Novak Djokovic begged not to be disqualified after the statement made on...

Novak Djokovic enjoyed another dominant year in 2023, winning three of the four Grand Slams with Wimbledon the only title eluding him.

The US Open was his record-breaking 24th – and most recent – slam at Flushing Meadows, dropping just two sets throughout the entire tournament in New York back in September. However, the Serb has had an interesting history at the showpiece event in recent years, including an infamous incident which saw his chances of success wiped out completely.

Djokovic missed the 2022 event after refusing to have the coronavirus vaccine. But in 2020, his campaign came to an abrupt and unexpected end when he was thrown out of the tournament.

The incident came when he was competing against Pablo Carreno Busta in the fourth round, and had just had his serve broken to leave him trailing 6-5 in the first set. This prompted Djokovic to smash a loose ball down the court in frustration, which hit a lineswoman

The player did not intend to hit the line judge and went over to apologise and check on her well-being. But after much deliberation between tournament officials, Djokovic was disqualified and eliminated from the tournament. Following the incident, the tennis legend refused to speak to the media and faced a fine for failing to attend the press conference.

A USTA statement said: “In accordance with the Grand Slam rulebook, following his actions of intentionally hitting a ball dangerously or recklessly within the court or hitting a ball with negligent disregard of the consequences, the US Open tournament referee defaulted Novak Djokovic from the 2020 US Open. Because he was defaulted, Djokovic will lose all ranking points earned at the US Open and will be fined the prize money won at the tournament in addition to any or all fines levied with respect to the offending incident.”

Djokovic pleaded his case with referee Soeren Friemel and supervisor Andreas Egli for over 10 minutes on the court, but ultimately his efforts were in vain.

“His point was that he didn’t hit the line umpire intentionally. He said, ‘Yes, I was angry, I hit the ball, I hit the line umpire, the facts are very clear, but it wasn’t my intent, I didn’t do it on purpose, so I shouldn’t be defaulted for that’,” said Friemel who explained how they came to their decision.