Unexpectedly, what should have been a fierce matchup between Grand Slam champions turned out to be Swiatek's standout, and when the British girl Raducanu only got out of the court with one game, many Chinese fans thought that this was the most reasonable explanation for Zheng Qinwen's exit.

In the third round of the Australian Open women's singles, former world queen Swiatek and former US Open women's singles champion Raducanu met in a narrow way, and the outside world also had full expectations for the showdown between the Grand Slam champions. Judging from the pre-match predictions, fans generally believe that Swiatek still has a better chance of winning, after all, in the previous three meetings, Swiatek has maintained a winning record and has not lost a set! However, considering Swiatek's slippery form following the doping scandal and her performances at the Australian Open over the past two years, it is believed that it will not be too easy for Swiatek to win this match, after all, she will face Raducanu, who is a Grand Slam champion.

It is worth mentioning that before this match, the British girl was also full of confidence, she proudly said to reporters, "I know I can cause her problems and beat her." There's a reason why we're considered the best of our generation...... I know I just have to play at my level and the results will speak for themselves. ”

However, as the bout got underway, many fans realized something was wrong, and what was supposed to be a fierce matchup between the pinpoints and Maimang turned into Swiatek's solo show. In the first set, Swiatek got into the groove quicker, using her trademark forehand and fast-paced striking to take the lead quickly. However, in the face of her opponent's menacing attack, Raducanu was a little scrambling. Her lackluster serve and baseline touch saw her break back-to-back in the fourth and sixth games of the first set, and Swiatek took advantage of the momentum to win the first set 6-1. In the second set, Raducanu's form was still sluggish, and Swiatek did not give his opponent any chance, and cleared up directly to win 6-0. Throughout the match, Swiatek served well and attacked from the baseline, while Raducanu struggled due to injury.

It turned out that when Raducanu came to the Australian Open this year to prepare for the tournament, he was accidentally bitten by a local ant, but because he was worried that there might be banned substances in the medicine, which would lead to abnormal urine tests, Raducanu chose "natural recovery". However, in the process, the bite wound became more and more swollen, and there was pain in the future.

For such a game, some fans said that this game was a good name for Zheng Qinwen. They believe that, firstly, this game proves that for competitive sports, all players are not superhuman, everyone gets injured, everyone has fluctuations, and once you get injured, it is really difficult to play at your level; Second, even a Grand Slam champion like Raducanu is difficult to win a set from Swiatek, and Zheng Qinwen not only won the set from Swiatek, but also defeated her in the Olympics and on clay, which Swiatek is best at, which fully shows Zheng Qinwen's strength, so the Australian Open exit is just an accident.

In this regard, many netizens also agreed, and some fans commented, "If there is no black whistle of the referee, with Zheng Qinwen's strength, he can definitely go straight to the quarterfinals!" However, some netizens retorted, "Black whistle? Where is the black whistle? The timer has obviously timed out, who wronged her? And, straight to the quarterfinals? Even if he wins against Sigmund, don't forget, who won against Zheng Qinwen in Cincinnati last year? ”

In fact, after Zheng Qinwen was out, quite a lot of voices in China were alluding to Zheng Qinwen's "black whistle", and many people thought that the referee stole Zheng Qinwen's victory, and even Zheng Qinwen's die-hard fans called for the referee to be banned.

Looking back at Zheng Qinwen's two "service timeout" decisions, the first occurred in the ninth game of the first set, when Sigmund held a break point, and when Zheng Qinwen was about to serve, the referee gave the first "service timeout" warning, and Zheng Qinwen probably also knew that this point was crucial, so he calmed down and ignored the referee. The second penalty was awarded in the fourth game of the second set, when the score was 30-15, Zheng Qinwen was again given a "service timeout warning" by the referee, and according to the rules, Zheng Qinwen was also directly penalized for a one-serve opportunity. Zheng Qinwen then showed an expression of disbelief, and even more tears broke down after the argument.

There are two main reasons why netizens regard this penalty as a "black whistle": First, some fans believe that there is a "double standard for men and women" regarding the punishment. In men's matches, there are often "service timeout" penalties, but the referee will generally be lenient when a player points out that the spectator has affected him or that the caddie is too slow to deliver the ball. After all, a service timeout penalty may not be counted as a "service timeout" as long as the player enters the toss phase at the last second of the countdown. Second, many fans believe that this penalty falls into the category of "penalty or not", but the penalty obviously affects the player's mood and even directly changes the course of the game, so the penalty is quite controversial. Some fans used the 2018 US Open women's singles final as an example, thinking that Ramos was a little inconsiderate when he gave Serena Williams the first "off-court guidance" warning, after all, Serena Williams had already given a reason and said that he didn't see it, and it was difficult for Coach Serena Williams' gestures to be directly characterized as "off-court guidance" at that time, so this penalty was purely a case of whether it could be judged or not. In the same way, after Zheng Qinwen gave his reason for overtime, the handling of overtime penalties should actually be the same, after all, as the referee, all penalties should be conducive to a smoother and fairer game process, rather than dominating the process and ending of the game.

So, what do you guys think in the comment section? Did Zheng Qinwen encounter a "black whistle"? And can Raducanu's exit justify Zheng Qinwen's name? Leave your thoughts in the comment area!(Source: Tennis Home Author: Lu Xiaotian)