LONDON -- Milos Raonic and Frank Dancevic threw a one-two winning punch for Canada on Tuesday as the eighth seed and the lucky loser combined for a pair of first-round Wimbledon victories within minutes of each other. Raonic, from Thornhill, Ont., fired 30 aces -- compared to two for his opponent -- in a comfortable 6-2, 6-4, 6-4 win over Australias Matthew Ebden that took little more than 90 minutes. It was a two-hour victory for the 107th-ranked Dancevic, who won his first Wimbledon match since 2011 as he upset 29th-seeded Croatian Ivo Karlovic 6-4, 7-6(5), 7-6(4). Raonic, who lost his only grass tuneup match this month at Halle, Germany, is into the Wimbledon second round for the fourth consecutive year, but hopes to go farther after never winning two matches in a row at the event. The 23-year-old was never in trouble from Ebden, with the Canadian claiming the first two sets and breaking for a lead in the third. Raonic sent over a service winner for three match points, but needed only one as he put a volley into the far corner out of Ebdens reach. "I feel really good about this win, I played a lot better than I expected to," said Raonic. "I showed that I can adjust my game on this surface," said the right-hander with a 10-10 career record on grass. "I did what was necessary to win. I think my Roland Garros quarter-final gave me confidence and showed me that I know what I need to do to win in these situations and eventually get into the second week of slams." Dancevic, a 29-year-old from Niagara Falls, Ont. has played in the main draw at the All England Club seven times and earned his third Wimbledon win as he overcame 32 Karlovic aces. Dancevic never faced a break point and broke the Croatian once. Dancevic advanced with 47 winners and just four unforced errors. "I had to serve really well, it was my main focus," said Dancevic. "But returning was a lottery, I was just guessing. "From the first point I had to pick sides. I returned amazing, From the first ten serves in a row I got ten returns back. It was basically a guessing game, when I got into the point, I had the advantage. It came down to a coin toss, I returned a little bit better on the key points." He entered the field as a lucky loser from qualifying round and won his first match at the ATP level since the U.S. open fist round over Robin Haase last August. "It feels great, I havent been on this grass while," Dancevic said. "I felt motivated by the whole atmosphere and being given a chance to be alive here at Winmbledon. I tried to play relaxed and go for my shots. "Im really, really happy I got through." In womens action Swiss Timea Bacsinszky beat Torontos Sharon Fichman 6-1, 6-3, with the 85th-ranked Canadian admitting she was outplayed. "Im starting to like the grass," said the 23-year-old who was making her main draw debut at the All England Club. "Unfortunately I didnt plays as well as I could have. "It didnt help that my opponent was playing very well, Its disappointing. I felt like I didnt bring a good enough level for most of the match and she did. It was pretty straightforward -- she played well and went for it, I tried and it just didnt work for me today." Womens 13th seed Eugenie Bouchard of Westmount, Que., faced veteran Daniela Hantuchova later. Nike Free Wholesale Australia . - Zac Leslie scored two goals and assisted on two more, and Justin Nichols made 34 saves as the Guelph Storm blanked the Kitchener Rangers 6-0 in Ontario Hockey League action on Sunday. Nike Free Sale Australia . He still wanted out. "It just seemed like the direction they were going didnt fit what I thought my career was going to be," Kesler said. "At the end of the day I want to win a championship and I want to win it now, and four years is a little too long for me. http://www.nikefreeaustralia.com/ . PETERSBURG, Fla. Nike Free Clearance Australia .Fiji striker Roy Krishna scored in the 14th minute to give Wellington its fourth win, along with a draw, from its past five matches, putting the Phoenix fourth but only a point behind third-placed Adelaide. Nike Free Cheap Online . The 33-year-old Spaniard, who held the lead since the second round, turned in a solid final round that featured six birdies and two bogeys to finish on 22-under 266. The victory is Garcias first this year with his last win coming at the Johor Open, an Asian Tour event in Malaysia last December.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hi Kerry, I am sure you will get a ton of emails on this one. Last night, the Kings went up 2-1 on the Sharks around eight minutes remaining. My question with this goal - Is Justin Williams allowed to hit the goalie with his stick? Cant this be considered goalie interference? I am a Ducks fan waiting to see my next opponent. I really think the Sharks were cheated here. The NHL says this type of play is non-reviewable. This excuse just seems like an easy way out from a judgment call. Thanks,Jake Kevari Jake: The L.A. Kings greasy second goal should have been disallowed by referee Chris Lee as per rule 69.6 when Justin Williams used his stick to push Alex Stalock, set in a statuesque pose, that resulted in both the puck and the toe of Stalocks left skate to cross the goal line into the net. It appeared that the referee was purely focused on the puck that became partially visible under the left skate of Alex Stalock after the goalie made the initial save. If referee Lee taken had taken into account the action of Justin Williams pushing Stalock from the front of the goal crease with his hockey stick or subsequently had the opportunity to utilize video review I would hope that a different decision on the play would have been rendered. Many fans who follow me on twitter @kfraserthecall (Kings Fans perhaps?) could not comprehend that the action of Justin Williams pushing Alex Stalock with his stick became a goalie interference violation. Language contained in Rule 69 defines contact, whether incidental or otherwise, to mean any contact that is made between or among a goalkeeper and attacking player(s), whether by means of a stick or any part of the body. Some had even more difficulty accepting that Rule 69.6 applied on this play since Stalock was not knocked completely into the back of the net. Rule 69.6 reads; "In the event that a goalkeeper has been pushed into the net together with the puck by an attacking player after making a stop, the goal will be disallowed." To simplify this play, Alex Stalock made an initial save on his knees wheen Robin Regehr shot the puck from the top left side faceoff circle.dddddddddddd Stalocks lower body remained stationary inside the top right side of his goal crease after the puck was gobbled up in his pads. Referee Chris Lee attacked the net straddling the goal line with the whistle in a ready position near his mouth demonstrating some intent to blow the whistle and kill the play; that is until he saw the puck peek out from under Stalocks left skate blade and pad. The refs body posture and head position indicates that he was intently focused on the puck from this moment forward. Freeze frame that visual picture in your mind for a second! If in this moment, Justin Williams dove or crashed into Alex Stalock resulting in the puck entering the net, I would think most everyone would agree that "goalie interference" had been committed and the referee should disallow the goal. The exact same illegal outcome was achieved when Justin Williams used his hockey stick to push Stalock within his goal crease and off his set-stationary position which caused both the puck and the goalies left skate to cross the goal line and enter the net as demonstrated by the overhead net-cam shot. To disallow the goal under Rule 69.6 would be purely academic at this point had the referee been focused more on the action taking place at the front of the net as opposed to the puck. Ideally, the whistle (or intent to blow the whistle) should have been exercised once Justin Williams began pushing Alex Stalock with his stick, if not before! Jake, video review can only be utilized in eight specific situations as listed in Rule 38.4. At the present time interference on the goalkeeper is not one of them. I have continually stated that referees must have the ability to review their initial decision whenever contact with the goalkeeper is in question. This should be initiated by the officials on the ice, the video goal judge or through a coachs challenge. However the review is initiated, I strongly recommend that a referee(s) makes the final call after personally reviewing the play in question on a monitor in the timekeepers box. Look for expanded use of video review in some form next season. We can only hope they get it right. China NFL JerseysCheap Nike NFL JerseysNFL Jerseys CheapWholesale NFL JerseysCheap Basketball Jerseys OnlineStitched Hockey JerseysWholesale Baseball JerseysFootball Jerseys OutletCollege Jerseys For SaleCheap MLB JerseysWholesale Soccer JerseysWholesale Jerseys For SaleWholesale NFL Jerseys ' ' '