Summarize this content to 2000 words in 6 paragraphs There was bewilderment all around Rod Laver Arena during Iga Swiatek’s ruthless victory over Emma Navarro in the quarter-finals of the Australian Open. With Swiatek, the world No. 2, a set up and level at 2-2 in the second, the Pole and the American were locked in a gruelling baseline backhand exchange, before Navarro had Swiatek scrambling towards the net with a delicate sliced backhand drop shot. The second seed showed great pace to get her racquet to the ball, scooping it back over the net and forcing Navarro to hurry forwards and make the return, which teed the Pole up nicely for a backhand put-away. However, as the ball zipped past Navarro, the eighth seed raised her arms and looked at chair umpire Eva Asderaki-Moore in disbelief.The American, playing in the last eight of the year’s opening Slam for the first time, believed that Swiatek had in fact not stopped the ball from bouncing twice on her side of the court, and she had a brief exchange with Asderaki-Moore at the net before conceding and making her way back to her chair for the changeover. That sparked further confusion, especially in the Eurosport commentary box, with Simon Reed and Jo Durie also trying to figure out whether the ball had bounced twice, and whether Navarro was on the end of an unfair decision at such a critical stage of the match.Swiatek loses just three games to reach semis in style – Australian Open highlightsVideo credit: EurosportThe American was threatening to break Swiatek in the fifth game of the second set, having been decimated 6-1 in the opener, but the controversial call came on game point, allowing Swiatek to come out scot-free and keep her service intact. “Oh, well done,” Reed exclaimed as Swiatek produced a clean backhand winner. But Durie was a lot more curious about the double-bounce. “Was that up?” she asked. “[Navarro] is doubting it,” Reed replied. “I thought it was.”“I think you can get a replay now,” Durie said. “Yes, you can,” Reed said. “VAR could be in action here. I thought it was up, but she wasn’t sure, Iga wasn’t sure.”“I’m not sure. I thought you could ask for a replay,” Durie said, baffled that Navarro seemed to have just accepted the decision. “Oh, I’m actually not sure it was up!” Reed said, changing his stance. “Very difficult. What happens, then? What’s happened to VAR? It’s not too late to change it, or is it?“That’s why they brought it in, so why isn’t the umpire using that?” Durie asked. “I don’t understand. Does the player who lost the point have to challenge it and she didn’t challenge it? Maybe that’s it?” Reed said. Swiatek reacts to ‘tough’ victory and is ‘really happy’ to be in semi-finalsVideo credit: Eurosport“I thought that, as Navarro came to the net, she was saying, ‘Was that up?’,” Durie replied. “Is that not a challenge? I don’t understand. I thought that was why it was brought in.”“I would have thought it was,” Reed said. “It definitely wasn’t up. What an important point, just as she was getting back in the match. She’s a very fine umpire, Asderaki-Moore, but I think she’s made a mistake there.”Tennis rules stipulate that players are able to challenge double-bounce incidents and request a video review, but it seemed as though Navarro didn’t want to prolong the situation, as she sat down at the changeover now 3-2 down.Unfortunately for her, she would not win another game, with Swiatek running out a comfortable 6-1 6-2 victor, and progressing into the last four, where she will face Madison Keys, who beat Elina Svitolina earlier in the day 3-6 6-3 6-4. Navarro was asked about the incident in her post-match press conference, with the American clarifying that the umpire had ruled that, since she had played her shot, she could no longer request a review. “I didn’t stop playing,” she insisted. “I played the next shot, so I couldn’t see a replay. “I asked her after the point if I could see a replay, and she said I played it, so I couldn’t see it.”Watch as ‘very good’ Swiatek wins through to semis as her dominance continuesVideo credit: EurosportIt was clear that Navarro was still baffled by the on-court decision, and she admitted that she was frustrated at the sit-down. “I think it should be allowed to see after the point even if you play,” she said. “It happened so fast. You hit the shot, and she hits it back, and you’re just, like, ‘Oh, I guess I’m playing’. in the back of your head you’re like, ‘Okay, maybe I can still win the point even though it wasn’t called’. “It’s going to be a downer if I stop the point and it turns out it wasn’t a double bounce. It’s tough. I think we should be able to see it afterwards and make that call. It happened so fast. I don’t know if she knew or not. “It’s up to the ref to make the call. It is what it is, I guess. It’s tough to place blame on anybody. It’s a tough call. I think the rules should be different. I think we, for sure, should be able to look at it afterwards and decide. I don’t know why that decision was made. “I don’t see a reason to not use a let machine. I’m not really sure why that was the decision.”Stream the 2025 Australian Open live and on-demand on discovery+
