As Alex de Minaur assessed a quarterfinal clash against Jannik Sinner at Melbourne Park a couple of nights ago, the Aussie star declared that he was dreaming big.

Watch every ball of The 2025 Women’s Ashes Series LIVE with no ad-breaks during play on Kayo | New to Kayo? Get your first month for just $1. Limited time offer.

One envisages that when his head hit the pillow on Wednesday, he might instead have been reliving a tennis version of a Nightmare on Elm Street, with Jannik Sinner taking the role of Freddy Krueger. He knifed and diced “Demon” in a ruthless manner on Rod Laver Arena.

The 6-3 6-2 6-1 mauling the Australian received in the quarterfinal will fuel negative narratives that the “Demon” will never get there. It is something de Minaur understands.

It was the most sobering of reality checks last night, but it is also probably one only Sinner can truly deliver to him, so bad is the matchup between the two.

That is because de Minaur’s weapons, primarily his speed and precision and returning, trouble most. His results across the board over the last two years indicate that.

But none bother Sinner. As a case in point, he won just ten return points in three sets.

For all the hype surrounding de Minaur, which is deserved given his exceptional deed to reach all four grand slam quarterfinals in succession, hark back a fortnight.

When the draw came out, there was a sinking feeling when he drew Sinner in a quarterfinal. While the focus will be on how badly beaten de Minaur was, context needs to be applied.

The Australian likened the trauma Sinner inflicted to the trouncing a motivated Novak Djokovic gave him here two years ago. It felt, he said, like being “slapped in the face.”

“The negative is after playing some great tennis on home soil and gaining so much, you feel like you have just been slapped across the face, to be honest, to finish off like that,” he said.

“I guess the other positive thing is it’s not the first time that I’ve felt that. I felt the same thing when I played Novak a couple of years ago. So, hey, I’ll survive. I’ll keep improving.

“If anything, I just need to sit with my team and figure out a way to hurt Jannik on the court. That’s ultimately the way we’ve got to look at it and find different ways, because at the moment we don’t have it. (It will be) back to the drawing board, like I’ve done my whole career.”

Context should be considered, though, when rushing to Judgement as to whether the “Demon” can ink his name alongside grand slam champions and finalists.

Clearly given the gulf between Sinner and the Aussie at the moment, it will be difficult should the pair cross unless the world No.8 can somehow find a solution to the Italian conundrum.

Aside from Carlos Alcaraz, who edged Sinner on hard courts at Indian Wells and Beijing, and Andrey Rublev when the No.1 was returning from illness, he is nearly untouchable on hard court.

Dating back to a loss against Novak Djokovic in the ATP Tour Finals in 2023, Sinner has won

58 of his last 61 matches on the surface.

In that time he has led Italy to two Davis Cup titles, clinched the Australian and US Opens, claimed the Miami, Cincinnati and Shanghai Masters and then the 2024 ATP Tour Finals.

It is a Hall of Fame resume compiled in just over 12 months. And he is only getting better.

For those who will criticise de Minaur on Thursday, and there will be some, consider this.

As the Australian noted after the loss when quizzed as to how hard it is to play Sinner on hard court, he pointed to the vanquished in last year’s Australian Open semifinal.

That man was Novak Djokovic, the 10-time Australian Open champion, who got lucky to snare a set. They met only once more last year – the Shanghai final – and Sinner did the legend over again. That is the quality of the player de Minaur was trying to take down.

“He’s built this aura up from beating everyone. That’s the thing about it, right? It’s not like he’s just had a good week here or good week there. He’s just beaten everyone,” he said.

“I think the best way to describe it is the fact that he was able to, I don’t know if it was last year or two years ago, play Novak here and play pretty flawless, and, again, (he did not) give him not too many games. (And) Novak out here is probably the best player to have ever played on these courts.

“The fact that he’s got this top level that he can do this to players, it’s pretty tough. You go into the match, and you know it’s going to be a battle, it’s going to be tough, you’re going to try different things.

“But then you’re an hour and 30 minutes in, and you’re struggling to win games, and you’re trying to find ways to get on the board. It’s pretty surreal.”

THE DIRTY OPEN SECRET OF MEDICAL TIMEOUTS

Questions over the use of medical timeouts continue to hang over the Australian Open after some of the tournament’s biggest names took full advantage of lengthy breaks to swing momentum in recent days.

Novak Djokovic and Jannik Sinner both survived medical dramas in their quarter-finals, with the Serbian in particular drawing the ire given how often he seems injured during his matches – then playing through (and winning with) something that should be stopping him.

On the American ESPN broadcast, John McEnroe warned during the Djokovic match: “This isn’t the first time we’ve seen this routine (from Djokovic). Don’t be fooled.”

When his co-commentator and brother Patrick McEnroe asked “did you see this coming?”, John replied: “yes”.

The 2024 Grand Slam Rule Book states players are allowed one medical timeout for each distinct condition, and they’re limited to three minutes of treatment. Two are allowed to be taken consecutively.

However Sinner took over 10 minutes off court during his battle with illness against Holger Rune.

Djokovic, meanwhile, spoke openly about how playing through injury seemed to help him and hinder Carlos Alcaraz in their quarter-final match.

Asked if he noticed Alcaraz losing focus, Djokovic said: “I did.”

“Look, I feel for him. I understand that it’s not comfortable to play someone that you don’t know if he’s going to retire or not. Is he moving? Is he running? What’s happening? I felt that he was looking at me more than he was looking at himself.

“He was trying to play at some point quite a few drop shots and make me run.

“I’ve been in situations, as well, where opponent’s struggling with injury, but keep going. The opponent is going for everything, and then he’s staying in the match. Then all of a sudden as the match progresses, the opponent feels better. You’re starting to panic a bit with your game.”

Alcaraz explained: “I think everybody saw in the second set he was struggling a little bit to move. I don’t know if it was more running to the forehand or running to backhand, but obviously he was struggling. Then the third and fourth set, I didn’t see anything bad from him.

“So I’m not saying, like, he made a show. I’m just saying that, I don’t know. It’s obvious and everybody saw it, that he’s struggling in the second set. Then the third and fourth set he showed he was really good.”

While there are no doubts players at the elite level are often playing hurt, many have questioned whether top players are manipulating the rules.

Asked about the over-use of medical timeouts, former Australian Open tournament director Paul McNamee told the Nine papers on Wednesday: “I’m not a big fan of it, I’ve got to say.”

“Unless there’s a modesty issue, I think it should happen on court.

“And you’ve got three minutes, and that’s it.

“I don’t think it’s fair to the opponent to stop a match for 10 minutes, even five minutes. It’s meant to be three minutes and should be policed strictly.”

Aussie tennis champion John Alexander declared in 2024 on the ABC Tennis Podcast: “I think when players so routinely are taking advantage of these rules and so obviously using them strategically to have an advantage tactically over their opponent, these rules need to be looked at a little bit more.

“The injury timeouts – if there is a question mark over his greatness in his entire career, it’s the way he (Djokovic) has, in many people’s minds, strategically used injury timeouts.

“After the loss of the second set, take an injury timeout to have his wrist massaged for some five minutes, breaking the opponent’s concentration, maybe having thoughts entering into his opponent’s head ‘gee maybe he’ll default, I’m all over for the night’.

“Then he picks himself up, wins the next five games, wins that third set 6-1.

“I have to say at this point I agree with many of my friends who say if they don’t see blood they don’t believe there’s an injury.”

DOUBLE BOUNCE DEBATE RAGES

Not up? A balls up? Or not on at all?

The debate was raging after a controversial non-call in Iga Swiatek’s triumph over Emma Navarro on Wednesday at Melbourne Park. First things first. It did not alter the result.

But the use of technology in tennis – or the lack of it in some instances – has been a hot topic again at the Australian Open and it came to the fore as a result again on Wednesday.

Swiatek has enjoyed a magnificent Australian Open on the court by reaching the semi-finals of a grand slam on a surface other than clay for the first time in three years.

But the Polish star has again found herself in controversy, this time surrounding a point against Navarro which she claimed despite it being a double-bounce.

A day after Alexander Zverev hit out at the lack of technology able to identify a let cord when serving, Navarro said there is merit in changing the rule related to challenging a “not up”.

A video replay showed Swiatek, who progressed to a semifinal against Madison Keys 6-1 6-2, failed to make it to a drop shot in time during a point at 2-all in the second set.

In order to ask for a video review, Navarro needed to stop the point immediately, as per what used to occur when challenging line calls prior to the current computerised system.

In practicality, this is difficult to do, for if the American was wrong, she would automatically lose the point. And given the speed of a point, a player is taking a big gamble to halt play.

“I think it should be allowed to see after the point even if you play. It happened so fast. You hit the shot, and she hits it back, and you’re just ‘Oh, I guess I’m playing’” he said.

“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.”

Swiatek, who leads her head-to-head against Keys 4-1 in a rivalry that is squared on hard courts, said after another dominant victory that she was not aware it was a double-bounce.

It is not the first time the four-time Roland Garros champion has been involved in a situation of this kind and stills of the shot are a bad look.

They show a clear gap between the racquet and the ball. But a real time assessment is not always easy and the No.2 was sprinting forward and at full stretch to reach the drop shot.

“I never really thought about it deeper. I would have to analyse (it) more,” she said.

“Honestly, this is the first time something like that has happened to me, so I’m not sure. But I think they already had kind of a lot of time to think it through. So if there would be some better option, I think tennis would use it.

“We already had some … tense situations in other matches and also (in the) ATP last year. I guess the referees kind of think about it. It’s their kind of job to make the proper rules.”

SHOULD AO BE CONCERNED ABOUT CROWD BEHAVIOUR?

Throughout a feisty first week at Melbourne Park, it seemed umpires were issuing admonishments to crowds almost as frequently as they were calling the score.

It is a scene as familiar as Groundhog Day. A match tightens up and the atmosphere builds, with an over-excited – or intoxicated according to Novak Djokovic among others – bellows.

The umpire issues a caution, reminding fans about the importance of demonstrating fairness and respect to those putting on the show. But it goes on and on and on.

That said, the theatrics of Danielle Collins following her late-night victory over Destanee Aiava and the Ashes-style battles between the baselines shared by Jack Draper against Thanasi Kokkinakis and Aleks Vukic did stoke fervour among fired-up home town crowds.

It is no surprise that Australian Open boss Craig Tiley is always going to support his constituents – the paying fans – and on Wednesday morning he issued a strong defence of crowd behaviour.

Given past controversies include incidents where rival groups threw chairs at each other, court invasions and protests around the grounds, booing fans scarcely seem a crisis, as unseemly as it has been on occasion.

“Really, it’s been no different in number to what it has been in previous years, even with the larger crowd we’ve had come through the gates,” Tiley told reporters at Melbourne Park.

“You’re always going to have one or two (fans who cause trouble). We’ve made it very clear (that) anyone who comes onto the site that is going to be disruptive to the enjoyment of the people around them are not going to be welcome.”

Madison Keys, who has been coming to Melbourne since 2012 and reached her third AO semifinal with a 3-6 6-3 6-4 win over Elina Svitolina, has no issues with the crowd at all.

Then again, she is a mild-mannered player who is well liked on the tour and tends to be nasty only towards tennis balls.

“I always really love playing here. I have typically had some really great crowd support,” she said.

“There are quite a few Americans pretty much on every court where you go here. So it’s always nice to have some home-grown support as well.

“I think every slam has a different vibe for all of the fans. I would say here is definitely the most fun. They love tennis. They’re loud. They’re lively. But I’ve always really enjoyed my time here.

“Other than having to play an Australian here, I’m usually in a crowd that’s pretty supportive.”

BUT THOSE FANS STILL HAVE SOMETHING TO CHEER FOR

The Aussie charge in singles ended on Wednesday night with the exit of de Minaur but there is still a green-and-gold flavour to be excited about with four days remaining in Melbourne.

There have been concerns about the depth of Australia’s talent in women’s tennis, though players including Olivia Gadecki, Kimberly Birrell and Destanee Aiava have enjoyed moments over the past year.

But with a view to the future, there are encouraging signs in the girls’ singles, with world No.1 junior Emerson Jones and Talia Kokkinis through to the quarterfinals.

It is the first time two Australian girls have reached the last eight in Melbourne since Baijing Lin and Sara Tomic in 2016 and Jones, a finalist last year, continues to impress.

A 6-3 6-2 victor over Yuliya Perapekhina on Wednesday, she will play Austrian Lilli Tagger for a spot in the semifinals, while Kokkinis faces Japan’s Wakana Sonobe in her quarter.

The Brisbane teenager is playing the junior event for the second time and is revelling in the experience of playing at home.

“It honestly feels amazing. I loved the crowd getting behind me again and I feel like every time I have a match, I have this inner belief, knowing that this crowd’s always going to be with me,” Kokkinis told the Tennis Australia website.

Meanwhile, the first all Australian mixed doubles final in the Open era will be played on Saturday when Olympic gold medallist John Peers partners Olivia Gadecki against Queenslanders Kimberly Birrell and John-Patrick Smith.