbledon quarter-finalist after Ken Rosewall in 1974 and Roger Federer in 2021.
The latter was watching from the Royal Box, along with England Ashes veterans Joe Root and James Anderson, and must have been astonished by what he was watching as de Minaur swept the first set.
Djokovic double-faulted on the very first point of the match and while he followed that with an ace down the centre the tone had been set.
Troubled by a gusting wind the Serb continued to struggle with his serve dishing up four double faults in the set, getting fewer than half his first serves in and winning the point on only 18 per cent of his second serves.
He also made 16 unforced errors prompting former Wimbledon champion John McEnroe to state on BBC commentary, "I can't remember when I have seen him play a worse set than this, it's literally been years. It's incredible to see him play like this."
But that was to give insufficient credit to de Minaur. His first serve accuracy was even worse but there were no double faults and he backed his second serve to the extent he won 75 per cent of points on it.
His trademark scurrying seemed even more effective than usual, covering the grass with extraordinary speed but arriving at the ball with the composure and poise to deliver some superb passing shots and drop volleys.
While the first set was a mind-blowing walkover what followed was a lot more competitive. The sun came out, the wind dropped, and Djokovic found his rhythm.
But de Minaur was equal to the challenge. Djokovic claimed the second set but it took him more than an hour as the pair traded breaks of serve and he had to save a break point when serving for the set.
The third stanza was studded with magnificent shots from both, with each applauding the other. But Djokovic secured the first break, in the ninth game, and served out.
The Australian would not go quietly, snagging an early break to race into a 3-0 lead in the fourth set. But at 4-1 he failed to take a break point and that proved crucial.
The end came quickly as Djokovic broke, and broke again.
De Minaur was warmly cheered as he left court, with Djokovic leading the applause, but it was another case of so near, but so far.
For a heady half-hour Alex de Minaur was in dreamland, for three hours he was in contention, but ultimately he was unable to achieve what would have been one of the biggest wins of his career and knock over Novak Djokovic at Wimbledon.
De Minaur won the first set 6-1, stunning Djokovic, the Centre Court crowd, and millions watching on television.
But Djokovic was not going to let his own dream of winning a record 25th grand slam, eclipsing Margaret Court, slide away. He refocused and came back to defeat de Minaur 1-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 in three hours, 19 minutes to reach his 16th Wimbledon quarter-final.
"I didn't have many solutions in the first set," he said. "There were a lot of challenging moments for me.
"It was a tough game to close out the second set, I felt that was a momentum shift."
It was, but as late as midway through the fourth set de Minaur had a break and looked set to force a fifth only for Djokovic to up a gear and ruthlessly finish off the 11th-seed.
De Minaur had been waiting a year for this match, having been forced to withdraw from a quarter-final date with Djokovic last year due to the hip injury that dogged him through the back half of last year.
The 26-year-old had beaten Djokovic at Perth in the United Cup in the interim, but to do so at Wimbledon, where the Serb has won seven times, would be something else entirely.
But while he is a champion, he is an aging one: the 38-year-old was bidding to become the third oldest Wimbledon quarter-finalist after Ken Rosewall in 1974 and Roger Federer in 2021.
The latter was watching from the Royal Box, along with England Ashes veterans Joe Root and James Anderson, and must have been astonished by what he was watching as de Minaur swept the first set.
Djokovic double-faulted on the very first point of the match and while he followed that with an ace down the centre the tone had been set.
Troubled by a gusting wind the Serb continued to struggle with his serve dishing up four double faults in the set, getting fewer than half his first serves in and winning the point on only 18 per cent of his second serves.
He also made 16 unforced errors prompting former Wimbledon champion John McEnroe to state on BBC commentary, "I can't remember when I have seen him play a worse set than this, it's literally been years. It's incredible to see him play like this."
But that was to give insufficient credit to de Minaur. His first serve accuracy was even worse but there were no double faults and he backed his second serve to the extent he won 75 per cent of points on it.
His trademark scurrying seemed even more effective than usual, covering the grass with extraordinary speed but arriving at the ball with the composure and poise to deliver some superb passing shots and drop volleys.
While the first set was a mind-blowing walkover what followed was a lot more competitive. The sun came out, the wind dropped, and Djokovic found his rhythm.
But de Minaur was equal to the challenge. Djokovic claimed the second set but it took him more than an hour as the pair traded breaks of serve and he had to save a break point when serving for the set.
The third stanza was studded with magnificent shots from both, with each applauding the other. But Djokovic secured the first break, in the ninth game, and served out.
The Australian would not go quietly, snagging an early break to race into a 3-0 lead in the fourth set. But at 4-1 he failed to take a break point and that proved crucial.
The end came quickly as Djokovic broke, and broke again.
De Minaur was warmly cheered as he left court, with Djokovic leading the applause, but it was another case of so near, but so far.
For a heady half-hour Alex de Minaur was in dreamland, for three hours he was in contention, but ultimately he was unable to achieve what would have been one of the biggest wins of his career and knock over Novak Djokovic at Wimbledon.
De Minaur won the first set 6-1, stunning Djokovic, the Centre Court crowd, and millions watching on television.
But Djokovic was not going to let his own dream of winning a record 25th grand slam, eclipsing Margaret Court, slide away. He refocused and came back to defeat de Minaur 1-6 6-4 6-4 6-4 in three hours, 19 minutes to reach his 16th Wimbledon quarter-final.
"I didn't have many solutions in the first set," he said. "There were a lot of challenging moments for me.
"It was a tough game to close out the second set, I felt that was a momentum shift."
It was, but as late as midway through the fourth set de Minaur had a break and looked set to force a fifth only for Djokovic to up a gear and ruthlessly finish off the 11th-seed.
De Minaur had been waiting a year for this match, having been forced to withdraw from a quarter-final date with Djokovic last year due to the hip injury that dogged him through the back half of last year.
The 26-year-old had beaten Djokovic at Perth in the United Cup in the interim, but to do so at Wimbledon, where the Serb has won seven times, would be something else entirely.
But while he is a champion, he is an aging one: the 38-year-old was bidding to become the third oldest Wimbledon quarter-finalist after Ken Rosewall in 1974 and Roger Federer in 2021.
The latter was watching from the Royal Box, along with England Ashes veterans Joe Root and James Anderson, and must have been astonished by what he was watching as de Minaur swept the first set.
Djokovic double-faulted on the very first point of the match and while he followed that with an ace down the centre the tone had been set.
Troubled by a gusting wind the Serb continued to struggle with his serve dishing up four double faults in the set, getting fewer than half his first serves in and winning the point on only 18 per cent of his second serves.
He also made 16 unforced errors prompting former Wimbledon champion John McEnroe to state on BBC commentary, "I can't remember when I have seen him play a worse set than this, it's literally been years. It's incredible to see him play like this."
But that was to give insufficient credit to de Minaur. His first serve accuracy was even worse but there were no double faults and he backed his second serve to the extent he won 75 per cent of points on it.
His trademark scurrying seemed even more effective than usual, covering the grass with extraordinary speed but arriving at the ball with the composure and poise to deliver some superb passing shots and drop volleys.
While the first set was a mind-blowing walkover what followed was a lot more competitive. The sun came out, the wind dropped, and Djokovic found his rhythm.
But de Minaur was equal to the challenge. Djokovic claimed the second set but it took him more than an hour as the pair traded breaks of serve and he had to save a break point when serving for the set.
The third stanza was studded with magnificent shots from both, with each applauding the other. But Djokovic secured the first break, in the ninth game, and served out.
The Australian would not go quietly, snagging an early break to race into a 3-0 lead in the fourth set. But at 4-1 he failed to take a break point and that proved crucial.
The end came quickly as Djokovic broke, and broke again.
De Minaur was warmly cheered as he left court, with Djokovic leading the applause, but it was another case of so near, but so far.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Sydney Morning Herald
12 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
R-E-S-P-E-C-T: Find out what it means, Benny
What transpired was particularly unpleasant. England's batters being brought on to bowl like an under-10s team to serve up anything but Test standard bowling. To this was added vituperative sledging, albeit hardly of the venomous kind. England's fielders ambled after balls struck through the cordon, running like puppets with broken strings. Only muted acknowledgment was given when each Indian batter brought up three figures. The match ended almost immediately after that. Fairly assessed, it was sooky and petulant conduct, driven by Stokes' incandescence at not getting his own way. This, to all intents and purposes, is of course the same England team that cried with poisonous fury after the Lord's Test of the 2023 Ashes series, once Jonny Bairstow was stumped by Australian wicketkeeper Alex Carey having absent-mindedly meandered from his crease. You almost get the sense of a theme … By any sensible analysis of what is legislated for under the Laws of Cricket, Bairstow was fairly dismissed that day. Equally, Gill's decision to not agree to prematurely end the Test match at Old Trafford was entirely within the rules of the game. The England team's posturing and remonstrations were misguided, unedifying and wrong. In almost any other sport – golf is the true exception which comes to mind – you would readily cop Stokes' and his teammates' behaviour. In any football code, Stokes' conduct would be seen as positively de rigueur. Yet cricket is supposedly different. For not only is it governed by the laws of the game, but also the esoteric spirit of cricket, which ties the laws together with a veritable golden thread. What the Laws of Cricket say is that although the laws themselves have governed the playing of the game for nearly three centuries, cricket owes much of its particular appeal and enjoyment to the fact that it should also be played within the right 'spirit'. But if indeed it exists, what constitutes cricket's spirit is hard to identify. The preamble to the Laws of Cricket are directed to this concept of the spirit of the game. The opening paragraphs state that the notion of respect is central to the spirit of cricket. It is expressly written that central to the spirit of this noble sport is to play hard and fair; to show respect for your opponents; to show self-discipline even in the face of adversity; to congratulate the opposition on their successes; and to establish an overall positive atmosphere. Could the case be prosecuted that the England team's actions in the fourth Test were consistent with this idea of the spirit of cricket? It would seem not. The England team's feigned incredulousness at India's decision to play on despite the likely impossibility of a match result, and everything that occurred thereafter, certainly has a spirit interwoven. But a slightly malicious one. The swearing of England's fielders, picked up by the stump microphones, and the incredulity displayed by Stokes and Harry Brook especially, bears scant correlation to the notion of the good spirit of anything at all. A mountain of pressure can reveal character; however this was not a situation where pressure existed. This was a Test match meandering towards oblivion. Stokes' ungracious reaction to his team being required to play on revealed much, but not much of it positive. Loading All of this leaves this columnist unconvinced that the spirit of cricket exists otherwise than in a form of words written within the rules of the sport. In 2013, the Australian Test umpire Simon Taufel delivered the Marylebone Cricket Club's Cowdrey Spirit of Cricket lecture at a black tie dinner at Lord's, during which he argued that the spirit of cricket means that the values of the game take priority over personal gain or advancement. If that's an accurate summation, you have to question whether it still exists at all.

The Age
12 hours ago
- The Age
R-E-S-P-E-C-T: Find out what it means, Benny
What transpired was particularly unpleasant. England's batters being brought on to bowl like an under-10s team to serve up anything but Test standard bowling. To this was added vituperative sledging, albeit hardly of the venomous kind. England's fielders ambled after balls struck through the cordon, running like puppets with broken strings. Only muted acknowledgment was given when each Indian batter brought up three figures. The match ended almost immediately after that. Fairly assessed, it was sooky and petulant conduct, driven by Stokes' incandescence at not getting his own way. This, to all intents and purposes, is of course the same England team that cried with poisonous fury after the Lord's Test of the 2023 Ashes series, once Jonny Bairstow was stumped by Australian wicketkeeper Alex Carey having absent-mindedly meandered from his crease. You almost get the sense of a theme … By any sensible analysis of what is legislated for under the Laws of Cricket, Bairstow was fairly dismissed that day. Equally, Gill's decision to not agree to prematurely end the Test match at Old Trafford was entirely within the rules of the game. The England team's posturing and remonstrations were misguided, unedifying and wrong. In almost any other sport – golf is the true exception which comes to mind – you would readily cop Stokes' and his teammates' behaviour. In any football code, Stokes' conduct would be seen as positively de rigueur. Yet cricket is supposedly different. For not only is it governed by the laws of the game, but also the esoteric spirit of cricket, which ties the laws together with a veritable golden thread. What the Laws of Cricket say is that although the laws themselves have governed the playing of the game for nearly three centuries, cricket owes much of its particular appeal and enjoyment to the fact that it should also be played within the right 'spirit'. But if indeed it exists, what constitutes cricket's spirit is hard to identify. The preamble to the Laws of Cricket are directed to this concept of the spirit of the game. The opening paragraphs state that the notion of respect is central to the spirit of cricket. It is expressly written that central to the spirit of this noble sport is to play hard and fair; to show respect for your opponents; to show self-discipline even in the face of adversity; to congratulate the opposition on their successes; and to establish an overall positive atmosphere. Could the case be prosecuted that the England team's actions in the fourth Test were consistent with this idea of the spirit of cricket? It would seem not. The England team's feigned incredulousness at India's decision to play on despite the likely impossibility of a match result, and everything that occurred thereafter, certainly has a spirit interwoven. But a slightly malicious one. The swearing of England's fielders, picked up by the stump microphones, and the incredulity displayed by Stokes and Harry Brook especially, bears scant correlation to the notion of the good spirit of anything at all. A mountain of pressure can reveal character; however this was not a situation where pressure existed. This was a Test match meandering towards oblivion. Stokes' ungracious reaction to his team being required to play on revealed much, but not much of it positive. Loading All of this leaves this columnist unconvinced that the spirit of cricket exists otherwise than in a form of words written within the rules of the sport. In 2013, the Australian Test umpire Simon Taufel delivered the Marylebone Cricket Club's Cowdrey Spirit of Cricket lecture at a black tie dinner at Lord's, during which he argued that the spirit of cricket means that the values of the game take priority over personal gain or advancement. If that's an accurate summation, you have to question whether it still exists at all.


West Australian
a day ago
- West Australian
The Ashes: Australia's cricket enemy No.1, Stuart Broad, heading Down Under with Channel 7
Australia's most despised Englishman is going to add fire to the hottest Test cricket series ever played on Australian soil. Stuart Broad — the English fast bowler Australian fans love to hate — has been unveiled as a Channel 7 expert for the blockbuster Ashes series this summer. The recently retired paceman is the man who controversially refused to walk during the 2013 series despite hitting a ball to slip and who whinged the hardest when Alex Carey stumped Jonny Bairstow at Lord's during the fiery 2023 clash. Now he will sit alongside Aussie legends like Ricky Ponting, Justin Langer and Matthew Hayden as the old enemy returns, with cricketing tensions between the two nations at an all-time high. Broad will be a part of Channel 7's leading coverage for all five matches of the series, which kicks off with The West Test in Perth from November 21. The 167-Test champion said stirring the pot with Australian rivals was just part of his nature and said the feeling from the 2023 series will carry through this time around. 'I wouldn't say I've loved winding them up, it seems to have come quite naturally,' Broad said. 'I think Ashes series, the history of it, always brings emotion. I think anyone who has played an Ashes series will say it is the best cricket you can play, it's the absolute pinnacle and you remember certain moments in Ashes series that define your career in a sense. 'The 2023 Ashes series here had a lot of emotion to it, particularly ignited by the Bairstow run-out and how everything turned about there. 'I think that brings a lot of emotion and excitement about this Ashes series. The next time the teams will meet will be in November. There's a lot of players still playing from those series and they will remember what happened in that.' England's players were at the centre of another flashpoint this week when they reacted petulantly to India's batters rejecting their calls for an early draw so they could reach their centuries. Broad warned his former teammates they were up against an entire nation, not just the Australian team. 'I know the Australian press picked up on the handshake stuff between England and India a little more than the English press did, but that's how Ashes series will work,' he said. 'One thing you know as an England player when you go to Australia — and I really respect everything about this — you are not going to play against 11 cricketers, you are going to play against the country. 'Everyone wants to beat you, whether you are going to a restaurant or for a drink in a bar, you are England versus Australia.' Broad admitted Australia — who have not lost an Ashes on home soil since 2010-11 — had the wood over his side for a long time, but warned England will bring a team that is up for the challenge.