Controversy struck the seventh edition of the Ultimate Table Tennis during the final league-stage fixture between Dabang Delhi and Pune Jaguars at the Shyama Prasad Mukherjee Indoor Stadium in Panjim, Goa on Thursday.
It was the fifth and final match of the tie between Delhi’s Sutirtha Mukherjee and Pune’s Diya Chitale. This women’s singles fixture was a dead rubber as the G. Sathiyan-powered Delhi had clinched the tie in the previous match and advanced to the semifinals.
But a controversial moment during the second game added an element of importance to the match. The score was 10-10 with Diya serving for the Golden Point. However, just as the Maharashtra paddler was about to serve, Sutirtha seemed to stop play. Confusion broke out, replays were looked at.
It was Jigar Rambhia, Competition Director, who cleared the air after the tie.
“Diya was just about to serve and even before the ball left her palm, Sutirtha called for a Table Tennis Review (TTR). Before that [ball leaving the palm] if the receiving player speaks, it’s deemed as obstruction of play. As per the rules, if there’s an obstruction in play then the point goes to the serving player. That’s what happened in this case. There’s nothing more to it,” he told reporters.
G Sathiyan of Dabang Delhi, who was visibly furious during this moment in the match and had left his bench to appeal to the umpire, also weighed in. | Photo Credit: Rajdeep Saha
“TTR didn’t come into the picture because the point was already awarded for obstruction,” he added.
[On why Sutirtha might have asked for the TTR] “We didn’t hear that. So I don’t know why she was planning to call for a TTR, because the ball hadn’t left, and we have confirmed that,” he said.
Sathiyan, who was visibly furious during this moment in the match and had left his bench to appeal to the umpire, also weighed in.
“Never have I seen a point being awarded for alleged obstruction of play at such a crucial juncture, that too when it was clearly unintentional. With so much doubt whether the ball was tossed first or the appeal came before the toss, it would have been better had the point been replayed,” Sathiyan told Sportstar.
“With TTR newly introduced now, rules need to be clear also stating whether calling TTR a split second early can be described as distraction. Because they say you have to call immediately after he serves and sometimes they say you were late. Either they should have checked the TTR or replayed the point,” he added.
Rambhia, who felt the TTR was an “overall success” in his debut UTT season, said the league will try to add more instances which can come under the purview of the review system.
Julien Girard, the foreign coach of Pune, revealed why Sutirtha could have appealed for a review.
“Diya was ready to serve. Sutirtha knows sometimes she can hide the ball, so she said, ‘TTR, TTR.’ Perhaps she said something too early, so the umpires gave Diya the point,” the Frenchman said.
“At that point of the tie they were leading 10-4. We cannot fight over one point like this. Anyway they were through to the semifinals and our campaign was already over,” he added.
(With inputs from Amol Karhadkar)
Comments
Published on Jul 24, 2026