Should Wimbledon introduce ‘lucky losers’ in light of Kyrgios’ final freebie?

The Nadal vs Fritz quarter-final once again reminded us how far to its limits the ageless Spaniard has always been willing to push his body in his unquenchable quest for glory. 

Nadal needed medical attention as early as in the 2nd set of the QF, and his serves were compromised thereafter as he seemed to be in visible discomfort—even his family was seen visibly gesticulating him to withdraw midway through the game. Yet, he somehow fought the young American to the end and bested him in a 5-setter to set up a mouthwatering semi-final with the game’s favourite bad-boy Nick Kyrgios.

Also read: Nick Kyrgios’ road to the Wimbledon 2022 final

But yesterday Nadal announced that the abdominal tear he sustained during the game against Fritz was too serious for him to continue and he regrettably had to withdraw from the tournament. This led to a debate on whether tennis should introduce the lucky-loser system, where the player who was beaten by the retiree, in this case, Fritz, takes his place in the draw instead. 

This is because, with Nadal’s retirement yesterday, Kyrgios will now have a walkover to the final without having to earn his ticket for the showpiece event plus the advantage of three days to rest and condition himself for the big day. This will be in contrast to his final opponent Novak Djokovic who fought his way to a 4-set semi-final victory over local lad Cameron Norrie. At the same time, fans both at Wimbledon and all over the world have been robbed of the chance to savour a mouthwatering semi-final clash, and just see more of the controversial Kyrgios, who they can’t seem to get enough of as it is!

Also read: Novak Djokovic’s road to the Wimbledon 2022 final

Kyrgios is the sole beneficiary in this situation, and so in the hope of making things even, reputed sports journalist Christopher Clarey took to Twitter to declare his support for the ‘lucky loser’ system to be applied here. He said: 

“It happens so rarely, but I still think it’s worth exploring. When a player withdraws this late in a Grand Slam or before a major tour final, the beaten player should be able to take the slot. In this case, Fritz would play Kyrgios as a “lucky loser”.

The show must go on”

It should be noted that tennis already has this system in place for qualifiers, where any player who is in the main draw for the tournament and withdraws before their first-round match is replaced by a higher-ranked player who lost in the final round of qualifying.

Also read: Nick Kyrgios calls out unsupportive Aussie tennis legends ahead of Wimbledon final

However, not everyone was on board with Clarey’s opinion. The 2003 US Open champion Andy Roddick was emphatic in his disagreement, saying that one shouldn’t be able to lose a semi-final and go on to win a Grand Slam, considering it fundamentally wrong for the integrity of the sport. And Roddick has a point. One of the charms of a Grand Slam is its knockout format, where you’re in a two-week long game of do-or-die. Having a player who has already lost a game in the tournament then go on to win it would definitely leave a substantial section of the fans questioning the authenticity of the Grand Slam victory.

Also read: Wimbledon 2022: Djokovic expects ‘a lot of fireworks’ in final vs Kyrgios

As for Fritz, the potential beneficiary had this rule been in place, his thoughts on this matter were quite clear when this was suggested to him on a post on Instagram. “Nah, not looking for handouts, if I couldn’t beat him then I don’t deserve to be in semis…simple as that,” replied the American on IG, and it is hard to argue with that school of thought either!