ATP changes hindrance rule after Draper-Medvedev Indian Wells controversy

The ATP Tour has moved to amend its rules on video review and hindrance following a controversial incident involving Jack Draper and Daniil Medvedev at Indian Wells. The changes come after sustained criticism from players, officials, and commentators over how and when reviews can be used during points.

The controversy unfolded during the quarter-final clash between Draper, the defending champion, and Medvedev, in what had otherwise been a high-level contest. A disputed call late in the match shifted attention away from the tennis itself, raising broader questions about consistency and fairness in officiating.

At the centre of the issue was a hindrance decision made after the conclusion of a point, a scenario that some players have long argued creates ambiguity. The ruling ultimately handed Medvedev a critical advantage at a decisive stage of the second set, influencing the match’s trajectory.

In the days following the match, discussion intensified around the application of video review, particularly whether players should be allowed to challenge decisions after knowing the outcome of a rally. The ATP has now responded with two specific rule changes aimed at addressing those concerns.

The key moment came with the second set finely poised at 5-5. During a rally, Draper raised his arms mid-point in reaction to a line call, appealing to chair umpire Aurélie Tourte. Although the rally continued, the situation was later reviewed, with officials determining that Draper’s gesture constituted a hindrance.

The decision proved costly. The point was awarded to Medvedev, giving him a 0-30 lead at a crucial juncture. From there, the Russian was able to capitalise, shifting momentum decisively in his favour. Draper, who had been competing strongly, was unable to recover from the setback.

The incident quickly became a focal point for debate, with critics highlighting the unusual timing of the review. Rather than being addressed in real time, the hindrance call was made after the rally had ended, prompting questions about whether such interventions undermine the natural flow of play.

Journalist Jon Wertheim later outlined the ATP’s response, confirming that the governing body had acted to prevent similar scenarios in the future.

"Two ATP Tour rule changes to watch.

a) Video review of hindrance after the point (a la Medvedev/Draper)... (in effect no longer trialled).

b) Video review challenges are unlimited but chair ‘will retain control over the process’ and has discretion to deny any unreasonable requests.”