As Oscar Wilde’s axiom reminds us, “There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.” In tennis, however, 2025 proved that scrutiny often follows failure. From umpiring errors and ELC breakdowns to ineffective video reviews and passive supervision, controversies piled up. With the calendar turning toward 2026, it is time to rewind and revisit the five biggest chair umpire and VAR blunders of the year.

‘Extraordinary Mistake’ mars Hellenic Championships

This year’s Hellenic Championship marked a fresh start on the ATP calendar. The ATP 250 event replaced the Belgrade Open and was staged in Athens. Matches were played on indoor hard courts at the OAKA Basketball Arena, a venue used during the 2004 Olympics.

The tournament made headlines early, but not for the right reasons. In the opening round, an umpiring error shocked players, commentators, and fans. The mistake was quickly described as “extraordinary” due to how obvious it appeared on replay.

Miomir Kecmanovic defeated Kamil Majchrzak 7-6, 7-6 to reach the R16. However, the result was overshadowed by one baffling moment. A crucial point was awarded to the wrong player in the first set.

Top Stories

Naomi Osaka Reveals How Daughter Influenced Her First Loss of 2026

Iga Swiatek Blatantly Slams Aryna Sabalenka and Nick Kyrgios’ Battle of Sexes

Coco Gauff Calls Out American Fans Amid United Cup Swing: “The Worst”

40-Year-Old Stan Wawrinka Ties Rafael Nadal’s Record After 3-Hour Battle at United Cup

Australian United Cup Hit by Late Scare as Top Player Falls Ill on Eve of Event

With Kecmanovic leading 6-5 and serving, he fell behind 30-40. Majchrzak returned serve cleanly. Kecmanovic then hit a backhand that landed well outside the tramlines.

Despite the clear error, the point was given to Kecmanovic. Hawk-Eye failed to register the ball as out. The chair umpire stayed silent and allowed play to continue without interruption.

Even more surprising was Majchrzak’s reaction. He barely protested the decision. He was denied a break of serve but raised no serious objection, leaving viewers confused and commentators stunned.

Although the moment did not change the match outcome, it drew widespread attention. Majchrzak still broke serve later in the game. Yet the incident remained one of the strangest scenes of the season.

Tennis blogger Ricky Damon reacted strongly online. “One of the most bizarre things I have seen in a while,” he said. “Kecmanovic hits a shot 3 feet out, gets awarded the point, Majchrzak barely argues at all, announcers say that Kec lost the game and then make no mention at all that the game inexplicably continues.” The episode underlined that tennis still has flaws to fix.

Wimbledon’s Line-Calling Breakdown

Another major controversy unfolded at the grass-court Grand Slam this year. Wimbledon found itself under scrutiny after a failure in its electronic line-calling system. The incident raised fresh concerns about technology replacing human judgment.

The problem occurred during a fourth-round match on Centre Court. Britain’s Sonay Kartal was facing Russia’s Anastasia Pavlyuchenkova. An operator error accidentally deactivated the ball-tracking system for one game.

At 4-4, with a game point against her, Kartal hit a backhand that landed well long. However, the line-calling system did not register the error. Instead, it issued two automated calls of “stop,” leaving players and officials uncertain.

Chair umpire Nico Helwerth chose to replay the point. Kartal went on to win it. Pavlyuchenkova strongly disagreed with the decision and questioned why the umpire did not overrule and call the ball out.

Television replays clearly showed the ball was out. Pavlyuchenkova later argued that tennis needs a video review system like football. She believed such a tool would have allowed the correct decision to be made.

Following the match, Wimbledon responded with changes. “Following our review, we have now removed the ability for Hawk-Eye operators to manually deactivate the ball tracking,” the All England Lawn Tennis Club said in a statement. “While the source of the issue was human error, this error cannot now be repeated due to the system changes we have made.”

The AELTC also defended the umpire. It said Helwerth had “followed the established process.” However, officials confirmed that video reviews would be “among the matters considered” after the Championships.

Pavlyuchenkova reiterated her stance later. She said tennis should adopt video checks “so that we can review the point”. “On such a big event I think it is necessary, since this isn’t the first time this has happened.” 

The episode added to the growing debate as elite tournaments increasingly rely on electronic line-calling systems.

Chair Umpire error mars Alcaraz-Draper match at Indian Wells

Carlos Alcaraz and Jack Draper met for the fifth time in their careers at the 2025 BNP Paribas Open. The match took place in the semifinals at Indian Wells. Both players arrived in strong form and had not dropped a set in earlier rounds.

Despite expectations of a tight battle, the match unfolded strangely. Neither player performed at their best at the same time. The contest ended with a bizarre scoreline of 6-1, 0-6, 6-4 in Draper’s favor.

The deciding set began calmly. Both Alcaraz and Draper held their opening service games. The momentum shifted early, however, when controversy emerged in the third game of the final set.

At 1-1, 15-15 on Alcaraz’s serve, chair umpire Mohamed Lahyani stopped a rally mid-point. He ruled that Draper had failed to reach the ball before a second bounce after Alcaraz played a drop shot.

The situation quickly escalated. Draper immediately requested a VAR review. The replay showed he had reached the ball in time. Lahyani overturned his original call and ordered the point to be replayed.

Draper disagreed again. He argued that he should have been awarded the point outright. He believed Alcaraz had already made an error while returning the shot.

Alcaraz later explained his confusion. “I didn’t see if it was one bounce or two bounces at the beginning. So I was just waiting for the review,” he said. “With the second review, it was in the middle of the point or after I hit it, I wasn’t sure enough. I didn’t hear (the umpire) while I was hitting the ball, but I wasn’t sure enough to say something.”

After another VAR review, Lahyani changed the decision once more. This time, he awarded the point to Draper. The ruling calmed the dispute but left both players visibly frustrated.

Draper went on to break the two-time champion in that game. He broke again later but initially failed to close the match. He succeeded on his second attempt. Still, the early-season controversy left fans questioning officiating standards.

Umpire issues code violation to Daniil Medvedev

A controversial moment unfolded at this year’s China Open involving Daniil Medvedev. The incident occurred during his semifinal match against Learner Tien. Medvedev was clearly struggling physically as the match progressed.

The Russian star was suffering from severe cramps. He appeared close to retiring from the match. At that point, chair umpire Adel Nour stepped in and questioned Medvedev’s effort on court.

Nour accused the former US Open champion of not giving his best effort. He then issued Medvedev a code violation. The decision immediately sparked anger from the Russian.

Medvedev reacted strongly and called for the supervisor. Roland Herfel was summoned to the court as tensions rose. The exchange quickly became heated and public.

“You prefer that I retire?” Medvedev said. “Say to the guys and the cameras that you prefer I retire. I’m giving my best effort so why the hell are you saying I’m not giving my best effort. Who are you to decide for me? Who are you? What’s your name?”

The umpire’s intervention appeared harsh to many observers. Medvedev was clearly hoping to continue for a few more points. He seemed to believe the cramps might ease if he pushed through.

Despite his efforts, Medvedev could not continue. He was forced to retire from the match. The score stood at 5-7, 7-5, 4-0 in the deciding set.

Commentators quickly weighed in on the situation. Former Andy Murray coach Miles MacLagan questioned the call. “What that for best effort,” he asked. “I think the umpire has made a mistake there. His best efforts are what they are right now.”

The incident sparked debate among fans and analysts. Many felt the decision was unnecessary and poorly timed. Coming late in the ATP season, the controversy added to growing frustration around officiating standards.

Call confusion during Zverev-Paul showdown

The incident occurred at this year’s Australian Open during a high-stakes quarter-final. Alexander Zverev faced Tommy Paul in a demanding four-set battle. Zverev eventually won 7-6, 7-6, 2-6, 6-1 to reach the semi-finals.

The victory marked Zverev’s third Australian Open semi-final in five years. However, the match was not without controversy. A missed call in the opening-set tiebreak drew immediate attention.

During the tiebreak, a clear let on Paul’s serve went uncalled. The chair umpire failed to stop play. The point was awarded to Zverev, effectively handing him the set.

Paul was visibly frustrated. He questioned how the umpire did not hear the ball clip the net. The moment left him stunned, especially given its importance in the tiebreak.

After the match, Paul revealed his surprise. He said he did not realize the tournament was not using automatic ‘let’ technology. The lack of electronic assistance added to his frustration.

His complaint was not an isolated one. Earlier in the tournament, New Zealand doubles player Erin Routliffe had also questioned why the technology was missing during her match.

Zverev later acknowledged the mistake. “To be honest, the point that Tommy complained about, it was an incredibly clear ‘let’,” he said. “I didn’t know what to do in that situation… because if there’s no call and I stop playing then it’s a loss of point for me. In that situation, there’s nothing much you can do but continue playing.”

Despite the error, Paul remained measured. He admitted the incident did not decide the match outcome. 

And with these moments now widely discussed, which officiating incident from 2025 stands out most to you? Share your thoughts below.