Asked whether he expected Andy Murray to continue to give as he has to Great Britain’s Davis Cup cause after his fellow Scot had powered through the pain barrier to keep his team in contention at The Emirates Arena on Sunday team captain Leon Smith momentarily looked non-plussed.

“Ehhhm… did you ask him that?” he counter-queried, buying a little time, before responding.

“It’s not something I’ve thought about. All I know is that here he is again this weekend, having played all three days again, put his body right on the line, put his body before his own individual schedule. Yeah, I mean, look he’s a great Davis Cup player. He absolutely loves it, but again he has to be smart with his schedule as well next year.”

Which, of course, is precisely why the question is so relevant in spite of being considered irritating by participants immediately after an emotionally turbulent experience such as this Davis Cup semi-final.

Those who have repeatedly felt obliged, in the interests of news gathering, to ask ageing players directly after major campaigns whether this is an appropriate time to call a halt fully understand the need for sensitivity when raising questions that can wrongly be interpreted as questioning commitment. In particular the reaction of Nathan Hines when that was put to one of rugby’s great warriors immediately after Scotland’s 2011 World Cup campaign ended, remains vivid in the memory. Hindsight does not change the view that the inquiry was valid given widespread speculation about his intentions, but the frustration displayed by this normally most approachable of men was also understandable.

Similarly, no-one who had the slightest grasp of what Andy Murray subjected himself to on Sunday could have the slightest doubt about his desire to play for his captain, for his team-mates or for the country he represents, so it was probably as well that he was not asked about his future Davis Cup intentions at that point.

At the back end of this golden Olympic summer in which he also regained the sport’s most important title at Wimbledon, context was, however, offered in Murray’s insistence that full respect be accorded to the decision of Juan Martin del Potro, the man he had beaten in the Olympic final, when opting out of the decisive match. The Argentinian who has suffered dreadful injury problems, was rightly unprepared to risk undertaking the rigours of another singles outing after his five hour plus opener against Murray.

Del Potro’s decision was surely further justified by the damage Murray did himself in stretching his every fibre beyond the limit to keep British hopes alive by first partnering brother Jamie in the doubles - a decision by the team’s on-court leader that was as important symbolically as it was competitively - then playing the reverse singles against the highly capable Guido Pella.

Those suggesting the gulf between Murray and Pella in the world rankings reduced the scale of that challenge demonstrate ignorance of a depth of quality in men’s tennis that has been slightly masked by the brilliance of the quintet that has formed a hegemony in acquiring all bar one of the 30 Grand Slam and Olympic titles since del Potro’s US Open win in 2009. As their collective grip has slackened in the last couple of seasons, so we are rediscovering that the slightest drop of standards by these men means any player in the world’s top 100, perhaps even top 150, is capable of generating an upset.

Little wonder, then, that Murray’s body finally gave way in the course of that hard-earned three set victory. This was, he told us, the first time he has suffered a muscle injury of such severity, his previous significant problems having been to joints. There is only so much that even the best of conditioning can accommodate.

By the time the next Davis Cup reaches the quarter-final stages Murray will meanwhile have passed his 30th birthday, always considered a telling milestone for an athlete. While, then, there will hopefully be several more summers to come that are as joyous as this one has been for Britain’s finest tennis player of at least the last 75 years and probably all time, he must, as his captain so rightly recognised, be ‘smart with his schedule.’

Plans to overhaul the Davis Cup to make it more attractive and manageable for leading players are in the pipeline, but for all the love of team involvement that he has also shown on Olympic duty, until that happens Murray has much to consider.

Had he, for example, chosen to play in the Davis Cup quarter-final six days after his Wimbledon triumph, with a flight to Belgrade thrown in for good measure, is it conceivable he could have recovered in time to defend his Olympic title?

Thereafter, by selflessly throwing himself into the semi-final as he did, what long-term damage to his career has he, or might he have done?

With that potential Davis Cup re-vamp and the absence of Olympic challenges to be factored in, he may consider the potential rewards continue to be worth the risks for the next three years at least.

However his willingness and bravery are such that he may also have to be protected from himself, which is why it was apt that the question was directed at Leon Smith and, in turn, why it is in everyone’s best interests that the British captain’s view will also be influenced by having worked with Murray since boyhood, thereby fully understanding all the implications.