Giants: Little things and big defeats

By Art Spander

SAN FRANCISCO — They’re not going to win the division. That’s for sure. Maybe the Giants still will make the postseason, get in as a wild card, and even that’s problematic.

But definitely the way they are playing, just poorly enough to lose, they won’t overtake the Dodgers — who gleefully overtook the tumbling Giants in the National League West days ago.

It’s not that the Giants are a bad team. The Atlanta Braves are a bad team. No, the Braves are a terrible team. The San Diego Padres are a bad team. They are 22 games below .500. And that’s after sweeping a three-game series from the Giants. For a second time this season.

The Giants are a good team playing badly. Or once were a good team playing badly, very badly as defined by a classical, baseball reference.

When they hit they don’t pitch, as they did and didn't on Tuesday night, San Francisco entering the ninth with a 4-1 lead and ingloriously losing to the Padres 6-4 on a home run by, not Nate Colbert or Tony Gwynn even, but Ryan Schimpf. The 27th blown save of the season. Oh, where are you now, Robb Nen?

When the Giants pitch they don’t hit, as they did and didn't on Wednesday in the sunshine and gloom (the mood, not the weather) at AT&T Park, San Francisco getting only four singles and thus getting whipped by the Pads, 3-1.

So the little bit of optimism created when the Giants had a sweep of their own, taking three in a row at Arizona over the weekend, has been trashed, smashed and tossed into McCovey Cove. So much for progress.

The Dodgers, who beat the Yankees for the second time in their three-game series at the Stadium, now are five in front of San Francisco. The billionaires at Chavez Ravine smirk.

In the post-game session Wednesday, Bruce Bochy, the Giants' manager, was asked if he had sleepless nights, to which he answered in the affirmative, adding, “I wish I could do more. Every manager or head coach does. It’s always on your mind.”

Some would say Bochy could have done more on Tuesday night if Brandon Belt hadn’t been out because he was ailing. Buster Posey was playing first, and there was a ball off Posey’s mitt, which became an infield single when reliever Hunter Strickland conceded he was slow to cover the base.

The little things, and the big defeats.

On Wednesday, the Giants' bullpen couldn’t be faulted. Neither could starter Madison Bumgarner. You allow only three runs, you’ll normally win. Not, however, when the season is coming apart at the seams.

San Diego starter Luis Perdomo mystified the Giants' batters. The first four men in the order, Denard Span, Angel Pagan, Posey and Brandon Crawford, had two walks and no hits among them. Only because Belt and Joe Panik managed back-to-back singles in the second, after a Crawford walk, did the Giants avoid a shutout.

“He had a good sinker,” Bochy, a former catcher, said of Perdomo, who didn’t look like someone who came into the game with a 7-9 record and 5.89 earned run average. Ah, but the Giants looked very much like the team that has collapsed (20-35 since July 10) in notable fashion.

Bumgarner, gracious as always post-game, stood there attired like a hunter (not Strickland) and was asked what needs to be corrected: pitching, hitting, whatever.

“I don’t know,” he answered quietly. “So far, the second half’s been a club I’ve never seen before.”

A club that Giants fans have seen too much of, one that's causing them to wonder what might have transpired if San Francisco, not the Cubs, got 100 mph closer Aroldis Chapman (or who the Giants would have been forced to trade to acquire him).

Bumgarner was unable to pick up his 100th career victory, a total that’s inevitable.

“There’s a lot of pressure this time of year,” reminded Baumgarner, reflecting on the chase for the playoffs and not his personal goals or difficulties. “It’s more of a mind-set this time of the year.”

Bochy could only agree.

“This was a big series,” he conceded about the three games, three defeats, against San Diego. “They’re all big.”

A little more than two weeks are left in a season that began so well, a season — an even year — in which the Giants were picked to be champions. How did we go wrong? How did the Giants?

S.F. Examiner: Rams looked pathetic — making it hard to gauge how good the 49ers actually are

By Art Spander
San Francisco Examiner

So we’ll get to the trivial stuff quickly, meaning you won’t have to wade through the material about the 49ers crushing the Rams and Carlos Hyde rushing for 88 yards just to find out that yes, Colin Kaepernick and Eric Reid knelt down during the Star Spangled Banner, next to an American flag literally as big as the football field.

Read the full story here.

©2016 The San Francisco Examiner

A question for Serena, but no questions for Kerber

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — It seemed wrong, a final in women’s tennis without Serena Williams, but at the same time it seemed right. Sport is nothing but change, heroes and heroines raising a trophy or a hand in triumph and then being pushed aside, maybe in a matter of weeks or months — the Warriors' reign was halted all too quickly — or, in Serena’s case, a matter of years.

Now there is a new women’s tennis champion, someone who not that long ago the critics said didn’t have the game or the nerve to get to the top. Angelique Kerber is not only the U.S. Open winner but No. 1 in the rankings.

Kerber left no questions Saturday in the Open final, beating Karolina Pliskova, 6-3, 4-6, 6-4, someone who like Kerber few outside the little, provincial world of tennis knew well, if at all, until recently.

Yet their questions of another, Serena, whose defeat in the semifinals by Pliskova on Thursday, and tumble from the top of the rankings on Saturday morning, became front-page news in the New York Times, 24 hours later.

The day the women’s final, for a second straight year, would played without her.

“Serena Williams Will Be 35.” said the headline over a story by tennis correspondent Chris Clarey. “But Will She Be No. 1 Again?”

Yes, Williams is American and held her position for 186 consecutive weeks, and we tend to dwell on what was as much as what is. Still, women’s tennis is in flux, although Kerber suddenly appears to be the top-of-the-heap player who may hold her ranking for a while.

Kerber has done what Serena used to do, what Venus Williams used to do, what Steffi Graf and Chris Evert used to do: she stepped up and dominated. She beat Serena in the Australian Open final, lost to Serena in the Wimbledon final and now beats Pliskova in the U.S. Open final. Three finals and two titles in a calendar year. That’s something we would have expected from Serena, or from Kerber’s mentor and fellow German, Steffi Graf, who persuaded Kerber to be more aggressive.

As perhaps too many women on tour, Kerber played too carefully, keeping the ball in play but rarely forcing the issue. But after she lost to Victoria Azarenka in the third round of last year’s Open, she visited Graf — the last player, male or female, to take the Grand Slam, all four majors in a year, 1988 — in Las Vegas, where Graf lives with her husband, Andre Agassi, and family.

“Kerber used to play too defensively,” Evert told the ESPN television audience, “and she had that pitty-pat serve.”

At age 28, Kerber conquered her faults and her demons. And with experience she then conquered the hard-serving Pliskova, who at 24 finally had her breakthrough.

Pliskova, who never had been beyond the third round of any major, first won the Cincinnati tournament a month ago, beating Kerber in the final, 6-3, 6-1, and then going all the way to this final — if not to the championship.

Kerber said she had dreamed of being No. 1 since she was a child in Bremen. Sometimes even in a sport where the young come up so quickly, and the veterans slip away no less quickly, success is a process that takes a long while.

"It means a lot to me,” said Kerber, still on the Arthur Ashe Stadium court as tears trickled down her face immediately after the match. “I mean, all the dreams came true this year, and I'm just trying to enjoy every moment on court and also off court."

She’ll enjoy it. Serena Williams may enjoy it less so. Will she be No. 1 again? It will be fascinating to find out.

Serena denies she was beaten because she was ‘beat up’

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — She looked weary, bewildered, and even, yes, old, because some two weeks from her 35th birthday, as a tennis player Serena Williams is old, 12 years older than Karolina Pliskova, who on a Thursday night of disbelief — and perhaps transition — stunned tennis and Williams.

A 6-foot-1 Czech with a serve no less impressive — and at times more effective — than Williams', Pliskova overcame her own history of Grand Slam failures, Serena’s reputation and a howling crowd with a 6-2, 7-6 (5) win in a U.S. Open semifinal.

For a second straight year, Williams falls one match short of the Open final — in 2015 she was upset by Roberta Vinci — and also for the first time in months falls out of the No. 1 ranking in women’s tennis, which now goes to Germany's Angelique Kerber, who faces Pliskova in Saturday's final.

Maybe it was because Serena played a three-setter in the quarterfinals Wednesday against Simona Halep and was unable to recover physically.   

Maybe it was because Serena’s game is not what it used to be.

Maybe it’s because Pliskova has learned to conquer the nerves that rattled her until this summer.

Maybe it’s because Serena has a sore leg.

However, she rejected any thought that playing two matches in two days had any effect on her game.

“I definitely was not beat up after my quarterfinal match,” she insisted. “I wasn’t tired from (Wednesday’s) match. I’m a professional player, been playing for over 20 years.

“If I can’t turn around after 24 hours and play again, then I shouldn’t be on tour. So I definitely wasn’t tired from (Wednesday’s) match at all. But yeah, I’ve been having some serious knee problems. Fatigue had nothing to do with it.”

Williams, who rides on her thundering serves, was broken twice in the first set and once in the second. Pliskova, who until this Open had never been past the third round of any major in 17 previous attempts, won the battle of serves, and thus the match.

“Yes,” said Williams. “I thought she served well today, and that definitely was a big thing for her.” 

As over the years it’s been a very big thing for Serena, who in the tiebreak had two double faults. That’s what others do, not Williams. Until this semi.

Pliskova had beaten Venus Williams, Serena’s older sister, in the fourth round of this Open, and so becomes only the fourth player, along with Martina Hingis, Kim Clijsters and Justine Henin, to score a victory over both Williamses in the same Slam tournament.

"I don't believe it," said Pliskova moments after the match finished at Arthur Ashe Stadium.

She wasn’t the only one, but anything in tennis, in sports, is believable. Who would have thought Rafa Nadal and Andy Murray would be gone before the semis? Who would have thought the San Francisco Giants would fall apart as they have done?

"I knew I had the chance to beat anyone if I played my game,” said Pliskova.

Which basically is preventing the opponent from returning a serve. It was evident why Pliskova leads the Tour in service aces.

Williams’ coach, Patrick Mouratoglou, had suggested that the knee injury was the difference. It’s tough to blame defeat on ailments. Long ago Venus Williams, when asked after losing a match if she had been hurt, said, “If you play you’re not hurt. If you’re hurt don’t play.”

Serena, pressed about the knee, said, “I’m not downplaying anything. Karolina played great today. I think had she played any less, I would have had a chance.

“So I think I wasn’t 100 percent, but I also think she played well. She deserved to win today.”

As with almost every full-time tennis player, Williams has had her share of injuries. It’s a fact in a sport where the competitors are traveling around the world and rarely taking days off.

There’s a never-ending circle. You have to be in a tournament for a chance to earn points that will get you into a tournament. And bodies fray.

Nadal pulled out of the French Open and missed Wimbledon because he was injured. Roger Federer’s knee would not allow him to play in this Open. Time catches up, especially as the years mount.

Williams lost to Kerber in the Australian Open final in January and beat her in the Wimbledon final in July. Who knows whether Serena can keep going on year after year? What we do know is she’s not going on in the 2016 U.S. Open.

An official’s call and a rain delay unhinge Andy Murray

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — He was adamant in defeat, trying to handle the questions better than he did Kei Nishikori’s maddening drop shots, a man whose summer of success, a Wimbledon championship, an Olympics championship, unwound in a single afternoon on America’s biggest tennis stage.

Andy Murray was playing elegantly, happily. He had won 26 of 27 matches since mid-June, was in control of his game, the forehands, the backhands, the serves, and no less significantly because of an intensity that can lead to frustration, in control of himself.

Sure, Novak Djokovic might be there at the end of this U.S. Open, Sunday’s final, but Roger Federer hadn’t entered because of an injury and Rafa Nadal was upset in the fourth round. What an opportunity for the 29-year-old Murray, the No. 2 seed, to win the Open a second time, to win a fourth major.

But like that, the whole world seemed to go against him, from the closing of the new roof over 23,000-seat Arthur Ashe Stadium when rain began to fall, to a loud bong on the public address system that had the umpire calling a let, to a moth or butterfly fluttering around before the fifth set to getting broken at the start of the fifth set.

So Nishikori, the No. 6 seed, beaten in the Open final two years ago by Marin Cilic, eliminated Murray, 1-6, 6-4, 4-6, 6-1, 7-5 and goes to the semis. Murray, who got so angry at one juncture he slammed his racquet to the court, goes to Glasgow and a Davis Cup match. 

“I was in good position,” said Murray, “up a set and a break and had chances at the beginning of the fourth set as well. I could have won the match for sure.”

But he didn’t, and as we’ve seen so often, no matter what the sport, when the person or the team lets the extraneous stuff — the weather, the noise, the officials’ calls — get to them, get them rattled, they’re in trouble. As was Murray.

After the loudspeaker system acted up in the fourth set — Open officials explained the noise was a computer problem — the chair umpire, Marija Cicak, called a let and halted play. Murray protested.

“Stopped the point,” said Murray, “and I was curious why that was. (Tournament referee) Wayne McKewen told me it happened four times during the match. I only heard it once before, which was on set point in the second set.”

After the discussion in the fourth set, Murray lost seven straight games.

“Yeah,” said Murray, “I lost my serve a couple of times from positions when I was up in the game. I got broken once from 40-love, once from 40-15, and at the end of the match I think I was up 30-15 in the game as well. That was the difference.

“It was obviously different serving under the roof. I started off the match serving pretty well. It (closing the roof) slows the conditions down so it becomes easier to return. You know, he started returning a bit better. I didn’t serve so well, obviously ... Under the roof, he was able to dictate more of the points. He was playing a bit closer to the baseline than me and taking the ball up a little more.”

And using drop shots, which is the tennis equivalent of a baseball bunt, a ball that doesn’t go very far but doesn’t have to when the opponent, whether a third baseman or a tennis player, is all the way back, unable to return the shot.

“Yeah, a couple of them,” said Murray about being hurt by the drop shots. “I didn’t lose all the points. I won a number of them.”

Nishikori had lost seven of eight previous matches against Murray over the last five years, and when he got stormed in the first set, taking only one game, the pattern seemed certain to continue. Then came the rain, the roof and the Murray reaction — along with the Nishikori resilience.

With some 20 minutes to get the roof closed, Nishikori went to the locker room and got advice from his coaches, one of them Michael Chang, the Californian who at age 17 won the 1989 French Open.

“We talked about a lot of things,” said Nishikori, the only Japanese player to get to the finals of a Grand Slam event. “It was definitely my mistake I lost the first set. I was feeling a bit rushed. After the rain delay I changed something.”

He certainly changed the direction of the Open, ousting Murray.

“I have not let anyone down,” Murray insisted about his performance. “I tried my best. I didn’t let anyone down. Certainly not myself.”

He just let himself get distracted by a let call and a rain delay. Not very smart.

S.F. Examiner: One divisional win doesn’t excuse a month of awful play for Giants

By Art Spander
San Francisco Examiner

The fans’ thoughts are easy enough to imagine: The Giants are a disgrace, an embarrassment. It’s one thing to lose, but to collapse like a house of cards — and that’s not a St. Louis reference.

But what are the execs in the offices of AT&T Park thinking?

Read the full story here.

©2016 The San Francisco Examiner

Monfils knocks out the man who knocked out Nadal

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — It never fails, does it? The person or team that scores the upset, that knocks Duke out of the tournament, knocks Rafael Nadal out of the U.S. Open, never wins the championship. Usually never wins another round.

Which, naturally, was the situation with Lucas Pouille.

On Sunday, Pouille was the new star of tennis, rather than the new hero, because defeating the popular Nadal, as Pouille did, doesn’t necessarily make one a hero.

Villainhood is a greater possibility among the fans and the TV audience hoping to see Nadal.

In Tuesday’s quarterfinal, however, they watched Pouille against Gael Monfils in a match that was one-sided and brief, the 10^th-seeded Monfils defeating Pouille, a fellow Frenchman, 6-4, 6-3, 6-3, in just over two hours at Arthur Ashe Stadium. 

Yes, two French in one of the four quarters. Jo-Wilfried Tsonga, who met No. 1 Novak Djokovic, is another …ooh la la. Sacre bleu! The French can cook and design — and play tennis, unlike Americans. No U.S. male made it out of the fourth round.

The mavens say that in Steve Johnson, winner in Cincinnati two and a half weeks ago; Jack Sock, who was beaten in the Open by Tsonga; and teenagers Francis Tiafoe and Taylor Fritz, the future of U.S, men’s tennis is excellent. We’ll see.

What we see now is that France has depth and, for sure, a semifinalist. Long ago, men’s tennis was as French as the Eiffel Tower. Rene LaCoste (known as the Crocodile, the little reptile he put on the shirts he designed), Jacques Brugnon, Jean Borotra and Henri Cochet won Davis Cups and a total of 18 major singles titles in the 1920s and early 1930s.

They were called the Four Musketeers. In fact, the trophy awarded to the winner of the French Open each year is La Coupe des Mousquetaires — or the Cup of the Musketeers. 

Monfils, 30, is a lone musketeer, a showman who chases balls all over the court and, when he is able, hits them between his legs. He’s been as far as the semis previously in the French. Now he’s done it in the U.S. Open.   

“I drop my racquet," agreed Monfils, “and I do slide. You will say I entertain people, no matter what … Or I do a trick shot and still kill it. You will say I’m a showman. Today I didn’t have the chance to do it, but Lucas hit two tweeners (between the legs). I don’t think you will tell him he tried to entertain.”

Pouille, 22, the No. 24 seed, basically tried to stay in the match. He had played three five-setters, including that match against Nadal, and one four-setter.

“I was a bit tired,” said Pouille after his first Grand Slam quarter. “Yeah, it would have been better if I played a bit less time on court. I did my best today. Gael was playing very good. He’s physically fit. He’s moving so well.”

Monfils attributes that to conditioning and lineage. “I’m very blessed genetically, you know,” said Monfils of his agility and suppleness. “But I am even stronger than before.”

Although it’s no less a business, a way to earn a fine living, tennis to Monfils is also a game. So it was no surprise when, asked if he were having fun, Monfils quickly responded, “Always.”

That, he insisted, is the reason to play.

“No matter what, looks maybe a bit more serious, like everyone mention. But I play tennis because I have fun, because I love the sport. I’m happy where I am now.

“I think I missed a good chance two years ago against Roger (Federer). Now I have a second opportunity to get to my first Slam final.”

Pouille, who had dropped a previous match to Monfils, was not particularly distraught. Monday’s upset lingers in his mind.

“It’s the best win of my career,” he confirmed.

“Now I have a lot of confidence. Even if I lose today, I will leave New York with a lot of confidence for the rest of the year and the next season. Now I know I can be in a quarterfinal again, and maybe more.”

New York. If you can make it here …

Venus and Serena: This could be the last time

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — You waited through the afternoon, watched the sisters who have become such a large and magnificent part of tennis, of American sport, Venus and Serena Williams, back to back, on the same grand court in the same Grand Slam tournament, the U.S. Open. 

And the words of that Rolling Stones song kept repeating in the mind: This could be the last time.

This could be the last time in one of the four major championships that their play and the draw — and scheduling by shrewd tournament officials — combine for a box-office attraction like we had Monday.

Venus is reaching that stage, age 36, where her game is not what it used to be. She was beaten in her fourth-round match, 4-6, 6-4, 7-5 (3) by Karolina Pliskova, the Czech who finally escaped her nerves and the third round of a Slam. Venus won’t retire — “I love what I do,” she said — but neither will she regain what she once had.

Serena still is the best of the women, ranked No. 1, and with her tidy victory over Yaroslava Shvedova, 6-2, 6-3, has won more Grand Slam matches 308, than anyone in history, male or female. 

But the days when Serena and Venus are on the same court in a Slam, either facing each other, as they have 27 times, or playing consecutive matches — on, say, Centre Court at Wimbledon or Arthur Ashe at the Open — regrettably are finished.

So it was probably expected after Venus' defeat that she would be asked if she would walk up, above the interview room, to Ashe court to watch Serena, whose match was underway. “I haven’t thought about that,” said Venus. “I still have other stuff to do. Maybe she will win quickly, and then I won’t have to think about it.”

Serena did win quickly, and someone wondered if she had followed Venus’ match. “I was really trying to warm up,” said Serena. “I really get nervous when I watch. So I didn’t get to see much. I knew that she lost when it was over, but I didn’t really watch what was going on.”

What was going on was the writing of yet another chapter of sports inevitability, a potential young star — Pliskova is 24 — taking the stage while the older, familiar player is moved out of the spotlight. Venus still can compete, but not like before.

The crowd at 23,000-seat Ashe probably was cheering for itself as much as it was for Venus. We’re all trying to hang on to the present, which all too soon becomes the past. Only days ago it seems Venus was the teenager on her way up. Now she’s the veteran. This was her 18th U.S. Open.

Venus showed her courage, down triple-match point in the 11th game of the third set and breaking Pliskova to get even at 6-6. Then Venus showed her vulnerability, making mistakes in the tiebreaker that she wouldn’t have made a decade ago.

“I think (in) the breaker I went for a little bit more,” she said of her tactics, “but I didn’t put the ball in enough. You know I went for some aggressive shots, didn’t necessarily put them in.

“She played a great game. I was going to try and stay in there, continue to get points.”

That’s the way opponents used to talk after they lost to a younger Venus.

“I did what I could when I could,” was Venus’ assessment. “That’s the match.” Once upon a time, Venus did what she wanted.

Which basically is what Serena has been doing the last few years, winning Wimbledon in July, a 22nd Slam triumph to tie Steffi Graf for second on the all-time list. There have been stumbles — "hiccups" is the tennis term — such as last year’s U.S. Open, when Serena was upset by Roberta Vinci in the semifinals. For the most part, she’s stomped along.

“I feel like I’m going out there and doing what I need to do,” said Serena, now in the quarterfinals. “I’m not overplaying. I’m not underplaying. I’m just trying to play my way into this tournament.”

She’s done that. On Monday, she followed older sister Venus onto the big court at the big time in the big city to complete a double-bill that we may have very well seen for the last time.

The new kid hits Broadway and beats Nadal

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — It was classic Broadway, if a few miles east at Flushing Meadows. The new kid shows up and, right there before our eyes, shows up the older guy, the champion. You can hear the words from the decades: “We’re going to make you a star.”

Except they don’t have to, because Lucas Pouille is now a star. He went from virtual anonymity to instant fame in the time of a single tennis match Sunday afternoon and evening, if a lengthy, dramatic match, stunning the great Rafael Nadal, 6-1, 2-6, 6-4, 3-6, 7-6 (6) in the U.S. Open.

Yes, a tiebreak in a fifth set that by itself lasted one hour and 10 minutes. Yes, a tiebreak in which Nadal, trailing 6-3 to draw even in a competition few in the bellowing, howling crowd in 23,000-seat Arthur Ashe Stadium thought Nadal ever would lose.

Yes, a tiebreak when Nadal had a wide-open forehand at 6-6 in that tiebreak — and hit it into the net.

“It was a very tense moment,” said Pouille (pronounced Puh-yeeh, or thereabouts). He is a 22-year-old Frenchman from the suburbs of Dunkirque on the English Channel, a relative unknown facing one the game’s finest, the 30-year-old Nadal who has won 14 Slams, with at least one victory in each of the four.

“After this,” said Pouille of the Nadal miss, “I was very comfortable. I wanted to take my chances.”

After this, meaning the fourth-round triumph, Pouille becomes one of three Frenchmen in the quarter-finals, one of whom, Gael Monfils, is his next opponent.

Nadal, a lefty, had been bothered by a bad left wrist. He pulled out of the French Open, a tournament he has won nine times, in late May. Then he skipped Wimbledon. But in August, he teamed with fellow Spaniard Marc Lopez to win the doubles title at the Rio Olympics and in singles there reached the semifinals.

Here, in the Open, he hadn’t lost a set. And the only time they had met previously, Nadal defeated Pouille, 6-1, 6-2, in straight sets. “When I was younger,” said Pouille, “I used to watch all his matches at the Open, the one against (Novak) Djokovic. I knew I had to be aggressive.”

So he was, jumping off to that 6-1 win in the first set by moving to the corners. No one then suspected we were in for a match that would last over four hours and finish with Pouille, after a winning forehand, flopping on his back in glee and sticking out his tongue.

That was his method of celebrating, not of mocking anyone. The fans, who as always in tennis support the best-known, Djokovic, Federer, Nadal, had shifted, not so much dropping Nadal as embracing Pouille.

What they were witnessing hour after hour was courageous, enthralling play, and they wanted to be part of it.

“The crowd,” said Pouille appreciably, “was just unbelievable. You just have to enjoy.”

There was no enjoyment for Nadal. He was the No. 4 seed, favored over No. 25 Pouille. At times Rafa produced some of the heroic, athletic shots we know and expect. But too often, there were mistakes.

“I think he played a good match,” said Nadal of Pouille. “He started so strong. I fight until the end with. There were things I could do better. Had the right attitude. I fighted right up to the last ball.

“But I need something else; I need something more that was not there today. I going to keep working to try to find. But, yes, was a very, very close match that anything could happen. Just congratulate the opponent that probably he played with better decision than me the last couple of points.”

These battles between a familiar and successful player and an outsider perhaps about to reach the next level inevitably leave us with mixed emotions, delighted that someone new takes the big step but also distressed at the failure of a player so long at the top. When Nadal walked out of the tunnel after the pre-match introduction, the approval was thunderous.

When he left the court, he smiled, if painfully, and waved.

“Was a big mistake,” he had said earlier about his forehand. “But you are six-all in the tiebreak. I played the right point. I put me in a position to have the winner, and I had the mistake. That's it.

“You cannot go crazy thinking about these kind of things, no? You have a mistake. The opponent played a good point in the match point, and that's it. The problem is arrive to six-all on the tiebreak of the fifth. I should be winning before.”

That is the lament of all losers, no matter how much they’ve won.

Hurricane Serena sweeps into the Open

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — Warning signs kept popping up on I-495 east of the Queens Midtown Tunnel. “Tropical storm on weekend. Heavy rain, high wind.”

But there was a billboard with more tantalizing advice: “Leaving City of Dreams.”

To link either or both with the tennis of eternal champion Serena Williams might be a reach, if not that big of one. She’s been sweeping through this 2016 U.S. Open with the force of a hurricane. On Saturday, she spent only one hour on the court, defeating Johanna Larsson of Sweden, 6-2, 6-1.

But of course. This is women’s tennis. The top few, Serena, Angelique Kerber, maybe Agnieszka Radwanska or Flavia Pennetta, make it interesting when they are matched up. Otherwise, the rest are barely competitive.

In the early rounds, and the Open is in the third, there ought to be Serena warnings. Even with a sore shoulder, she simply overpowers the opponents. And the record book.

The victory over Larsson was Williams' 307th in a Grand Slam event, one more than the previous women’s record held by Martina Navratilova and the same as Roger Federer, who holds the men’s record — and since he’s not here, and since Serena will get more before the Open is done and Federer is missing because of a bad knee, she’ll have the most of anyone, female or male.

“That was pretty cool for me,” said Williams. “Obviously I want to keep that number going higher and see what can happen.”

Anything and everything. City of Dreams, indeed. A year ago, with the pressure of earning the legitimate Grand Slam — all four majors in a calendar year — overwhelming her physical capability, Williams was stunned in the Open semifinals by Roberta Vinci.

She seemed deflated as much as defeated, making it to the finals of the next two Slam events, the Australian and French Open, but losing to Kerber in Australia and Garbine Muguruza in France.

Small wonder then she was particularly elated by the triumph over Kerber in the Wimbledon final, her 22^nd Slam, ending questions about a decline in her confidence if not in her talent.

Serena, along with older sister Venus, is a lady of great pride. When someone asks if he’s the best women’s athlete on the planet, Williams wonders if gender should be a part of the question, that simply “best athlete” would be proper.

And Saturday, post-match, the issue arose once more, hardly a surprise but after you get past Serena’s thundering serves and quick points, what else is there?

Sixty-minute woman. The first set against Larsson lasted 36 minutes, the second 24. To paraphrase the old Peggy Lee song, is that all there was? Not a chance.

There’s the Williams interview, on this day more fascinating than the Williams match. She can be soft and hesitating in her answers, but the viewpoints are unmistakably clear.

“I definitely think there is a difference between the way male and female athletes are treated,” she said. “I also believe as a woman we have still a lot to do and a lot to be going forward. I think tennis has made huge improvements. We just have to keep it going for all other female sports as well.”

Serena herself is intent on keeping it going. She will be 35 the end of this month and, other than a minor injury or two, appears both and willing and able. Kerber and Radwanska are challenging for the No. 1 ranking Williams has held for 309 weeks, which is exactly what Serena needs, a reason to continue the quest.

“There is a huge pay difference in terms of male and female athletes,” she reminded, “in a lot of sports, tennis as well.”

She and Venus both are millionaires. Serena’s motivation is not from dollars. There will be a finish line, but it is not in the immediate future.

“I am not ready to throw in the towel yet or just to have enough,” she said. “I think a lot of it has to do with my mentality. Just never wanting to quit and still being able to compete at a high level.

“I am still having fun out there. I’m still able to compete with the best. I think that’s what matters most to me.”

Hurricane Serena shows no sign of weakening.

Rain on the new Open roof — and noise underneath

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — People seem to be fascinated by what’s over their heads. Didn’t the Drifters have a hit song in the 1960s, “Up on the Roof"? And every time there’s a new stadium that’s under cover, such as the Astrodome, bless its history, or an old stadium that’s under new cover, such as Wimbledon Centre Court, we’re enthralled.

When the Astrodome opened in 1965 with an exhibition game between the Astros (neé the Colt .45s) and the Yankees, there was a home run by Mickey Mantle and complaints that no one could see the ball through the then-translucent roof. Still, so enamored were we by the structure that it was proclaimed the “Eighth Wonder of the World.” Such naiveté.

Now there are domed stadia, ballparks and arenas, some of the coverings permanent, some retractable, from Seattle (Safeco Field, retractable) to New Orleans (the Superdome, permanent). And still we can’t get enough, especially the officials who have a new toy.

Centre Court at Wimbledon needed a roof practically since Victoria was queen of England. The 2000 men’s final, won by Pete Sampras, was halted so many times by rain it lasted seven hours. Naturally, when at last the $120 million retractable covering was ready, for the 2009 tournament, the weather was beautiful until early in the second week a few drops dripped. Elation. Close the roof. Thank you, Mother Nature.

So it was here at Flushing Meadows for the U.S. Open tennis championships. Five years running, 2010-14, the men’s final had to be delayed or postponed by everything from hurricanes to drizzles. Call in the architects. The new roof over the main court, at 23,000-seat Arthur Ashe Stadium, was finished a few weeks ago. U.S. Tennis Association officials even had media previews of the closing and opening.

Hey, if you can’t interview Roger Federer, that’s the next best thing.

All day Monday and Tuesday, like people watching for an invading force, Open execs searched the skies for even a cloud. Nothing. Finally, Wednesday, it turned. A bit of rain Wednesday evening. A great deal of joy for the USTA, if not for Rafael Nadal and Andreas Seppi, who competed in the first indoor match ever for the Open. If not the last.

Thursday was wet, and play was chased from the outdoor courts for a long while. But not from Ashe, where the stars performed. Andy Murray, the No. 2 seed, beat Marcel Granollers in straight sets. Then Venus Williams won over Julia Georges. It was different, but it was tennis.

No roars from jets ascending from LaGuardia but a constant din, like 5,000 crickets chirping or neighbors talking gossip across the back fence. As at all roofed stadiums, whatever the sport, the noise was unavoidable, although not particularly irritating.

“I don’t think it was too different to the other night when I played,” said Murray, referring to Tuesday, when he played the late match with the roof open at the Open. “But when the rain came, it was certainly loud.”

Murray the Brit (he’s Scottish not English) not surprisingly was selected on that night in June 2009 to be part of first full match under the Wimbledon roof. There were gasps and then cheers when the mechanism was deployed.

Murray was not totally overjoyed by what he heard at Arthur Ashe Stadium, or more specifically what he didn’t hear. It’s as if the tennis is being played in a hangar.

“You can’t hear anything, really,” said Murray. “I mean you could hear the line calls but not so much when the opponents — you know, when he was hitting the ball or you were hitting the ball.

“We’re not used to it. That’s what make it so challenging. Because we use our ears when we play. It’s not just the eyes. It helps us pick up the speed of the ball, the spin that’s on the ball, how hard someone’s hitting it.”

Venus Williams, in her 18^th U.S. Open, was unperturbed by what others considered by the noise or anything else.

“You know,” she said about the pre-roofed Ashe Stadium, “there was a lot of noise last year. Over time you start to forget about the noise. So I think as a player, the higher the stakes the less you year. I do enjoy the quiet.”

To which one must add, “Shhhh.”

Fognini closes his mind on the Open — it’s ‘the worst’

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — So Fabio Fognini, who most Americans wouldn’t know from Giuseppe Verdi, except Fognini probably has a better forehand, says the U.S. Open is worst of the four tennis Grand Slam tournaments. Maybe we could get a comment from Colin Kaepernick.

Fognini’s dislike of the event surfaced when he was warned for whacking a ball in anger after losing a point and subsequently received a point penalty for — he said — jokingly grabbing a line judge’s sunglasses.

“They have their rules,” Fognini told writers from Italy. “You know the Americans are different in every way.”

Meaning we walk on all fours?

“Of the Grand Slams,” he specified. “this, as far as I’m concerned, is the worst.”  

Apparently he spoke without consulting his wife, Flavia Pennetta, who, having won the women’s singles last year over Roberta Vinci in the final, surely has a different opinion.

If, however, Fognini has such low regard of the Open, perhaps, as one tennis official pointed out, he shouldn’t enter.

“But then,” the man reminded, “he wouldn’t have a chance to make money.”

Worst or best — and the vote here is very much toward the latter — the Open is a joy, two weeks of high-class sport and New York madness, an event as much as a championship where the crowds are huge, the competition tense and a kid can get an autograph almost as easily as he can a kosher hot dog.

The whole idea in entertainment, and sports is yet another form, is to, well, entertain, whether it’s a hot musical like “Hamilton,” where tickets before the cast change were selling in the $500 range, or a concert or ball game. To make the people feel good.

They figured out how to do that long ago at the Open, where music blares, fountains spray and it’s just as much fun to watch a key match on the big screen facing the plaza as it is inside the largest arena in tennis, 23,771-seat Arthur Ashe Stadium.

In this city that never sleeps, the tennis starts each day a few minutes after 11 a.m. and lasts until, well,Tuesday. The match in which Madison Keys defeated Alison Riske started Monday night and lasted 2 hours 26 minutes, ending at 1:48 a.m., the latest ever for a women’s match.

The fans who stayed until the end cheered — themselves, as well as Keys and Riske. Nobody leaves early in New York, even if early is late. Besides, the subway’s still running, and there’s a place on East 51st Street, Bateau Ivre, that serves full meals until 4 a.m. So what’s the rush?

The Open is part history and part circus, and it now has a new big top, a retractable roof, which if the forecast for rain on Thursday is accurate may very well become a grand part of this Grand Slam — the one Fognini slammed grandly, if incorrectly.

Yes, jets from LaGuardia, a few miles away, roar above, but not continually. The wind off Flushing Bay whips around the court at Ashe, but not constantly. If Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic and Serena Williams have won titles there, who can complain? Except Fognini

The Billie Jean King National Center is smack in the middle of a park where the 1964 World’s Fair was held, anchored in a way by the Unisphere, the huge stainless steel representation of the earth constructed for the fair. To come from the south, past the 120-foot sphere, then enter the Court of Champions, past the plaques of everyone from Bill Tilden to Oakland’s Don Budge to Helen Wills, born in Alameda County, to John McEnroe to King herself is a real experience.

A country needs familiar sporting locales, places such as Wimbledon, Churchill Downs, Augusta National, the Rose Bowl — and, as is the case with Billie Jean King Center, places identified with greatness, with triumph.

The U.S. Open draws 700,000 people during its two-week run. On Broadway, they would call that a box office smash, boffo. But Fabio Fognini would rather be anywhere else. Poor fellow.

Venus Williams remains ageless and remarkable

By Art Spander

NEW YORK — The years go on and, for Venus Williams, so do the games. She is long past the point of no return — and interpret that any way you choose. The serves no longer are ferocious, but they are effective. More importantly, her tennis is timeless.

No one asks her when she’ll retire. Or even if she’ll retire. And why should she?

Venus can live with the game she plays at 36, which unsurprisingly isn’t the one she had at 26. If there are no more Grand Slam championships, there at least is a sense of accomplishment.

It’s her younger sister, Serena, who has been atop the women’s tennis stairway, the way 15 years ago Venus was in that enviable position. On Monday, Venus, in her opening match of the 2016 U.S. Open, was in the final slot of the afternoon program at Arthur Ashe Court, a winner, if not easily, 6-2, 5-7, 6-4, in 2 hours and 42 minutes over Kateryna Kozlova of the Ukraine.

Then, when Venus was being debriefed in the main interview room below the stadium, Serena, the No. 1 seed, was on court, defeating Ekaterina Makarova of Russia, 6-3, 6-3.

“I always admired her game,” Venus said in sisterly admiration of Serena, who will be 35 in September. “Just so fearless.”

Of Venus, we could say, just so amazing. Tennis is a sport that wrenches wrists and ruins ankles and knees. No less, it wears out psyches. There comes a moment when a player, having hit balls since she or he was a child, says, “That’s it, enough.” But Venus never gets enough.

Maybe because she has a fashion house — the New York Times ran a full spread on the designing and planning of dresses and tops — which gets her far enough away from tennis that it’s almost an escape to get back. Not the other way around.

Venus has appeared in the four Grand Slam events a total of 72 times, more than anyone else. When told, she replied, “That’s crazy.” More accurately, that’s persistence.

“I’m grateful and I’m blessed,” she said about a career that began in a tournament at what then was the Oakland Coliseum Arena in 1994. “All I’m hoping for is just health that I can keep the record going.

“I don’t know when I’m going to stop playing. I don’t have any plans now. I’m playing too well to be thinking about stopping. I appear to be getting better and better each and every month.”

An exaggeration, but an allowable one. When in 2011 she disclosed she had been stricken with an autoimmune disorder, Sjogren’s syndrome, the suspicion was Williams was finished as a competitive player. And for a few tournaments she appeared to lack energy, although not intent.

Then these past few months, Williams for the first time in seven years made it to the Wimbledon semifinals, the finals of the Bank of the West Classic and, with Rajeev Ram, the finals of the Olympics mixed doubles, indicating that she still was a factor.

“As an athlete,” she said, “you’re always aiming for perfection. You want more and more. It’s never enough.”

That thought would be echoed by the American public, which in a sport built upon personalities and recognition, there are virtually no substitutes at the time for Venus or Serena, the one-two punch for every tournament in the U.S.

Asked what she loves the most about tennis, Venus had an emotional response. “I love that I love it,” she said. “So when you love something you put the work in.

“I love the challenge. Definitely I like the pressure. I like high stakes. All of that makes it just perfect for my personality.”

And makes Venus perfect for tennis. She’s ageless and remarkable, a legend who refuses to stop acting and playing like one. The game has been fortunate to have her.

S.F. Examiner: Timing is curious, but Kap’s actions nothing new in NorCal

By Art Spander
San Francisco Examiner

NEW YORK — A quarterback is in the hot seat because he refuses to relinquish his own seat when the national anthem is played. The Bay Area reacts — and overreacts. The sky is falling. At the least, jerseys are burning.

But back here, in New York, where the U.S. Open tennis championships have started and the only items involving a signal caller have to do with the Jets’ Geno Smith — “Bird brained QB boo-birds,” was the Daily News headline — they barely notice.

Read the full story here.

©2016 The San Francisco Examiner

Are these the new Swingin’ A’s?

By Art Spander

OAKLAND — Well, all was quiet on the western front. Also in the East Bay clubhouse. No punches. No concussions. No conversation either. All reminders of the Swingin’ A’s of the 1970s are only coincidental.

Those guys could play baseball. They won three consecutive World Series, ’72-73-74. Those guys also could fight. Each other. There’s nothing wrong with teammates smacking each other around, as long as when the umpire yells “Play ball,” the priorities are reassessed.

As the Hall of Famer Rollie Fingers said two years ago when the ’74 champions had a reunion at the Coliseum, “We had some characters and, we were beating the bleep out of each other. But still we won.”

The ’16 A’s have not for the most part, although Oakland looked more than competent Tuesday night at the Coliseum, defeating the AL Central-leading Cleveland Indians, 9-1.

Solid pitching, timely hitting. Which is the way it used to be.

Minus an attempted haymaker or two. Ah, such memories of the glory and gory days.

Game One of the ’74 Series was at Dodger Stadium in Los Angeles. Writers from around the country stood around the cage during batting practice, most skeptical of the Athletics’ reputation.

“I don’t believe all those stories of the fighting,” a journalist told the late Ron Bergman, in those days the only correspondent who covered every A’s game. At almost that very moment, Fingers and fellow pitcher John “Blue Moon” Odom began to brawl in the visitors’ clubhouse.

Ray Fosse was a catcher on the ’73 and ’74 A’s. Now at 69, he works with Glenn Kuiper as the Oakland television commentator. Fosse became famous for being run over by Pete Rose in the 1970 All-Star Game — and for breaking up a fight between Billy North and Reggie Jackson in that ’74 A’s title season.

“I just tried to pull Billy away,” said Fosse, who having incurred a crushed disk in his neck that still hurts, is reluctant to say much more about that battle.

Ballplayers are with each other virtually every day from February until October, on buses and planes, in cramped clubhouses. Nerves fray, tempers explode.

Jeff Kent once took a swing at Barry Bonds in the Giants’ dugout at AT&T. That Danny Valencia of the A’s conked teammate Billy Butler wouldn’t have been particularly noteworthy except that Butler was diagnosed with a concussion, a serious condition.

In fact, while one offers condolences to Butler — who must have taken a beating from Valencia — the incident has for a brief moment made the A’s relevant once again. Consigned to the back pages of the Bay Area’s dailies, they suddenly became front-page news.

They would prefer to do it by being successful, but until then any sort of attention will do.

“It’s not the first time guys have gotten in a fight in the clubhouse,” said Oakland general manager David Forst correctly.

“Unfortunately, when we’re having the kind of season we’re having, it’s a big story. If we were winning, it would be colorful, but we’re not.”

Precisely, and even though the A’s fined both Valencia and Butler, Forst and manager Bob Melvin perhaps were not displeased in their athletes showing some fire, if they didn’t appreciate Butler getting concussed.

Oakland team chemistry has been lacking — “not great” is the way Forst described it — which is hardly unexpected the way the A’s repeatedly ship people from Oakland to Triple A Nashville, and vice versa.

The insecurity has to have an effect on young players. How can there be chemistry when there’s no stability?

Through it all, Melvin, the A’s manager, has remained resolute and pleasant. While it’s true any manager is only as good as his players, the entire business, from lack of talent to losing a player because he was socked by a teammate, must be a downer. 

The rare triumph, such as Tuesday night’s — after loses in eight of the previous nine games — allows Melvin a brief chance to escape the craziness of the past few days, not to mention the season.

“Certainly we had this incident, but when you have losing seasons and you’re not playing well, it’s not going to go as well as when you’re winning,” Melvin conceded when asked about the fight.

“And we’ve had two tough seasons. So in that respect, you don’t expect everything to be warm and fuzzy all the time.”

As men such as Rollie Fingers and Billy North from those 1970s teams readily would confirm.

S.F. Examiner: Giants need to prove magic of spring isn’t lost in fog of summer

By Art Spander
San Francisco Examiner

Bruce Bochy was telling the truth. A game in April is no less important — critical, was the word he used — as a game in August. But April is gone. So is the Giants’ lead. They are in second place now, behind the Dodgers, a team hailed and by some — Giants fans — hated.

A team against which San Francisco tonight begins a three-game series at Dodger Stadium.

Read the full story here.

©2016 The San Francisco Examiner

Newsday (N.Y.): As he often does, Bartolo Colon gives Mets what they need

By Art Spander
Special to Newsday

SAN FRANCISCO — The fan in the dugout box to the first-base side of home plate, the one who unbuttoned his Mets jersey to display a stomach supposedly the equal of Bartolo Colon’s? The pitcher never noticed.

He was focused on something more important.

Read the full story here.

Copyright © 2016 Newsday. All rights reserved.

No longer any sweetness in Giants’ torture

By Art Spander

SAN FRANCISCO — This is torture, but there is no sweetness. The Giants are coming apart, greatness slipping away. Even on a day of blue skies there is gloom, foreboding, a sense of inevitability that runs counter to what we have seen, what we expected.

Sport is so bewildering, at times so demoralizing. A baseball team that for weeks seemingly couldn’t lose, a team that a month ago had the best record in the majors, is now a team that can’t win. Literally.

The Giants dropped another one Wednesday, this time to the Pittsburgh Pirates, 6-5. Or maybe that should read "again," this time to the Pirates. Three games against Pittsburgh at AT&T Park, three defeats.

The team that was 57-33 at the All-Star break, the team that had an eight-game lead in the National League West two weeks earlier, has lost 21 of its last 30 — nobody in baseball has done worse than that — and is now in second, behind the hated Dodgers.

There have been momentous shifts before. The Giants, the New York Giants, trailed the Brooklyn Dodgers by 13 games in August 1951, ended up tied and won the playoff on Bobby Thomson’s “shot heard 'round the world.”

There’s no sure thing. Except these days that the Giants will lose.

“We’re in a funk,” said Bruce Bochy, the San Francisco manager, before Wednesday’s game. And then, as if to prove him correct, the Giants blew a 4-0 lead like that, in a half-inning, when starter Matt Cain began the top of the fifth with a hit batsman and three straight walks and closed it by giving up a two-run homer to Andrew McCutchen.

Wham, a blow to left by McCutchen. A blow to the psyche by McCutchen.   

A 4-0 lead after four? Surely this was a game that would end the woes. It wasn’t, and with the New York Mets coming in for four games starting Thursday night and then the Giants going to Los Angeles for three games starting Tuesday, perhaps the woes won't end until the season does.

The Giants are not a bad team, but they are playing bad baseball. When they hit, as they did on Wednesday, they can’t pitch. When they pitch, as they did 11 days ago when Madison Bumgarner threw a two-hitter and lost, 1-0, they can’t hit.

A team built on pitching, the Giants gave up eight runs in consecutive games, first to Baltimore, next to the Pirates. They lost both, of course.

There was an eerie quiet in the Giants' postgame clubhouse. The few players in sight sat and checked their  phones. Not until Cain, as required, showed up for his interview, did anyone talk above a whisper.

Earlier, Bochy, the onetime catcher, had said in another room that Cain “lost his release point,” meaning that the place in his delivery where the ball is fired had changed. Like that.

Four batters, no hits, one run. Then a single for two more runs. Then a sacrifice fly for another run, and the game was tied, 4-4. But not for long. After another out, McCutchen hit one into the left field bleachers. Javier Lopez replaced Cain. Too late.

Bochy was thinking about his bullpen, which has been used far too much, and about Cain’s confidence, trying to save his relievers, trying to save Cain’s self-belief. Another time, that would have worked. Now, nothing works.

“It didn’t play out the way I thought,” said Bochy, when asked if he were second-guessing himself about the tactic. “I saw some good things. That one inning got away from us.

“Then their bullpen did a good job. The way we were swinging the bat, I thought we could come back.”

They nearly did, if anyone cares about possibilities along with results. With the bases loaded and no one out in the bottom of the ninth, Buster Posey — who already had three hits, despite that back pain — stepped up to the plate. But he hit into a double play, with the final run scoring, and so it goes.

“We’re taking some blows,” agreed Bochy. “We’ve lost some of our mojo. But we’re resilient. This is a tough club.”

A tough club that has found out how tough baseball can be.

Raiders Carr just wants to win — like Al Davis

By Art Spander

NAPA — This was Al Davis talk, but from Derek Carr. Davis has been gone four and a half years now, and yet for the Raiders, for a player like Carr, it was as if Al still was parading around the field in training camp reminding us to just win, baby.

Carr wants nothing else, even in preseason games. “Anytime I put on a jersey,” said Carr, “my whole mindset is, ‘What do I need to do to win?’”

Most likely be on the field for more than a dozen plays, or something like that, to which most NFL starting quarterbacks are limited in the first or second week of what, in truth, are practice games.

No reason to take a chance with injuries, and conversely you’ve got to give a chance to the backups.

So for Carr, there’s impatience. Ten plays last weekend against Arizona, although with Matt McGloin throwing a couple of touchdown passes, an Oakland victory. Thursday night, it’s the Packers at Green Bay.

“There’s something where, like, if you lose,” said Carr, “it stings, because you’re a competitor.”

And unquestionably, in his third year, a leader — the leader. As a quarterback is supposed to be. Someone who understands the plan and people, and no less importantly himself. Someone as adept at dealing with the media as with a safety blitz.

The Raiders closed camp early Tuesday afternoon, not long after Carr, enthusiastic — as always — and reflective gave what would be the final session behind the podium for Napa 2016. And, according to some rumors, the final ever.

If the Oakland Raiders indeed are to become the Las Vegas Raiders, as Al’s son, Mark, is planning — scheming? — then, according to the predictions, training camp would be switched to Reno. Not that anyone associated with the Raiders would discuss it.

“Man, I’m just . . . I didn’t even think of that until you said that,” Carr offered. “That’s how focused we are on football. I love Napa. I love the Bay Area. If it is, I loved it. If it’s not, I look forward to coming back.”

It was the belief of the late Bill Walsh (whose first job in pro football was as an assistant to Davis in 1966, when Al was the Raiders' head coach) that a quarterback needs three years to develop: in the rookie year mostly watching, in the second year playing when he could succeed, in the third year becoming the starter.

Now rookies, such as Jared Goff with the Rams this season and Carr back in 2014, instantly are first-string, learning in the school of hard knocks and one-sided defeats. Peyton Manning himself endorsed the method with the man who succeeded him at Indianapolis, Andrew Luck.

“You’ve got to get out there and find out,” in effect is what Manning advised.

Carr definitely did. That first year, the Raiders lost their opening 10 games. For someone who prizes a win in preseason, the pain still lingers from the difficult beginning. Yet, Carr rarely gets down.

“Ninety-nine percent of the time,” he said of his attitude, “it’s real. It really is. I just love people, being around people. But there’s one percent of the time when you wake up and your body hurts or something bad happened with a friend or family member, and it bugs you. I’m human.”

But he recovers quickly enough.

“I just remind myself who I am,” said Carr, “my foundation, what I believe and who I am. That’s how I go about it, because I want to make sure I’m always the same for my teammates. Like when we were 0-10, it was hard. But I tried every single day to be the same guy. So, as they saw that when we were losing, when we started winning and I was the same guy, they knew it just wasn’t a game.”

He meant his behavior, not football, which is just a game — and more.

“When I came out of (Fresno State), I felt very prepared,” said Carr, “When I hit the NFL, there hasn’t been anything that was said to me that didn’t make sense. It’s all about experience, though. It’s just a matter of experiencing those things, those blitzes, those coverages.

“It made sense to me why they were doing it, but I had never seen it before so it wasn’t in my memory bank. Those two years of experience are what really gave me the most knowledge.”

We’ll find out whether, in his critical third year, they also give Carr the winning edge.

S.F. Examiner: Niners quarterback questions unanswered

By Art Spander
San Francisco Examiner

This 49ers season, with the new coach, the new up-tempo offense and the new hopes, is really about a not-so-new quarterback.

Defense wins in football. That’s understood. But you’d better have a QB, someone experienced, quick on his feet, quicker in his thinking and most of all in the NFL these days quick getting the ball to a receiver.

Read the full stoory here.

©2016 The San Francisco Examiner