A contentious moment unfolded during Alexander Zverev’s recent match at the Madrid Open, centering around a disputed line call that led to a heated exchange with the chair umpire and subsequent clarification from the German player. The incident, which occurred during his encounter with Spain’s Alejandro Davidovich Fokina, has ignited discussions about the accuracy of electronic line calling on clay courts and the protocol for handling disagreements.
The flashpoint of the controversy arose when Zverev vehemently disagreed with a call that deemed his opponent’s shot to have landed in. Believing the ball was clearly out, the world number two approached chair umpire Mohamed Lahyani, insisting on a review of the mark on the clay. “There’s a mistake in the system. There is a malfunction in the system,” Zverev was heard saying, expressing his conviction that the electronic Hawk-Eye system had erred.
However, Lahyani stood firm, explaining that the electronic review indicated the ball had indeed touched the line by a mere millimeter. In clay court tournaments, a long-standing tradition has allowed umpires to descend from their chair to inspect the mark left by the ball when a call is contested. This visual verification has often been seen as a crucial aspect of ensuring accuracy on the surface, where ball marks are visible.
Despite Zverev’s repeated pleas for the umpire to examine the mark – “Look at this mark. Please just come down, look at it. Don’t overrule it, please. Just come down, please. Just for me” – Lahyani explained that the implementation of the automated line-calling system meant he was no longer permitted to do so. “We are not allowed, Alexander,” the umpire stated, emphasizing that the system’s decision was final and applied equally to both players. “The system gave a decision. It’s the same for both of you. You have to accept it.”
Frustrated by the inability to have the call visually verified, Zverev took an unprecedented step. Defying Lahyani’s repeated requests to desist – “Please don’t do it” – the German retrieved his phone from his bag and proceeded to take a photograph of the ball mark on the clay. This action, a clear breach of ATP rules prohibiting the use of mobile phones during official play, resulted in Lahyani issuing Zverev a code violation for unsportsmanlike conduct. “Unsportsmanlike conduct, warning, Mr. Zverev,” the umpire announced, further escalating the tension in the stadium.
The Madrid crowd, largely supportive of their home player Davidovich Fokina, reacted audibly to Zverev’s actions, expressing their disapproval with boos and whistles. The incident added a layer of drama to an already intense match, highlighting the ongoing debate surrounding the complete reliance on electronic line calling on clay, a surface where the visual evidence of a ball mark has traditionally held significant weight.
Following the match, Zverev sought to clarify his actions and his perspective on the controversial call. While acknowledging the code violation, he emphasized his belief in the potential fallibility of the electronic system, particularly on clay where the surface can shift and create ambiguous marks. He reportedly stated that his intention in taking the photograph was to have further evidence to present to the ATP, expressing his concern that the system might not have been functioning correctly during that particular point. “Then there’s a mistake in the system. Because this ball is like this [far] out. Look at it, please. The ball is like this [far] out. Then there is a malfunction,”1 Zverev had argued with the umpire during the match, underscoring his conviction that an error had occurred.
The incident involving Zverev is not an isolated one, as other players have also voiced concerns about the accuracy of electronic line calling on clay this season. The removal of line judges from all ATP and many WTA events on clay has led to situations where players feel unable to challenge calls effectively, despite visible marks on the court. World number one Aryna Sabalenka reportedly experienced a similar situation in Stuttgart, further fueling the discussion about the reliability of the technology on this surface.
The French Open remains a notable exception, as the tournament has announced its intention to continue using line judges for the upcoming event. This decision likely reflects the ongoing skepticism within the tennis community regarding the exclusive use of electronic line calling on clay.
Zverev’s actions in Madrid, while resulting in a code violation, have undoubtedly amplified the conversation about the role of technology in officiating tennis matches on clay. His attempt to provide visual evidence of his disagreement with the electronic call underscores the players’ perspective on the unique characteristics of the surface and the potential limitations of relying solely on automated systems. As the debate continues, the incident serves as a reminder of the delicate balance between technological advancements and the traditions of the game.
Leave a Reply