There are times when I wish my family’s life revolved a little less around Andy Murray. Two words, "Andy’s playing", are sufficient reason for outings to be delayed or abandoned; invitations turned down; even holiday dates tweaked.

And when we do sit down to watch him, I’m like a hen on a hot griddle. I envy the Swiss their settled years when Roger Federer was at his glorious best and the Serbs their winning machine Novak Djokovic. Murray’s matches are an emotional workout. He can play a string of wonder shots and then, on a crucial point, drive a back-hand into the net; and then do it again.

But when he wins, the roller-coaster ride has been worth it. And now he has capped his extraordinary career, two grand slams and that historic gold medal at the Olympics with the return to Great Britain of the Davis Cup for the first time in 79 years. What a magnificent achievement.

"Nothing may ever top this," Murray said after the victory. Lord Sugar announced he would write to the Prime Minister nominating Britain’s best-ever tennis player for a knighthood. Murray said: "Every member of the team deserves a knighthood."

But not every member of the team is likely to get one; only Murray.

The Herald:

It’s not the first time a knighthood has been mooted. David Cameron said Murray deserved one when he took the Olympic crown. But the Prime Minister was accused of trying to bathe in the sports star’s reflected glory. Murray was given an OBE. Now the sword tap on the shoulder is back on the agenda.

So should Dunblane’s local hero become Sir Andy before he is even 30 years old? I’ll go further and ask: should he ever become Sir Andy?

Don’t get me wrong. He deserves whatever plaudits he is offered. It’s the system that I have doubts about.

To me it is as if the establishment exists in a sort of parallel – and exalted – universe. It floats above us and largely oblivious to us until we produce a creature of excellence. Then that person is plucked out, given their entry ticket, anointed and re-christened.

The dusty old establishment has revived itself with fresh blood. New talent has brought kudos. The survival of the "club" is ensured. It needs stars like Murray for its continued existence.

The question is: does he need it? I think not.

What can any gong add to Murray’s success? It has been won on merit. Shouldn’t that be the greatest plaudit in a modern Great Britain in a society that by now should believe that achievement is sufficient reward for hard work and talent?

What a curious knee-jerk reaction Britain still has: wanting to ennoble those who lives have been founded on application and merit.

We have watched Murray since he was a grumpy teenager. We saw how he struggled to improve his physique and better his game. From our ringside seats we have witnessed his journey to personal success. It is a tribute to his sense of patriotism and team spirit that he also put his heart and soul into bringing home this trophy.

Isn’t achieving that goal all the validation necessary?

It surely would be in other cultures but not here. Here we dust out the antiquated honours system. We take the most excellent amongst us in every sphere and present them at one of two palaces, Buckingham or Holyroodhouse. There, with much ceremony, they receive a gong.

One of Andy Murray’s charms is the way in which he and his family have remained true to their community. They are from Dunblane and also of it. His grandparents live there. He came home to marry. He has bought and is reviving a local hotel that will bring employment.

His mother, despite the success of both her sons, remains grounded. Her focus is on bringing the opportunity to play tennis to other youngsters in Scotland.

In other words, this is a family that remains very much part of the people.

A knighthood would make Murray Sir Andy. If it doesn’t change him, won’t it change how we see him?

Even if it must happen one day, surely at 28 it’s too soon.

The Herald:

At the age of 32, Sir Chris Hoy (above) was young when he was honoured but at least he was retiring from competitive cycling. Sir Bradley Wiggins was in also his early 30s when his knighthood followed success in the Tour de France and the Olympics.

In the summer there were calls for a knighthood for Chris Froome. As the first Briton to win the 2,000 mile cycling race twice, MPs called for him to be admitted to the "cycling aristocracy".

Traditionally it would have been unthinkable to award knighthoods to those still active in their field.

It’s true that, after England’s success in the 1966 World Cup, all the players in the winning team were awarded an MBE or OBE. But it wasn’t until a year later that their manager Alf Ramsay was knighted.

Footballer Bobby Charlton was knighted in 1994, two decades after he retired as a professional footballer. Cricketer Ian Botham waited 15 years after the end of his cricketing career.

The wait meant that knighthoods were seen to be a bit like a gold clock. They marked achievement but something broader too; a life well-lived. Botham, for example, wasn’t just a great cricketer. He also walked and worked to raise funds for charity.

To grant knighthoods to young men and women carries a risk. Murray’s character suggests that he would be a safe bet – though just days ago he was pulled up for swearing on court. But who could have predicted (Sir) Fred Goodwin’s fall from grace?

There is something not quite right about a young man like Murray moving round the international circuit as Sir Andy – or will that be Andrew? It feels a tad Ruritanian: fusty, out of keeping with his place in a sport that resembles an international gladiatorial contest that ceaselessly challenges champions to prove they remain the best.

Tennis at present is about stretching to new feats of skill and strength. Murray’s professional world is the epitome of a meritocracy.

For him, as he has said, country is important. We know he takes both pride and pleasure in representing Great Britain. He rightly deems it an honour to play for Team GB. His emotion at winning the Davis Cup shows his sincerity. "I play some of my best tennis when I’m playing for my country," he said. To win the Olympic gold medal and now the Davis Cup is to have made Great Britain a player again in world tennis. It has earned him a place in the history books and a place in people’s hearts. He is already their knight in shining armour: no "Sir" is necessary.