MIAMI: Three-time runner-up Maria Sharapova booked her second
straight Miami final on Thursday, rallying to beat disgruntled Caroline
Wozniacki to set up a title clash with Agnieszka Radwanska.
Sharapova clinched a 4-6, 6-2,
6-4 semi-final victory over the Dane after 2hr 34min. However, the
tennis match ending in acrimony as Wozniacki objected to the chair
umpire's over-rule of a call to Sharapova's benefit on match point.
World No. 4 Radwanska's 6-4, 6-2 victory over
Marion Bartoli was more straightforward, but included an injury to the
French seventh seed as well as a power failure that held up proceedings
in the second set.
'For sure one of the weirdest
matches, especially the lights,' said Poland's Radwanska, who led 4-2 in
the second set when the court went dark. 'You're really focused on the
match and want to finish in two sets. Suddenly, the lights go off.'
She kept her focus and returned to see off
Bartoli, who had reached the semi-finals by handing world No. 1 Victoria
Azarenka her first defeat of this year.
A day after that win, Bartoli was hindered by a left thigh injury, and had 35 unforced errors, failing to hold serve once.
Radwanska's reward was a meeting with Sharapova, who has won seven of their eight encounters.
The Russian was serving for the match and up
40-30 when her second serve was called long - a call over-ruled by the
umpire, who ordered the point replayed.
Wozniacki did not like it, but was out of video challenges.
Sharapova stepped up to serve again, working her way into position to put away a forehand for the victory.
Wozniacki, who declined to shake hands with
the umpire after the match, said it did not matter that TV replays
showed he was correct. 'I think when the ball is so close... he should
give her a chance to challenge, at least when I don't have any
challenges,' she said.
'She was going to challenge it, anyways. So if
it shows it's good, it's good. If it shows it's out, it's out. The ball
was so close that it might as well have been out.'
Sharapova said she would have certainly challenged the call if the umpire had not over-ruled it.