–

Longtime Australian Davis Cup captain Lleyton Hewitt has been assessed a two-week suspension and a $25,000 US fine for “offensive conduct”, related to a situation that occurred last November at the Davis Cup finals.

Yes, it took nearly a year for this to be adjudicated. And, notably, the suspension is to served from Sept. 24 to Oct. 7 – “so as not to be ‘unduly punitive’ on Hewitt by impacting his Davis Cup schedule, and to provide the opportunity for an appeal to be lodged before the sanction enters into effect.”

The ITIA added that to date, no appeal has been lodged.

We’ll note that beyond the couple of weekends (okay, make that weeks) during the year when a Davis Cup actually captains these days, the other 49-50 weeks are, if there’s any work at all, mostly leisurely trips to the majors to “check on the players’ level”. Or whatever.

So assessing a suspension to be served when a captain isn’t actually “captaining” is like suspending you from work when you’re already on vacation anyway. Pretty convenient.

The other notable thing about this is that even though it’s been ongoing all year, the ITIA did not release any information about it until it was adjudicated.

(If the timing of this release seems intended to cause maximum impact, coming just a few days before the Davis Cup tie, that seems to largely be due to Hewitt stalling the proceedings for months and months).

Those two things alone will surely raise eyebrows among the conspiracy theory set – although of course this is not a case of a positive doping test, even if it falls under the Tennis Anti-Doping Programme.

Shoving a 60-year-old volunteer

The suspension was imposed because of an incident after Australia lost to Spain in the Davis Cup semifinals in Malaga, Spain on Nov. 23, 2024. It came after Jannik Sinner defeated Alex de Minaur to give Italy an insurmountable 2-0 lead in the tie.

The 44-year-old Hewitt “pushed a 60-year-old volunteer anti-doping chaperone” – i.e., those anonymous-looking people you’ll often see holding a clipboard, following a player off court after they lose a Grand Slam match – against a wall. The information doesn’t specify whether it was a male or female official, but in the text, it confirms it was a man.

This was judged to be a breach of Article 7.15.1.1 of the Tennis Anti-Doping program, and Hewitt was charged with that offence on Jan. 6, 2025.

Just a few hours before this information was released, Tennis Australia put out a lovely video of Hewitt talking about “team culture”, and of a hit-and-giggle with members of the Wallabies rugby team.

No doubt they’ll issue a transparent, fulsome reproach of their captain’s actions when they wake up on Thursday morning Down Under.

Click here to read the report on the sanctions.

Click here to read the full report on the testimony.

(We read the reams of legalese, so you don’t have to! So if you appreciate that, please click on an ad or two!)

“Self-defence”

First, Hewitt denied it – even though there was a review of video evidence, witness statements and interviews.

He claimed – not particularly credibly, if you’ve ever seen these people do their job – “self-defence”.

He claimed that he didn’t know who this person was, and appears to have blamed it on “a (redacted) medical condition that ‘could have continued to trouble him.’ “. Later in the decision, it was indicated that he had “ongoing tenderness” in his recovery from the redacted medical condition.

Four lawyers appeared in Hewitt’s defence.

Because Hewitt made requests for extensions, citing his “travel schedule, desire to cross-examine witnesses and wish to appear in-person before the tribunal”, the initial hearing didn’t happen until July 21-22 in Sydney. There were two other online sessions before that for witness testimony.

On Aug. 4, the chair of the independant tribunal said that Hewitt’s actions “did not meet the requirements of self-defence”, and that his behaviour was “not reasonable and proportionate.”

A two-week suspension was issued.

“At the chair’s discretion*, the sanction was suspended to be effective from 24 September 2025 until 7 October 2025, so as not to be “unduly punitive” on Hewitt by impacting his Davis Cup schedule**, and to provide the opportunity for an appeal to be lodged before the sanction enters into effect”.

Again: to date, no appeal has been lodged.

(Details on asterisked elements at the bottom).

Not “unduly punitive”

ITIA CEO Karen Moorhouse: “Anti-doping personnel play a fundamental role behind the scenes in upholding the integrity of tennis, and they should be able to go about their roles without fear of physical contact. In this case, that line was clearly crossed, and we had no other option but to take action.”

Well, not in an “unduly punitive” way.

Logically, they figured that Hewitt likely would appeal the suspension anyway, taking it well past this weekend and the tie vs. Belgium. But it doesn’t exactly send out a “we’re tough on crime” sort of vibe, does it.

Hewitt told the Tribunal that his fall schedule included trips to the Tokyo, Shanghai, Paris and ATP Finals events over the next few months. The Tribunal was rightly dubious about that schedule, based on the fact that he didn’t attend them last year. So if Hewitt doesn’t, in fact, show up at all those tournaments, “there could be further consequences”.

The suspension would run through Tokyo and the first few days of Shanghai.

Other details

-The ITIA submitted that the suspension should be four weeks,

-The volunteer chaperone confirmed he’d … never volunteer again.

-Hewitt “offered no apology and did not deminstrate any remorse of concern for the victim’s well-being. He “consistently blamed the chaperone”. He claims the behaviour came because he “anticipated further physical contact from the Chaperone”. And he submitted that a “reprimand” was the appropriate penalty, as he has a “distinguished 25-year-old career marked by exemplary professionalism and commitment to tennis”.

-Per the ITIA’s submission, Hewitt has FIVE prior incidents of offensive conduct towards tennis officials and non-compliance with tennis rules.

-Hewitt’s conduct throughout the proceeding was “obstructive and inappropriate”.

The tribunal didn’t disagree entirely on that last point, stating that “Mr. Hewitt’s defence of the case against him was robust and at times unhelptul. There were many distractions which could have been avoided.” But it disagreed that all of this – or his previous purported instances of “offensive conduct” –should factor into in the actual suspension for the act in Spain.

The tribunal states situations involving players (Djokovic, Shapovalov, Zverev) that did not even involve physical contact but were penalized far more harshly.

It considered Hewitt’s case “involving deliberate and forceful physical contact with an official” to be “materially more serious and justifies disqualification from events and the imposition of a substantial fine”.

And yet, in the end, just two weeks and $25,000. So much for that.

The maximum suspension is “permanent suspension/denial of accreditation” on the ITF side (it’s significantly higher in the ATP rulebook, which doesn’t apply here).

One quarter of that $25,000 will be suspended if he doesn’t shove anyone over the next 12 months. The tribunal recommended that a third of the fine should be paid to the volunteer “in compensation for the stress, discomfort and embarrassment of the incident and these proceedings.”.

Hewitt and his crew preferred it go to a tennis charity.

*Paragraph 58 of the written decision reads: “In the view of the independent tribunal, the suspension should be meaningful, reflecting the principle underpinning many sporting disciplinary frameworks. At the same time, it should not be structured in a way that is unduly punitive. Mr Hewitt, through his counsel, advised that his role is as the Australian Davis Cup Captain, although he also appears to hold a mentor or advisory position…”

**Paragraph 60 of the written decision reads: “In all the circumstances, I consider that the suspension ought to commence on 24 September 2025 and conclude two weeks following that on 7 October 2025. In my view this is a real consequence but not targeted to be punitive in respective of the major events immediately forthcoming. It also enables Mr. Hewitt to appeal and apply for a stay of the suspension pending appeal if he wishes…”

About Post Author