Players get frustrated.  Racquets get bounced.  Umpires are questioned or yelled at.  Umpires have even been threatened, as in the 2009 US Open women’s semifinals where Serena Williams infamously yelled at a lineswoman who had called foot fault on a second serve.  Even then, Serena lost due to a point penalty at break point caused by the double fault.  She got fined, but retained the points for reaching the semis.

David Nalbandian had just won a set in a tiebreak and was up a break in the second.  Cilic came storming back and broke Nalbandian in a game that the Argentine was obviously frustrated.  Nalbandian bounced his racquet on the soft grass surface.  When the break came, Nalbandian went to the sideline and kicked a wooden enclosure where the linesman sat.  Unfortunately, for both of them, the wood broke and hit the linesman on the shin causing visible bleeding.  Although the injury was not serious, ATP rules state that if a player, or judge, or audience member is hurt due to anger from a player, the player is defaulted.

With blood visible, it was clear there was an injury, and so the tournament proceeded to default Nalbandian.  The loss was more problematic than simply losing the match.  Nalbandian will also forfeit prize money and even ranking points for his actions.  He was later on fined the maximum value for his fit of anger (12,000 dollars so the reports say).

The Argentine was not thrilled with the ruling.  He felt other rules were not so strictly enforced (presumably talking about time spent between points).  Nalbandian didn’t expect the wood ad to splinter, nor for it to hit anyone or cause injury.  Indeed, had the injury befell himself, as it did when Mikhail Youzhny whacked himself in the head due to poor play and caused himself to bleed, there would have been no penalty, and if he happened to injure the linesman by chasing down a ball, then again, no problem.  So clearly intent has something to do with whether the penalty should have been applied or not.

In that respect, it’s unclear how it should have been handled.  Was Nalbandian angry?  Yes.  Did he injure someone?  Yes.  So by the letter of the “law”, he should have been penalized.  This was similar to an incident at Wimbledon in 1995 when Tim Henman, while playing doubles, hit a ball in anger.  The bad news was that it hit a ball girl in the head.  He was disqualified as well, though he made a good show of it by giving her flowers the next day.

Nalbandian, by contrast, grumbled about the outcome.  The audience was in a weird state, partly disagreeing with Nalbandian’s stance on what happened, and partly eager to see a conclusion to a match they paid money to watch.

As usual, it seems negative incidents are given bigger media scrutiny than positive ones.  Nalbandian had to be at the awards ceremony where he was asked about the situation, in a weird insult to injury moment.  And later on, he was charged for assault, though it’s not clear who brought the charges.  So Nalbandian’s troubles may not be over.

Meanwhile, Marin Cilic becomes the unwitting beneficiary winning a match that hung in the balance, and having to apologize for the match not completing.