Wimbledon Smashtalk: Konta’s divisive match point

The drama continued on day eight of Wimbledon.

There was rain. A new world No.1 was decided. A former champion spoke out about the courts. And then there was that controversial finish to a women’s quarterfinal that everyone is debating, including the #Smashtalk team of Paul Moore, Vivienne Christie, Matt Trollope and Leigh Rogers…

What surprised you most on day eight?

Paul Moore: Probably Novak’s rant about the state of the Centre Court. I might be biased, but that is hallowed turf. Fair enough: if you want to knock the quality of the outside courts then go for your life, but leave Centre Court (and it’s divots) alone.

Vivienne Christie: I’m not so much surprised but disappointed that Simona Halep didn’t capitalise on the opportunity to become world No.1 with a semifinal run at Wimbledon. Credit to Jo Konta, who entered under an injury cloud and was almost ousted when Donna Vekic pushed her to 10-8 in the third set of their second round. The come-from-behind win over Halep was Konta’s third three-setter this Wimbledon; the Brit will need her rest ahead of the semifinal against Venus Williams.

READ MORE: Wimbledon day eight wrap

Matt Trollope: Rybarikova beating Vandeweghe. I figured CoCo would have too much firepower and big-match experience, facing an opponent who’d never been beyond the third round at a Grand Slam before. But Rybarikova has carried on her exceptional grasscourt season and continues to back up her early-round upset of No.3 seed and title favourite Karolina Pliskova. An incredible fortnight for the Slovak.

Leigh Rogers: Johanna Konta. The Brit continues to, unexpectedly, handle pressure with aplomb. The way she has played this fortnight, surviving some epic encounters under intense scrutiny, it is hard to believe she had never previously passed the second round at her home Grand Slam. She has certainly turned it around in an impressive manner!

SEE MORE: Wimbledon day eight in photos

Johanna Konta’s match point against Simona Halep proved controversial. Should the Brit have offered to replay the point when her opponent was clearly distracted by crowd hindrance?

PM: Shoulda, woulda, coulda. In an ideal world where everyone is the perfect sportsman, yes. But the gravitas of the situation, the overwhelming emotion and the significance of the moment means that it would have been asking a lot of her to ‘do the right thing’.

VC: Let’s be realistic – she was competing for a Wimbledon semifinal and that decision was one for the umpire. Mostly, I feel for both Halep and Konta. You never want to see a player distracted, as Simona clearly was, in such a high-stakes moment and Konta deserved a real celebration.

LR: What an awkward finish! There is no denying that the crowd interrupted the point. Halep should not have stopped without a call from the umpire – but in this case, replaying the point would have been the fairest call.

READ MORE: Konta advances to semifinal

Czech Karolina Pliskova will become the new WTA world No.1 next week. How long do you think she will stay there?

PM: I think she’s there to stay (for a while, at least). She doesn’t have many points to defend in the coming weeks, and the Tour is moving onto her favoured hard courts. I just hope she can win a major so that we don’t get the usual complaints about a Slamless No.1.

VC: How long will anyone stay there in this topsy-turvy women’s season? I imagine that we’ll see the top mantle change hands several times over the coming months, particularly given the pressure that Pliskova will face in defending points from her stunning US hard court season.

READ MORE: Pliskova rises to world No.1

MT: Probably not long. With the top women clumped closely together near the summit of the rankings, I can see the No.1 ranking being passed around like a hot potato between a few different players. Pliskova’s got a ton of points to defend in the US hardcourt season and if she doesn’t perform well, several players snapping at her heels just below her – Halep especially – will be in line to assume the mantle.

LR: In the end Pliskova’s rise to the top spot was very anticlimactic. A second round loss to become world No.1 is hardly inspiring, but she has been the most consistent player over the past 12 months so it is unfair to begrudge her for it. Halep has a Montreal title to defend in coming weeks, so Pliskova looks settled in the top spot for at least a few weeks. The US Open, where the Czech is defending finals points, will be a big test to see just how she handles the pressure.

Which gentlemen’s singles quarterfinal are you most excited for?

PM: It probably won’t be the most exciting match, but Federer v Raonic is a blockbuster. It’s obviously a re-match of the 2016 semifinal, but circumstances this time around are very different. I think the match is Roger’s to lose, but if Milos comes out swinging the No.3 seed could be in for a tough day at the office.

VC: Like most of us, Roger Federer v Milos Raonic in a fascinating rematch of their 2016 semifinal. Raonic’s rare five-set win was tipped at the time as a turning point but with injuries a factor, he hasn’t beaten a top-five opponent since that milestone; Federer, on the other hand, is on a seven-match winning streak against top-10 men, with that Wimbledon exit also marking the last match he lost at a major.

MT: It’s hard to go past Federer v Raonic. It’s a rematch of their semifinal here last year, but 12 months on, it’s Federer who’s the healthier and more in-form while the Canadian slowly but surely rebuilds the momentum he had last year that has since been halted by injury. Federer’s finesse versus Raonic’s blasts? Yes please.

LR: Andy Murray v Sam Querrey might not be the marquee match of the day – but I believe it is the one that will produce a major upset. The big-serving American is a dangerous opponent on grass and if he comes out swinging freely, he is capable of beating anyone (as Novak Djokovic discovered last year).

Do you agree or disagree with our panel? Have your say on Facebook and Twitter using #SmashTalk.