“This is ridiculous. Clear double bounce” wrote renowned journalist Jose Morgado on X during the controversial moment involving Iga Swiatek in her QF match against Emma Navarro. On Wednesday, the former World No.1 was playing against the American at the Rod Laver Arena when a debatable situation occurred in the second set with the Pole leading 3-2. Navarro hit a drop shot and the ball went over the net. It then bounced twice before Swiatek hit it with her racket. To everyone’s surprise, however, the chair umpire didn’t term it a double bounce. But what’s a double bounce and why it has become a major problem in tennis lately?

A double bounce occurs when a player fails to hit the ball before it bounces on the court twice. The ball needs to be hit after the first bounce. If it ends up bouncing the second time, it’s called a double bounce, which simply means that the player loses the point if they do not return the ball in play before it bounces twice.

So what’s the big deal and why it’s becoming a troubling issue? It appears that the way the video review rule has been implemented is the reason why it’s not turning out helpful for players – in this case Navarro. But how?

Per the rules, Navarro should have simply discontinued playing if she believed the Pole hit the ball after it bounced twice. Since she didn’t stop, the chair umpire didn’t care enough to take a call for a video review. Had she stopped and asked for a review, she would have got one. Speaking of the result in this QF battle, Swiatek cruised into the semis with a score line of 6-1, 6-2.

According to journalist James Grey of the iPaper, who reached out to Navarro after the match, she did, in fact, ask for a video review. “But because she had not stopped the point, she could not challenge the “not up” call,” wrote Grey on X on Wednesday. She also told him that the rules should be revised for video review. “She (Navarro) thinks the rules should change to allow players to challenge decisions at the end of the point,“ Grey reported.

When it comes to the video review system itself, even that’s not fully reliable. But how? Just try to recall what happened at the US Open last year in a women’s singles match.

When Anna Kalinskaya got eliminated due to VAR in the 2024 US Open

At the Flushing Meadows, in September 2024, Anna Kalinskaya was playing the Round of 32 against Brazil’s Beatriz Haddad Maia. In the first set, she was leading 2-0 when an unexpected incident occurred. She challenged a point against Maia, claiming a double bounce. That time, the chair umpire Miriam Bley used a tablet to review the shot hit by Maia. So what was her judgment?

Instead of awarding a break point in favor of Kalinskaya, the chair umpire awarded it to the Brazilian. Per the umpire, there was no double bounce and Maia’s shot was valid. That time, journalist Jose Morgado wrote on X in frustration, “One of the most embarrassing moments of this #USOpen. If it’s for this… then don’t use VAR at all.” According to him, the call taken by the umpire even after using VAR was incorrect. To add to Kalinskaya’s dismay, Maia eventually won the match and advanced into the Round of 16 at the US Open.

Former ATP pro-Andy Roddick said last year, “It shouldn’t be on the player to have to do the umpire’s job while also trying to navigate a match. It’s not something you should have to worry about.” Clearly, it’s exactly what happened in Kalinskaya’s case. Due to a wrong decision from the umpire, she couldn’t keep her focus on the match and lost 3-6, 1-6.

What are your thoughts on the match between Iga Swiatek and Emma Navarro? Do you think Navarro should have stopped the play for a video review after a double bounce? Or do you believe the rule for the review should change going forward? Let us know in the comments below.