Australian Open 2011: Novak Djokovic beats Roger Federer to reach final

A day after Rafael Nadal limped out of the Australian Open, Roger Federer followed him, although his exit visa was not stamped with an injury clause. We live in changing times. If Andy Murray is ever going to win a grand slam, a tournament stripped of the two greatest players of all time would be a good place to start. The only problem is, if he beats the softest option in the surviving group, David Ferrer, in his semi-final tomorrow night, standing across from him on Sunday will be Novak Djokovic in all his intimidating pomp. His 7-6, 7-5, 6-4 demolition of Federer in the first semi-final today was the sort of performance that announces a new era; this, Djokovic's passage to his fourth grand slam final, might have been Federer beating Pete Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001. We will see. Federer looked troubled, irritable and mortal as he whinged and fretted about Djokovic, no stranger to the vapours. It took exactly three hours; to Federer, the defending champion with nothing left to defend, it must have seemed like a life sentence. Djokovic said: "He puts a lot of pressure on you. It's one of the best matches I've played in a while. I had to take my chances. Second set I was a break up and after 20 minutes I was 5-2 down. I'm just happy to overcome the tough moments and enjoy the Rod Laver Arena." Tennis is an accumulation of skirmishes and random moments. No one understands that better than Federer, who has collected enough of them to win 16 grand slams, including the 2010 edition of this title. Then, he was regal. This year he mixed again with the serfs. A set down and trailing Novak Djokovic 2-1 and 30-40 on the Serb's serve in the second, Federer noticed a feather. He held a hand up and motioned to a ballboy to remove it. Non-plussed and probably sweating a quiet public death, the boy, maybe 10 years old, struggled to find it. The world No 1, from 20 yards away, directed him to the offending item, he plucked it from the net and put in his pocket. Djokovic, meanwhile, sweated too. When he served, the momentum he had gathered evaporated on the cool Melbourne night air, and, after further engagements, Federer broke back. These things happen. But then another string of little battles ensued and Federer won eight of them in a row. He was flying. Djokovic was plunged into Roger Time, merely sharing the time-space newly created by one of the cleverest players in the history of the game. Federer served out to love, held three break points on Djokovic's wilting serve, then broke him at the end of a quite remarkable rally during which he saved a near-certain winner with the sort of get Murray calls his own. He saved two break points on his own serve and, having been on his knees (figuratively as opposed to Djokovic, who slipped twice in the eighth game), led 5-2. But then it happened. The man who invents his own tennis universe was brought back to earth. Djokovic, fighting against his own game, somehow rediscovered the vim that had earlier nicked him the first set. Federer was neutered, as shot after shot eluded him. Djokovic took the set 7-5 and his pre-match price of 13-8 was looking absurd. Federer had only just got out of jail in the second round when he surrendered a two-set lead to Gilles Simon to win in five; here the reverse applied. Here he was one out, one back as the Australians say. At deuce on Djokovic's serve in the second game of the third set, he spotted another feather moment. As Djokovic went through his pre-service routine, Federer gave him his iciest Swiss stare for excessive ball-bouncing; next point, Djokovic hit long. Break point and crisis. Again, Djokovic was up to the challenge. The world No3 apologised with all the sarcasm he could muster, aced to save, and went on to hold after 13 minutes and three break points. Federer's second feather moment had passed. Thereafter, the gathering of small incidents piled up for Djokovic. But he had a delicious dilemma too. Should he go for the kill, finish it off here, or play conservatively, given he had the luxury (if that is what it is in any match against Federer) of a two-set cushion? As it transpired, it was Federer who responded falsely. The anxiety was with him and he took risks that appeared alien to the calmest man in sport. More moments, more crises – and another break for a 2-1 lead. Federer complained to the umpire at the changeover about Djokovic's time-wasting. Djokovic ignored it. The stress was building on Federer. Djokovic went for the safe option in the home stretch and Federer, despite breaking back, cracked again and it was over. There were glimpses of vintage Federer today, in the first set, which he ought to have won but for going passive in the tie-break, and for a few games in the second set. Outside of those moments, Djokovic smothered him, annoyed him (unintentionally, I would venture) and out-toughed him on pressure points. It is a shame Federer resorted to little tricks; he has always aspired to better behaviour than that. But, in the maelstrom gathering around him, he was consumed by the instinct to survive. He could do nothing about his wavering concentration – the root cause of disintegration and a curse of age. Djokovic could do no wrong. The Serb knew the price and value of small moments every bit as well as Federer. And, when it mattered, the younger man was too sharp, too intense, too good for the champion. It will take a mighty performance to stop Djokovic winning this Australian Open. Murray might almost have preferred Federer – and what does that say about the order of things?