PDA

View Full Version : It finally happened to me - crazy bounce over net and back


simi
08-31-2004, 11:25 PM
I've heard of it happening, but tonight in our make-up league match it finally happened to me. I was serving to the ad court and the serve return came back to me on my backhand side bouncing low at my feet. About all I could do was bring my racket down and give a little chip with an open face, (poor shot selection, I know). The result was a moderate height lob with tons of backspin. Since the downward trajectory was so close to the net, the opposition's net man wasn't sure if it would clear the net or not, so he let it bounce. After it bounced on his side of the net, it rose up about 10 feet and bounced a second time on our side of the net. He didn't hit it because he would have had to reach over the net to do so.

Really weird! First time for me. He gave us the point, which I assume is the correct call.

mucat
09-01-2004, 12:49 AM
I thought the correct play for the net player is to stick the racket to your side and hit the ball against your side of the net to sort of automatically win the point. It never happen to me, so I might remember wrong...

simi
09-01-2004, 01:08 AM
One is not allowed to reach over a net with either an arm, a racket, or anything else. An unintential (sp.) follow through after a ball is struck is okay, but the point of contact between the ball and the racket must be on the side of the net that the player sticking the ball is on.

bleach
09-01-2004, 05:23 AM
No, this is not correct.

A ball may not be stuck until it has passed the net. Since it passed the net then rebounded back across the net, the player can reach across the net and strike the ball. This is assuming the the player does not hit the net.

This situation is clearly discussed in the rules.

Camilio Pascual
09-01-2004, 05:33 AM
One is not allowed to reach over a net with either an arm, a racket, or anything else. An unintential (sp.) follow through after a ball is struck is okay, but the point of contact between the ball and the racket must be on the side of the net that the player sticking the ball is on.

You are absolutely incorrect, one may reach over the net to the opponent's side to strike a ball which has struck the ground on one's own court and has bounced back over the net before it strikes the ground on the opponent's side.

Simi, a request to you and others: Please don't make something up if you don't know the rules. The rules are complicated enough without this type of disinformation.

Tennis Guy
09-01-2004, 07:15 AM
Sorry, double post. :oops:

Tennis Guy
09-01-2004, 07:16 AM
I have done this three times. Once, on a serve return, I kinda dove for it and it floated over to my opponents side, then bounced really hard back to my side. It actually hit a couple of feet up on my fence. I also did it on a volley and on a short ball which I just tried to put as much backspin on it as I could.

Oh, and bleach is right, you can reach over the net.

simi
09-01-2004, 07:17 AM
One is not allowed to reach over a net with either an arm, a racket, or anything else. An unintential (sp.) follow through after a ball is struck is okay, but the point of contact between the ball and the racket must be on the side of the net that the player sticking the ball is on.


You are absolutely incorrect, one may reach over the net to the opponent's side to strike a ball which has struck the ground on one's own court and has bounced back over the net before it strikes the ground on the opponent's side.

Simi, a request to you and others: Please don't make something up if you don't know the rules. The rules are complicated enough without this type of disinformation.

My apologies, I stand corrected! And . . . Camilio, I did not endeavor to "make something up". I honestly thought that was the rule. It was an honest mistake and I don't appreciate you "dressing me down" in a public forum. What happened to the courtesy that existed on the old forum? People used to be very curtious and friendly. I left the new forum because of the change in character and personal attacks that seemed to start when the new software was installed by TW. It appears that I never should have come back. You should know better. You are one of the "old timers" from way back. I can't ever remember you ever dissing someone publically before. If there is a dissagreement with the rules, complicated as they are as you indicate, there can be an honest discussion about them without attacking someone and accusing them of "making something up". Poor form, fellow, poor form.

Brettolius
09-01-2004, 08:35 AM
yeah, he's been kind of a jerk lately, imo. he got all over me for a post recently in which he woulndn't read what i wrote in the context that i posted it, tried to again explain that he was missing my point and threw in a joke to boot, and he completely missed the joke. (the joke was in direct relation to the entire thread) and took it personally, i guess, saying he'll treat my post as rough as he likes or some such crap. his posts definitely have an air of negativity lately, unless he's responding to one of his "buddies", like some kind of old board fraternity. but, what do i know about it? i'm only a rookie and he is semi pro...i am low man on the totem pole.

Camilio Pascual
09-01-2004, 09:47 AM
Simi - I'm sorry if you feel dissed, I didn't attack you personally, just the behaviour. You did make something up, I'm asking you and others not to do that. I thought that was a reasonable request.
Brettolius, you can't have it both ways. By your criteria, I'm either a jerk because I got the joke or I'm an ignoramus because I missed the joke. What you missed was the fact that I was responding to you making fun of Richard Williams, which you have every right to do, of course. Given your hard on about James Blake, it didn't seem a stretch that you were not only making fun of RW, but also his subculture. Or, to paraphrase the infamous words of Lleyton Hewitt, "What's the similarity here?" If you did not intend to do this, then I am Dim, no hard feelings and I didn't get the joke.

drakulie
09-01-2004, 10:03 AM
Not that it happens often, but I love to see the expression on peoples faces when I pull this shot off.

simi
09-01-2004, 10:05 AM
No hard feelings. However, I did NOT "make something up". If someone is told something, even if it is incorrect, and that person has no reason to believe it not to be true, and later repeats it, the statement is not made up. It is what the person believes, even if false. It is my fault for not checking the rules myself when I was told that one cannot reach over the net, except for a followthrough swing. You have not been with me every time I've played nor interacted with my opponents, so you have no basis to state that something was pulled out of thin air. Perhaps a more non-confrontational approach would be to say, "Simi, I believe the rules state that one can indeed reach over the net to strike a ball that has first landed on his side. You might want to check to make sure." Such an approach is much more helpful without being confrontational. Just a suggestion. Have a good, productive day. :)

Brettolius
09-01-2004, 10:14 AM
dude, the joke was about how rw said something to the effect of "i kick people's asses that talk rough to me" do you see the correlation now between my post and the interview? that and his bad grammar were the joke, applied to my post...get it? hehe. plus i don't have a hard on for blake, i just think he's a bit overhyped and not that great a talent. considering he could destroy any of us, i AM just being overly critical, but hey, that's what we do here for the most part. anyway, i'm black and YOU have a hard on for the williams sisters.

Camilio Pascual
09-01-2004, 11:37 AM
Now, now, let's not exaggerate, just Venus. Serena is too immature and self-centered for my liking, I've never liked women who are the "baby" of the family.

counterpunch
09-01-2004, 02:18 PM
My opponent and I both did this in one match. It was a windy day. I hit a return that was high and short with lots of backspin. It not only came back over, it landed close to my service line on the second bounce.

lenosucks
09-04-2004, 07:45 PM
amazing how such a lighthearted topic can create such arguments... :roll:

khs_tennis
09-04-2004, 09:18 PM
I play #1 dubs for my HS team and twice already this year, in just 5 matches, we've had two of those shots go against us. Both on either game or break points. Talk about some bad luck.

thehustler
09-04-2004, 11:08 PM
The call was correct. You were the last person to hit it so you get the point. Now if there's a way any of us can perfect that shot imagine how quickly you could end rallies and get some true cheap points with that kind of shot.

aahala
09-06-2004, 09:53 AM
It's happened several times to me and again just last Saturday . . .My doubles partner miss hit, the opponent didn't read the spin and allowed the ball to hit on his side and bounce back.

I have never seen this and I hope if I ever get the opportunity I will be quick witted enough to execute: You are permitted to crossover to the over side to hit a ball that has hit your side. You can't touch the net or your opponents side of the court, but outside the lines is not part of the court. So I want to run around the net, hit the ball while standing on my opponents side but outside the lines.

Brian Purdie
09-06-2004, 06:54 PM
I was playing a real cheat the only time this happened to me, and I was the one who had hit the shot. He tried to tell me it was actually his point because I never gave him an opportunity to hit the ball. I told him off and took the point.

Rickson
09-06-2004, 07:27 PM
Let me say respectfully in that case that one may reach over the net if the ball has bounced. You may still not touch the net at all during play, but you may certainly reach over the net once the ball has bounced on your own side, you may not however, reach for a ball that's still in the air and hasn't yet crossed the net.

Brian Purdie
09-07-2004, 02:15 PM
Isn't it illegal to cross over the aerospace of the net? You are then in your opponents realm of shotmaking and causing an interference.

mucat
09-07-2004, 09:55 PM
From rules of tennis:
21. PLAYER HINDERS OPPONENT
If a player commits any act which hinders his opponent in making a stroke, then, if this is deliberate, he shall lose the point or if involuntary, the point shall be replayed.
Case 1. Is a player liable to a penalty if in making a stroke he touches his opponent?
Decision. No, unless the Umpire deems it necessary to take action under Rule 21.
Case 2. When a ball bounds back over the net, the player concerned may reach over the net in order to play the ball. What is the ruling if the player is hindered from doing this by his opponent?
Decision. In accordance with Rule 21, the Umpire may either award the point to the player hindered, or order the point to be replayed (see also Rule 25).
Case 3. Does an involuntary double hit constitute an act which hinders an opponent within Rule 21?
Decision. No.


Look at Case 2.