Law of Tennis: The Rule of Hindering

Draper momentarily widened his arms to signal that he believed a ball was out at 5-5 and 0-15 in the second set, but the comeback continued for a few more shots before Medvedev made a mistake. The point was contested by Medvedev. Umpire Tourte told Draper, "You did something different in the rally than you would normally do," after a video assessment determined that the gesture was a purposeful obstruction. Draper contended that since there were few rallies following the arm gesture, Medvedev was not disturbed.  Medvedev, who lost the point by hitting the ball in the net, was granted the point. Draper lost his serve game and the match as a result. 

The arm gesture was very minimal and at the beginning of the point, and the rally continued until finally Medvedev lost the point with the ball in the net. However, Medvedev knows the rule very well and noticed the minimum violation during the point. Even though it did not disturb him at all, he decided to challenge and leave it to the umpire to decide.

Hindrance is any action that distracts your opponent while they are playing the ball. This can be noise (talking, shouting), movement (waving arms, dropping something), or accidental or intentional distraction. This can be at any point of the rally (beginning of the rally or at the finish of the point).  This can be intentional hindrance; This is when a player deliberately distracts the opponent, such as shouting during the opponent’s shot, saying “out!” before the ball lands, or making a gesture noise on purpose. The result is losing the point. The unintentional hindrance is defined as an accident lead to the distraction, such as a racquet slipping out of your hand, a ball falling out of your pocket, or you losing balance and making noise. The point is then replayed.

Jack Draper's hindrance is clear as an action. It is not clear whether it should be considered intentional. Jack Draper should have argued that the action was not intentional, and the point should have been replayed instead of awarding it to Medvedev. The argument that the hand gesture affected Medvedev is a weak argument. Since Medvedev initiated the challenge, it implies that he was affected. He noticed the hand gesture when the umpire missed it. The argument that Medvedev's continuation of the rally means he is not affected goes against the rule itself, which defines hindering as any action at any moment during the point.  Medvedev admitted feeling conflicted about the decision but justified it by saying, "I let the referee decide". He took advantage of the vagueness of the rule and won the point he lost. Jim Courier said that you probably should hire Daniel Medvedev if you need a defense lawyer. Draper described the call as "pretty harsh," but shook hands with both the umpire and Daniel.