How big a game was this for Australians?
Well, let me put it this way- it was easier to get a ticket for any of the two finals of the Australian Open Andy Murray has reached than it was to secure a brief for this match.
The whole country it seemed, in the last few days, had gone Nick Kyrgios crazy. This was quite clearly an Aussie party and the invitations hadn't been extended to the Scots.
For the first time I can remember watching Andy in this tournament, St Andrew's flags and saltires were conspicuous by their absence. Green and gold was the overwhelming colour scheme with the sound track supplied by the high-pitched whoops and hollers of The Fanatics, an Australian cheer squad made up of middle-aged blokes who still live with their mums and think the chant-'Aussie Aussie Aussie, Oi, Oi Oi' is both witty and inspiring.
As both players were introduced on the court, the noise was deafening, especially for Kyrgios.
'From Great Britain, Andy Murray', boomed the MC, a sad reminder to the minority of his supporters how much better, 'From Scotland' would have sounded.
Kyrgios, with his day-glo outfits, rapper bling and two bags full of attitude isn't exactly everybody's cup of tea.
Generally speaking, most Aussies would have preferred someone a bit more white bread to be representing them. Oh, they'll take him all right, especially if he's winning, but you get the impression a nice blond haired fellow called Bruce would be preferable, all things considered.
The thing is, Kyrgios can play.
Tall, rangy and seemingly made of elastic, he belts the ball so hard it sounds like rifle fire.
But then, so does Andy.
Not fazed at all by the dearth of support, the Dunblane Colossus made his intentions clear from the start. Everything Kyrgios did, Andy did better.
Especially impressive on his own serve, the Aussie simply couldn't land a blow.
The first set flew by in an instant, Murray closing it out with some booming forehands.
Second set was a bit more even but really the suspense factor was zero since every one of us in Rod Laver Arena - even the cringe worthy Fanatics - knew it was only a matter of when, not if.
So it proved. Kyrgios put Andy under a bit of pressure for sure, but the big Scot showed his class with a couple of lobs that had to be seen to be believed. Even Kyrgios applauded. It was that good.
Tie break won, young Kyrgios looked shattered.
I wouldn't go as far as saying the game was an anti-climax, but the result was never in doubt.
The young whipper-snapper had a go, but the old campaigner - Andy's slightly more noticeable bald spot in contrast to the Kyrgios convoluted rapper style tonsure, reminding us that the big man is now approaching the veteran stages - had all the answers.
Not yet, junior, he seemed to be saying.
After the game was wrapped up, Murray gave an on-court interview where he suggested the Australian public should lay off young Nick, allowing him to mature and develop at his own pace, sounding like the wise old bird he, in tennis terms at least, apparently is.
Kyrgios is the future all right, but Andy is the here and now.
With Nadal losing earlier today, a major obstacle has been removed, Rafa being a sizeable nemesis in previous years and competitions.
Murray's semi-final opponent, Tomas Berdych won't exactly be a cakewalk either but suddenly, after a couple of years in the comparative wilderness, Andy is back at the pointy-end of a Grand Slam with a major chance of a final appearance. And then, well, who knows.
Tickets for the semi-final won't be that easy to come by.
But with no Aussie opponent, the upside is that the Scottish Murray Mob will be there at the expense of the execrable Aussie Fanatics.
Good thing too. Our chants are much better.
And so, indisputably is our player.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article