Damir Dzumhur survived a marathon quarter-final against Matteo Arnaldi at the ATP 250 event in Umag, winning 7-6 (5), 6-7 (4), 7-6 (4) after three hours and 42 minutes.
The Bosnian, ranked 108th in the world, overcame the world No. 34 in a match decided by three tie-breaks. However, the main talking point came during the opening set, when Dzumhur fiercely disputed a decision made by the electronic line-calling system.
Electronic system rules serve in
Arnaldi was trailing 4-1 in the first-set tie-break when his first serve was called in, giving the Italian an ace.
Dzumhur immediately protested, pointing towards a visible mark on the clay that he believed showed the ball had landed outside the service box. Chair umpire John Blom checked the decision but was not permitted to replace the electronic call with his own reading of the mark.
Read also: Why the Dennis Hildeby trade has reopened an old Maple Leafs wound
“Ladies and gentlemen, after verification, the system has confirmed that the ball was good,” Blom announced, according to L’Équipe.
The score moved to 4-2, but Dzumhur refused to accept the ruling.
‘Look me in the eyes’
Dzumhur repeatedly insisted that the mark proved Arnaldi’s serve had been out.
“Everyone can see that the ball is out. Why can’t you change the decision?” he asked.
Read also: Trump confirmed for World Cup final as White House hails ‘most successful’ tournament
The confrontation became increasingly heated as Dzumhur approached Blom.
“I’m looking you in the eyes. Look me in the eyes. You know the ball is out,” he said. “Answer my question: Is the ball out or not?”
Blom declined to give his personal opinion, explaining that he could only follow the verification procedure. Dzumhur then responded: “If you are an honest person, is it in or not? Be honest for once in your life.”
Play was delayed for more than three minutes before the tie-break resumed. Dzumhur recovered his composure and won it 7-5 to take the opening set.
Read also: ‘Come on Nick, make it happen’: Tom Brady calls for WWE match
No proof that system failed
Television pictures of the mark on the clay raised doubts about the electronic ruling, but they did not conclusively establish that the system had tracked the wrong impact point.
The incident involved electronic line calling and a Hawk-Eye replay. It should not simply be described as a confirmed Hawk-Eye error because neither the ATP nor the tournament has announced that the technology malfunctioned.
Electronic line calling is now used across ATP Tour events, including clay-court tournaments. Unlike under the previous system, the chair umpire generally does not climb down to inspect marks and overturn electronic decisions.
That difference is particularly controversial on clay, where ball marks remain visible and can appear to contradict the technology.
Read also: FIFA weighs action against Argentina over Falklands banner
Three tie-breaks decide marathon contest
The disputed call did not prevent Dzumhur from taking the first set, despite Arnaldi having served for it twice.
Arnaldi responded in the second set and remained alive when Dzumhur moved within two points of victory at 5-3 and 30-30. The Italian eventually won the second tie-break 7-4 to force a decider.
Neither player could establish a decisive advantage in the third set, sending the match into a final tie-break. Dzumhur won it 7-4 to reach his first ATP Tour semi-final of the season.
According to the ATP Tour, Dzumhur saved eight of the 11 break points he faced during one of the year’s longest best-of-three matches.
Read also: Pat Riley fuels LeBron rumours as Giannis begins Miami chapter
‘This is why we love the sport’
Dzumhur struck a calmer tone after securing the victory and focused on the quality of the contest rather than the disputed decision.
“Matches like this are why we love the sport,” he said on court. “It was perhaps a little too long, but I think it was a great fight.”
He will face Alex Molcan in the semi-final after the Slovakian recovered to defeat second seed Alejandro Davidovich Fokina.
For Dzumhur, the victory was a display of endurance and composure. For the ATP, the first-set controversy provides another reminder that electronic line calling on clay remains capable of producing arguments, even when the technology insists there is no doubt.
