At the end of 2007, the whole tennis world was waiting for the final event of the year – the Davis Cup final  in Oregon between the USA and  Russia.

The Davis Cup has always brought the best (and sometimes the worst) out of tennis players. And by the worst I mean their inability at times to play and represent something other than themselves.

So when I read a while ago that Andy Murray was quitting the GB Davis Cup team until further notice to concentrate on his career and climb  the world rankings, I raised not one eyebrow, but both.

'Does anyone really believe that two more matches a year - and let's face it, Britain isn't really in the run for the Davis Cup title - are going to jeopardise Murray's personal career in 2008?'


True, players have come out with similar announcements during their careers. So what's the difference with Murray? Players had come to similar decisions at age 28 to 30, towards the end of their careers at a time they were tiring on court, and as part of a general effort to cut down hours to keep up with rankings for a few more years. 

Most of them took this decision with a heavy heart; some even thought about it but never dared go through with the  action of  giving up the chance of pulling on the national shirt. But at age 21?

Murray is a great talent. He is the player British fans have been waiting for to fill the void Tim Henman left, the one to bring a Grand Slam, even  Wimbledon. But he has yet to deliver. He has had some very good results (including Qatar yesterday), climbed up the rankings steadily, and even when he has been unlucky and injured he has still managed to come back and maintain a high level.

So why quit Davis Cup play? Does anyone really believe that two more matches a year - and let's face it, Britain isn't really in the run for the Davis Cup title -  are going to jeopardise Murray's personal career in 2008? I have another theory.

Murray announced at the end of last year he was finally cutting himself loose from any commitments he had with the Lawn Tennis Association. He doesn't want their support nor them telling him who should be his coach just because they are picking up the bill. Fair enough.

But Murray took his "independence" a bit too far, by cutting himself loose from the national team, and the truth is the "looking after his own career" thing doesn't really sound like a good enough explanation.

The more likely reason is Murray is a afraid of the responsibility of leading the country into matches now that Henman and Greg Rusedski are out of the reckoning. His team-mates would be players ranked under 200 in the world (anybody heard of Jamie Baker?). And at 21, that is scary.

Murray should reverse his decision and lead Great Britain in Davis Cup. He won't be able to take the team to the World Group (they may even drop to a lower group), but he will be doing his part for British tennis as well as making himself into a better player.

Many outstanding players have represented their country over the years even when they knew they could never single-handedly make a difference.

Can anyone see Marcus Bagdhatis not playing Davis Cup tennis for Cyprus just because his team-mate is ranked 602 in the world rankings?