The quarterfinal clash between the defending champion Jack Draper and Daniil Medvedev is still making headlines, even two days after the Russian’s win. The controversial video review call during the second set by the two-time runner-up has the entire tennis world talking, with many questioning.
Whether it was the right call by the chair umpire, and whether the Russian player used the rule to his own benefit after losing the point.
Brad Gilbert Breaks Down ATP Rule Behind Daniil Medvedev’s VAR Controversy
Amid the debate, Coco Gauff’s former coach, Brad Gilbert, has stepped up to explain why Medvedev’s video review call was correct and falls under the ATP rulebook.
Medvedev delivered one of the best performances of his season so far against Draper, stunning the Brit in the first set with a 6-1 score. In the second set, as Draper was trying to mount a comeback with the score tied at 5-5 and Medvedev leading 0-15, the World No. 11 called for a video review of a potential hindrance by the Brit.
MORE: Jack Draper’s Coach Has a Clear Opinion on Daniil Medvedev’s Controversial Incident at Indian Wells
The incident raised eyebrows in the tennis community, as Medvedev called for a review after losing the rally rather than challenging immediately after Draper’s alleged hindrance. The Brit also argued that what he did wasn’t enough to distract his opponent and that the Russian kept playing after it.
Although the timing of Medvedev’s VAR challenge was debatable, the chair umpire reviewed it. She concluded that it was a case of hindrance, awarding the point to Medvedev. He then went on to win the set 7-5, ending Draper’s comeback campaign and title defense hopes.
A fan, confused by the Russian’s request for a review “7 shots after the incident,” went to X to get an explanation from two of the best technical minds in tennis: Patrick McEnroe and Coco Gauff’s former coach, Brad Gilbert. The latter noticed the question and explained why it fell under ATP regulations. He also made it clear that he was unhappy about the rule.
“to long explain but it was changed 2 years they can now call for after the point is over no matter how long the point goes, i don’t like that rule change.”
As explained by Gilbert, the updates in the 2024 ATP Rulebook now state: “In order to challenge, a player must show an immediate interest in making a challenge and must do it in a timely manner. The key to the policy is ‘immediate interest.’ The player must also make his/her intention to challenge known to the Chair Umpire either verbally or visually using his racquet or finger.”
Adding to this, the video review procedures for the Chair Umpires, specifically for the Indian Wells state that:
“A player may request a Video Review (VR) in the following situations:
• After a point-ending shot.
• If a player immediately stops play.
• For situations or decisions that occurred during a rally (play continued), provided the request has to be made immediately after the rally is over. This provision applies only to situations where VR would determine the winner of the point.”
Even though it might seem objectionable, Medvedev’s actions fall within the ATP’s guidelines specified for the BNP Paribas Open; he did not misuse any rule to turn the point in his favor, relying completely on the chair umpire’s judgment on the incident.
Just like Gilbert’s objection to the rule change, former Australian pro John Millman made his feelings known on the topic, writing on X, “The Video Review has resulted in way too many hindrance calls.. ATP/WTA have to clean it up.”
MORE: Insider Discloses Strategy for Daniil Medvedev To Have a Shot Against Carlos Alcaraz at Indian Wells
The video review was a tool added to the ATP Masters events to help Chair Umpires and players review any incident they feel didn’t fall under the regulations, but the increasing number of such cases is raising more fingers against it, and it would be interesting to see if the ATP or WTA makes any changes to it.
Apart from the controversial debates, Medvedev is set to face the World No. 1 Carlos Alcaraz, who defeated him twice at the same venue in 2023 and 2024, to lift the title. The Russian has only a 18% chance against the Spaniard, according to PFSN’s exclusive interactive simulator.
