Tennis experts say Nick Kyrgios should HAVE TO play a semifinal despite Rafael Nadal’s withdrawal

Wimbledon officials have been urged to investigate bringing in a ‘Lucky Loser’ rule after Australian firebrand Nick Kyrgios was ‘unfairly’ gifted a spot in the final when Rafael Nadal withdrew from their semi-final through injury.

Kyrgios and Nadal were set for another famous tennis showdown after the Australian beat him in the fourth round of his maiden Wimbledon back in 2014. 

But the 36-year-old was not able to back up from his tough quarter final win over American Taylor Fritz and retired hurt from the tournament.

That gave Kyrgios a walk over entry into the final against Novak Djokovic.  

By advancing to the final, No.40 ranked Kyrgios become the lowest ranked and first unseeded Wimbledon finalist since Mark Philippoussis in 2003.

He also became the lowest ranked grand slam finalist since Marcos Baghdatis at the 2006 Australian Open and the first unseeded finalist at a grand slam since Jo-Wilfried Tsonga at the 2008 Australian Open.

However, not everyone is celebrating Kyrgios’ feat, with New York Times reporter Christopher Clarey leading the calls for a Lucky Loser rule that would see Kyrgios play his semi-final against Fritz instead. 

‘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,’ Clarey tweeted.

Tennis broadcaster and journalist Simon Cambers said the Lucky Loser concept had merit.

Former tennis star turned broadcaster and pundit Pam Shriver tweeted: ‘I feel for Taylor Fritz. Should tennis re-examine the lucky loser rule’s scope?’

Commentator Nick McCarvel said the topic had been raised before but should come under heavy consideration given these circumstances.

‘What does Wimbledon gain with Nadal winning his QF and not being able to play the semi? Nothing. In fact the sport loses one of its marquee matches of the year.

‘If major events like the WTA and ATP Finals have tournament champions who have had losses in the event — with the round-robin format — why can’t that be acceptable in regular draws, including the Grand Slams?

‘It’s worth the discussion.’

 However some fans are against the concept, saying it would tarnish the credibility of the tournament.

This is why I consider the ATP finals an exhibition tournament. Wimbledon is real tennis you lose and go home,’ one fan tweeted.

‘You can literally lose twice at the finals and win the whole thing. So if they allow Fritz to be a lucky loser it would destroy the credibility of slams.’ 

Fritz himself has poured ice on the Lucky Loser suggestion, saying he ‘doesn’t deserve’ to be in the semi-finals

‘[I’m] not looking for handouts, if I couldn’t beat him [Nadal] then I don’t deserve to be in the semis…simple as that,’ he said.

Nadal is not the first big-name player to withdraw from a grand slam tournament and gift their opponent a walk over. 

One of the most recent – and memorable – examples was Novak Djokovic at the 2020 US Open when he struck a lineswoman in the throat with a ball and then got in his car and drove off while trailing 6-5 in the first set against Spaniard Pablo Carreno Busta.

Naomi Osaka withdrew from the 2021 French Open mid-tournament after refusing to speak to media while battling mental illness.

Then there is John McEnroe, who did not walk but was forcibly removed from the 1990 Australian Open. 

He was playing against Mikael Pernfors in the fourth round when he carpet bombed the crowd and officials with obscenities to become the first player tossed out of a grand slam for their behaviour.