WTA Belinda Bencic Yulia Putintseva US Open 2026

The controversy that went unnoticed in the Bencic-Putintseva match: why wasn't the Swiss player disqualified?

Fernando Murciego - 2 Sep 2026
Go to comments seciton
The controversy surrounding Bencic-Putintseva: why wasn't the Swiss player disqualified? Source: Getty

Belinda Bencic said goodbye this Tuesday to the US Open after losing to Yulia Putintseva 4-6, 7-5, and 6-3, but her elimination left an image that has gone unnoticed much more than it should have. In the second set, after losing her serve, the Swiss lost her temper and violently hit a ball towards the stands. The throw hit a spectator, who looked visibly surprised, while Putintseva immediately appealed to the chair umpire for a decision.

The question is inevitable: why wasn’t she disqualified? The answer lies in the application of the rules themselves. Although it may seem that deliberately throwing a ball into the audience should automatically result in expulsion, this is not the case. Disqualification depends, among other circumstances, on the consequences of the action. In this case, the spectator who was hit did not suffer an injury, and the chair umpire decided not to go to the extreme of default, limiting herself to a warning.

A rule that reignites the debate

The situation inevitably recalls the famous episode involving Novak Djokovic at the US Open 2020. The Serbian was disqualified after hitting a ball towards the back of the court and hitting a line judge, who required medical attention. That injury was decisive for the decision.

The difference with what happened now with Bencic is precisely that the spectator did not appear to be hurt, a circumstance that allowed the referee to interpret the action as a punishable conduct, but not deserving of expulsion. Putintseva, in fact, did not let the episode pass and demanded explanations from the other side of the court.

The Kazakh, who would go on to come back to eliminate the 12th seed, seemed to be asking for the action to have greater consequences. The debate, however, remains open. Although the rules allow for a distinction between a dangerous throw and one that causes injury, the image of a ball traveling at high speed towards the stands after an act of frustration raises an uncomfortable question again: should it be enough that no one is injured to avoid disqualification?

This is an automatic translation. You can read the original news, La polémica que pasó desapercibida en el Bencic-Putintseva: ¿por qué no fue descalificada la suiza?