Arise Sir Andrew Murray...

Apparently David Cameron is to recommend Murray for a knighthood.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/tennis/article-2358019/Andy-Murray-recommended-knighthood-winning-Wimbledon-title.html?ns_campaign=1490

I think this is very premature at this stage of Murray's career and DC appears to have jumped on a bandwagon of some sort. Sure it was a major achievement but is this not getting a little carried away?

Shouldn't Murray's accolades come after he retires from the sport so his career can be assessed once and for all?

Imagine if it is approved, we would have to get accustomed to hearing the following-

"Sir Murray is challenging the call on the left baseline, the ball was called out"!

No thanks......not just now. Leave it until after he has retired in my opinion.

Ordinarily not but with some of the recent additions, I say why not.

break_in_the_fifth wrote:Ordinarily not but with some of the recent additions, I say why not.

I just feel it is better to leave him to concentrate on his tennis career first and foremost. Knighthoods are fine for a few years down the line.

It's an absurd title for anyone at any stage so I find it hard to critique based on age etc, but I will. It's simply absurd and inconvenient.

Another bandwaggoner.  

The only time I can remember a sportsman in one of the mainstream sports - not the ones when you can sit down like cycling or rowing - getting a knighthood when they were still playing was Richard Hadlee in cricket in 1990. In any case, he retired shortly after.
Alex Ferguson got knighted after Manchester United won the treble in 1999 - but that was slightly different.
Wouldn't read too much into what Cameron said. What's he supposed to say - that Andy does NOT deserve a knighthood ?

I half expected that from Salmond, but Cameron? Urgh!

Andy's feet won't barely touch the ground for a few weeks. Let the guy enjoy it before suggesting such awards. Let the guy have his career first.

bogbrush wrote:It's an absurd title for anyone at any stage so I find it hard to critique based on age etc, but I will. It's simply absurd and inconvenient.

Another bandwaggoner.  

I totally agree and this article is not coming from an anti-Murray perspective either.
We all knew his life would change if he won Wimbledon but to give him an honour such as a knighthood to me is a bit OTT. After he has finished his career by all means give it but now to do it is inappropriate. Too much too soon I think and as yes he should be allowed to carry on with his tennis.

This also puts Murray in an awkward position. I am sure he would it but he may not want it at this point in his career. He cannot refuse it if it is offered to him as he may not be asked again!

Echo everyone above - hopefully after he has hung up his racquet for top flight singles.

And, when he is knighted, please could Virginia Wade be made a Dame?

If I were him I'd thank them and ask whether its possible to defer it until his retirement. Trouble is then you'll have the numpties getting angry that 'our Andy, who made all Britain proud' (ffs) hasn't been knighted.

Give it a while, the Pope will make him a saint. If you think knighthoods are absurd, ever read the rules for that?

time please wrote:Echo everyone above  - hopefully after he has hung up his racquet for top flight singles.

And, when he is knighted, please could Virginia Wade be made a Dame?

Re Wade, I always wondered why she has never been made a Dame. She achieved a lot for British tennis and I think she has been somewhat unappreciated. Some seem to forget Sue Barker's FO triumph at a time when Evert, King, Navratilova et al were dominating the game and this is even a greater achievement as I really cannot see a ladies British winner at Roland Garros anytime soon!

No no no....

I am embarrassed at the thought of Murray being knighted in mid career. It makes me cringe!

Game, set, match Sir Murray.... Please no!

Let the guy play tennis, then reflect on what he does or doesn't deserve when he's finished playing.

Agree with most of the above...talk of a knighthood so soon is ridiculous.

2 Slams and an Olympic gold is impressive, but the guy is only 26 for goodness sake and has only recently joined the top echelon of players. He's probably got at least 4 more years at the top - possibly longer depending on how his body holds up.

Knighthoods IMO should be reserved for people near or at the end of their careers, or for extended service/contributions to their field.

Would love to see him get one eventually...but not right now. Given he's a pretty level-headed, down to earth guy, I don't think he'd think its was appropriate either.

This annoucment has sparked a lot of interest in the media as LBC has dedicated its lunchtime programme to discussing whether this is justified or not. Opinion is split and most callers, such as us 606ers, are of the opinion this should be deferred until he retires.

Interesting someone said this is a personal achievement for Murray, whereas a Knighthood is for services to the nation. Has been a service to the nation? Was winning Wimbledon an achievement Murray wanted personally as a tennis player or was it because he wanted to win the title for GB that motivated him?

FedsFan wrote:"Sir Murray is challenging the call on the left baseline, the ball was called out"!

I think that the correct form is "Sir Andrew is challenging the call on the left baseline ..."

That said, I agree with everyone here that this is all premature and just an opportunity for the politicos to be populist.  I disliked seeing Cameron, Salmond and Miliband in the Royal Box during the match - they deserved to be there almost as much as Mrs Beckham.

Like most on here I would agree its too early. If it happens it should be be in the future. I read in one paper it normal that if someone receives an honour (Andy Murray got the OBE at the beginning of 2013) that it is at least another 4 years before that can get a higher honour (not a hard and fast rule). So leave it. I'm pretty sure that Andy would think holding that golden trophy and having his name on the Wimbledon honours board was the real reward he wanted for his efforts.

Calder106 wrote:Like most on here I would agree its too early. If it happens it should be be in the future. I read in one paper it normal that if someone receives an honour (Andy Murray got the OBE at the beginning of 2013) that it is at least another 4 years before that can get a higher honour (not a hard and fast rule). So leave it. I'm pretty sure that Andy would think holding that golden trophy and having his name on the Wimbledon honours board was the real reward he wanted for his efforts.

I agree. From now till whenever, when the programme is printed his name will always be there, the roll of honour will always have his name on it and down the line whenever a Brit plays it will be 'xxxx bidding to become the first Wimbledon champion since Andy Murray...' A Knighthood means so much less I think in those terms. Let's face it, I am sure the AELTC are already having designs for a bronze being drawn up as we speak!

I think Cameron, being a massive tennis fan has been motivated by the euphoria as I am sure if someone else in any other sport achieved something he would not have come out with this hours after the match.

If Hawkeye meets Andy does she have to address him as Sir Andrew Murray, then I am all for it. Of course it is a silly title as all hereditary titles are but that is another discussion.

Of course Andy shouldn't be knighted just on the strength of hi performances ove rthe last 12 months.

Lord Murray of Dunblane has a much nicer ring to it  

100% deserves to be knighted.

Any knighthood is ridiculous.

A knighthood for sport is even more ridiculous.

A knighthood for a sport in which you represent yourself and not your country is more ridiculous still.

Yes that would be great if next year he comes back to Wimbeldon and he is Baron Andy Murray, his lordship or something or other. It would really make the UK look kind of silly if he was deified in this manner for winning the tournament while he is an active player. He is deserving though. I don't know but Baron has a nice ring, much prettier sounding. Do players shaking his hands at the net have to address him as my lord and your excellency?

They could give him a coat of arms and the motto underneath could be "Come on! CONCENTRATE!"

socal1976 wrote:Yes that would be great if next year he comes back to Wimbeldon and he is Baron Andy Murray, his lordship or something or other. It would really make the UK look kind of silly if he was deified in this manner for winning the tournament while he is an active player. He is deserving though. I don't know but Baron has a nice ring, much prettier sounding. Do players shaking his hands at the net have to address him as my lord and your excellency?

I think 'Your Excellency' only applies (in the UK) for dplomats / representatives of foreign governments. However, I think he does have to be addressed as 'My Lord', and should be bowed / courtseyed to when he addresses you. Going to make the ball boys jobs hellish difficult though if they have to do that and still comply with the 20s rule...

Anyway, if he does get a peerage, I can't wait for his outfit for next year's Wimbledon - you think Federer's white blazer and flannel trousers was OTT, wait till Andy takes to the court in full Ermine robes  

Ok Dummy that does sound pretty funny and ridiculous. Do you people still take this stuff about coat of arms and titles seriously in today's modern world, do these guys really dress themselves up in Georgian costumes and ponce about flying their pendants and calling each other my lord and my lady and such? Does anyone laugh at them?

I dont agree with it like others, not now. However, Bradley Wiggins was awarded it after his TdF win last year so Murray will be odds on favourite to receive it at the end of this year.

No sportsman should ever be knighted until after his frontline sporting career is over - I find the concept embarrassing for all concerned.

If "Mr." is good enough for Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal, Novak Djokovic, and Lleyton Hewitt, it's good enough for Andy whilst he is still playing and I'm sure he'd feel the same. How absurd it would be walking out to play a match against 17-slammer Fed being "Sir Andy" or "Sir Andrew" when he is "Mr. Federer" - the same goes just as well for Nadal and Djoko.

Socal

My comment was firmly tongue in cheek.

Really the only people who take titles seriously are some of those with them and some of those who will inherit them. The exception is that most of the public have a positive opinion about most of the senior Royals (Prince Charles may be the exception still), and would care about protocol if they were to meet her maj.

The honours system has been hugely devalued by populist awards - Sir Bradley Wiggins, Sir Chris Hoy, Dame Kelly Holmes etc. Murray will get one, and there's a pretty good chance it will be inthe New Year's list. Ridiculous, but in keeping with recent precedent.

socal1976 wrote:If Hawkeye meets Andy does she have to address him as Sir Andrew Murray, then I am all for it.

That's a very good point, and may make me change my opinion on this matter.

I think Andy Murray has already knocked the idea on the head today. He says it is too soon for talk like that (or words to those effect).