John McEnroe sends warning to Jack Draper over playing style after British No1 was knocked out of Wimbledon
After overcoming Sebastian Baez in the first round, British No 1 Draper was eliminated by Marin Cilic, losing 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 4-6.
McEnroe suggested that Draper could suffer similar problems to Daniil Medvedev, who adopted an approach of standing far behind the baseline, which has had an impact on him physically.
McEnroe told BBC Sport: 'He's [Draper] six foot four, I don't think he's got an ounce of fat on him, it's not like he can't volley - he certainly can.
'I think he will make that adjustment. It'll be interesting to see if he changes things up on the hard courts, how he approaches that.
'Take Daniil Medvedev, I think it caught up, he's the guy that started that whole thing, standing way back. I think it's catching up to him mentally and physically.'
Despite his exit from Wimbledon, McEnroe believes that Draper has still developed well.
He has now called upon the 23-year-old to work hard at cutting off some of the angles of his opponents.
McEnroe said: 'He's done great. He's got to four in the world. If I was looking from a distance at Jack, I was like: 'Why's he standing so far back all the time?'
'Especially on hard courts, even on clay. Is he quick enough to cover? Is he fit enough to do that consistently? Is that what he wants to do - wear people down that way? Forehand has gotten way bigger.
'But to me at Wimbledon you've got to cut off some of these angles. You can't allow yourself because it's tougher to make those quick first steps.
'Jack needs to lean look what [Taylor] Fritz did, his first couple of rounds against [Gabriel] Diallo and [Giovanni] Mpetshi Perricard. He's standing at the baseline on 150mph serves.'
Draper has never progressed beyond the second round of Wimbledon but this was only his fourth appearance at the tournament and he will surely have many more opportunities to impress.
After his defeat Draper admitted that he has lots of weaknesses in his grass court game.
'I've been really disappointed with the way my game's been on the grass this year, in all honesty,' said the No4 seed.
'I wasn't feeling too great at Queen's. I don't know how I made the semis there.
'This year I really struggled on the grass. I felt great on the hard, felt great on the clay, I felt like there weren't many holes in my game, whereas as soon as I came on to the grass, I felt a big difference.
'It highlighted a lot of weaknesses in my game, especially against a player the way he was playing today, someone as good as him on the grass.
'I think the hole in my forehand showed up, for sure. I wasn't able to deal with his pace of ball into my forehand. I was over-spinning a lot. I think a lot of my success this year with my forehand was when I have more time and I can create the speed and the spin that I want.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
13 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Transfer news has lost its sense of wonder and surprise in era of ‘my sources tell me …'
Which transfer fee blew your mind? It was probably Spurs signing Gazza for £2m in the summer of 1988. TWO MILLION. No one is worth that kind of money. The following year, I distinctly remember running into the living room – Spurs had just signed Gary Lineker. I was preparing for the season ahead, invisible football at my feet, commentating to myself: 'Gascoigne, to Waddle, in for LINEKERRRR.' The next moment I switched on the TV and someone (let's say Ray Stubbs) was telling me that Spurs had sold Waddle to Marseille. I was bereft. There was no warning. For me, or for Lineker it turns out. I heard the striker talking about the transfer recently on the excellent What Did You Do Yesterday? podcast hosted by David O'Doherty and generic broadcaster Max Rushden (perhaps the second-best podcast he hosts). I asked Lineker whether he was as sad as I was when Waddle left. 'I imagine I was considerably sadder. I signed for Spurs and then I went on holiday and I got the news; my agent called me and said: 'They've sold Chris Waddle to Marseille.' Honestly it was like someone stealing 15 goals from my back pocket. He was so good, so good …' This may be the most self-indulgent way to illustrate the blind beauty of transfers back then – for fans and teammates. They just appeared out of nowhere like the Dungeon Master (press the red button for other more youth-friendly references). Patrick Bernal, Hugo Lambert and I playing Championship Manager 93 on the Amiga, flicking on the radio to hear Tottenham had signed Jürgen Klinsmann. No warning. No rumours. Just bang. Klinsmann. For Cambridge United signings you had to wait for the Cambridge Evening News to see Steve Claridge's beaming face holding a scarf aloft. I was not allowed, and too square, to ring ClubCall, an 0898 number, 90p a minute, to find out whether we were selling Alan Kimble to Wimbledon. That guy recording messages from a shed on an answerphone must be sitting somewhere now thinking if only he'd been born 30 years later, he'd be earning a fortune writing 'Here We Go' on X to announce Everton's purchase of Thierno Barry. At the lower reaches of the EFL, transfers do still pop up nostalgically from nowhere. A picture of a man's face, straight to Wikipedia to find out who Ben Purrington is, and then finding a mate who supports Charlton to ask whether he's any good. Elis James still hasn't got back to me about whether the former Swansea under-21 keeper Ben Hughes can do a job between the sticks in the Vertu Trophy. At the top of the Premier League, though, with TV and radio shows hosted by professional transfer influencers, and with flight tracking of private jets, almost nothing is unknown. Either that or you just keep linking a player with every possible destination so that eventually you say the right thing. 'My understanding is …' 'I've just exchanged a message from someone close to the club.' 'All my sources tell me the player is determined to push this through.' Maybe some people with more self-control manage to ignore this stuff and watch Chris Woakes moving it perfectly off a length for hours at Edgbaston without reaching for the second screen and typing 'Eze Spurs'. New transfers are fun and exciting. But the hype machine ignores a few basic realities. There is no guarantee of it working out, even if you spend more than anyone's spent before. In fact, a cursory look at the most expensive transfers of all time suggests they are more likely to fail. Sign up to Football Daily Kick off your evenings with the Guardian's take on the world of football after newsletter promotion In purely football terms – I'm not checking the shirt sales numbers – Neymar to Paris Saint-Germain for just under £200m (that's a hundred 1988 Gazzas!) didn't deliver the Champions League. Ditto Kylian Mbappé (for about £160m). The rest of the top 10: João Félix to Atleti, Enzo Fernández to Chelsea, Philippe Coutinho to Barça, Antoine Griezmann to Barça, Florian Wirtz to Liverpool, Moisés Caicedo to Chelsea, Declan Rice to Arsenal, Jack Grealish to Manchester City. Perhaps it's a little early to judge Wirtz. But with all the caveats of how you define success, how many of them have been worth the money? Or even taking the money out of it, how many have delivered consistently on the pitch? Maybe Rice is the only one? OK, Mbappé's 256 goals in 308 games seems pretty good, but … look at PSG now, look at Real Madrid now. Taking inflation into account, of course money is sometimes well spent: £80m for Ronaldo in 2009 feels like good business for Real Madrid – a few million less than United spent on Antony 13 years later . Poor Antony, always getting mentioned in these articles; he's taken a lot of the heat off Nicolas Pépé. Is it just the pressure of such a high fee? Or the fact we judge someone who cost a hundred million in a different way to someone who commands half that? Fifty million pounds still seems quite a lot for, say, Richarlison. Out of the most expensive 100 transfers of all time, if generous you could make a case that about 40 have worked out. What a terrible hit rate. Why are so many of us blind to the possibility that a new face won't work out? You've seen a seven-minute heavily edited YouTube video to early 2000s Europop. There's no way they've made Ricky van Wolfswinkel look like Kaká. He simply is just that good. There is actually a chance that someone already at your club will get better at football. Most of them train every day. It remains baffling how often a manager is praised for being able to improve players. Feels like a prerequisite. Of course relentless 24-hour coverage of existing squad players would be even less interesting than the rumour mill. 'My understanding is that Joelinton was good last year and might be good again this year.' Official club accounts making big reveal videos for a centre mid you signed three years ago may not get the numbers. But there's every chance they'll be more important this season than the guy you just signed for £30m from Strasbourg. Nevertheless, in a month or so someone will have won the transfer window. It would be great to have a life option to switch off rumour notifications, reject those cookies and select the 1988 discovery option.
Scottish Sun
19 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
‘You took the game away from me' – Major Wimbledon controversy as new technology FAILS and Kartal rival fumes at umpire
Brit benefits from huge blunder from the technology NOT 'DON RIGHT 'You took the game away from me' – Major Wimbledon controversy as new technology FAILS and Kartal rival fumes at umpire Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) THE Hawk-Eye live electronic line calling FAILED on Centre Court. And that sparked a furious rant towards the chair umpire in never-seen-before scenes at Wimbledon. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 4 Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova fumed as she was denied a point when the Hawk-Eye live failed Credit: Getty 4 The Russian accused Wimbledon of favourtism for their home player Sonay Kartal Credit: Getty 4 The incident happened at 4-4 in the first set on Centre Court Credit: BBC 4 The umpire tried to get to the bottom of the situation Credit: BBC Sonay Kartal took on Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova in the last 16. But the Brit's shot bounced well long at advantage Pavlyuchenkova at 4-4 in the first set. However, there was no call from the live system - even though replays showed it was clearly out. The audio system then declared "stop, stop". READ MORE ON WIMBLEDON Wimbledon 2025 Kartal and Norrie in action NOW as Fritz goes THROUGH after Thompson retires That led to a stoppage as the umpire got on his phone to work out what was happening. And despite the Kartal shot clearly being out, there was no video replay available to the umpire to overrule. Therefore, a let was called, although Pavlyuchenkova should have had the game. Incredibly, to add to the drama, Kartal battled back and won the replayed point and then went on to break at a crucial stage of the opening set. Pavlyuchenkova complained to the umpire when she returned to her seat. She quite rightly moaned: "I don't know if it's in or it's out. How do I know? "How can you prove it? Because she is local, they can say whatever. "You took the game away from me.' Pavlyuchenkova managed to regroup and break back immediately as Kartal served for the first set, even saving a set point. This is the first year of Wimbledon since the tournament ditched human line judges for the AI live system. THIS IS A DEVELOPING STORY.. The Sun is your go to destination for the best football, boxing and MMA news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see us on Facebook at and follow us from our main Twitter account at @TheSunFootball.
The Sun
19 minutes ago
- The Sun
‘You took the game away from me' – Major Wimbledon controversy as new technology FAILS and Kartal rival fumes at umpire
THE Hawk-Eye live electronic line calling FAILED on Centre Court. And that sparked a furious rant towards the chair umpire in never-seen-before scenes at Wimbledon. 4 4 4 4 Sonay Kartal took on Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova in the last 16. But the Brit's shot bounced well long at advantage Pavlyuchenkova at 4-4 in the first set. However, there was no call from the live system - even though replays showed it was clearly out. The audio system then declared "stop, stop". That led to a stoppage as the umpire got on his phone to work out what was happening. And despite the Kartal shot clearly being out, there was no video replay available to the umpire to overrule. Therefore, a let was called, although Pavlyuchenkova should have had the game. Incredibly, to add to the drama, Kartal battled back and won the replayed point and then went on to break at a crucial stage of the opening set. Pavlyuchenkova complained to the umpire when she returned to her seat. She quite rightly moaned: "I don't know if it's in or it's out. How do I know? "How can you prove it? Because she is local, they can say whatever. "You took the game away from me.' Pavlyuchenkova managed to regroup and break back immediately as Kartal served for the first set, even saving a set point. This is the first year of Wimbledon since the tournament ditched human line judges for the AI live system. THIS IS A DEVELOPING STORY.. The Sun is your go to destination for the best football, boxing and MMA news, real-life stories, jaw-dropping pictures and must-see video.
