PDA

View Full Version : Was he a Jerk?


Pages : [1] 2 3

Attila the tennis Bum
03-31-2007, 10:30 PM
Did you guys read the tennis mag article this month "A season on the Edge"?

The author tells a story of a jerk he played in league. But he intentionally keeps the identity of the team and the player a secret to "protect the guilty".

Well the secret is now out!! The team he is talking about is the Saw Mill Club in Westchester NY and the player he is talking about is Rich Callwood .

How do I know?? Well all you have to do is plug in the authors name James Martin into the USTA website. Next you look up his matches in 4.5 league. There is only one match where his opponent defaulted and it was Rich Callwood of the Saw Mill Club. ( he mention in the article that his opponent defaulted and that it was 4.5 league).

Call me Sherlock Holmes.:) Here is the article:


Here is PART of the article:

A Season on the Edge
by James Martin

League Tennis is fun, but it has a dark side. Just ask the author, who joined a U.S.T.A. team for the first time last year. (Names have been left out to protect the innocent -- and the guilty.)

Competition warps the minds of men. grown men with families. Men with highfalutin-sounding jobs. Men, in other words, who should know better.

There's no other way I can begin to explain the theater of the absurd that unfolded last spring during one of my USTA 4.5 league matches. I had just taken the court for the second singles against my opponent, a dapper Englishman with a yachtsman's tan. The trouble began when I was taking my warm-up serves.

"Foot fault," my opponent said.
"Excuse me?"
"You're foot faulting."

In my 25 years of playing tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm-ups? I walked up to my service line. "Don't even think about it," I said. "Don't start."

I returned to the baseline and hit another practice serve. "You're foot faulting," he said. "You can't do that."

I had a strong suspicion why he was acting like this. Fifteen minutes earlier, I had been in the lounge watching my team's captain play his match. The Englishman was there, too, upset that my skipper was, in his word, "bullying" his opponent. Whatever the reality, it was clear both players were sniping at each other over line calls. My soon-to-be opponent inched closer to the glass and said to his friend standing nearby, "Look, he's foot faulting." He tried pointing this out to his player from behind the glass. He eventually walked onto the court, interrupted play, and accused my captain of foot faulting.

Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

My 8-year-old daughter could have constructed a better argument, but it left me with little place to go. The man spoke softly with a dignified air, a stark contrast to the nonsense he was spewing. The combination made him seem slightly sinister. As he pressed his point, he reminded me of a villain from a James bond movie, a diabolical blue blood hellbent on destroying 007. Unfortunately, his plot for revenge was being carried out on me. As we continued to argue, I grew agitated. I don't know why--maybe because I've never been in such a bizarre altercation, perhaps it was the negative vibes in the air--but something took hold of me. Possessed me. I went from the voice of reason to the voice of madness.

"Look, if you're not going to play properly, let's take it outside," I said.

"Take it outside?" Who did I think I was, Russell Crowe? Adrenaline had overwhelmed my internal editor. "Let's step outside," I repeated, before throwing in a "Don't [expletive] with me" for good measure.

No, no one was going to win a sportsmanship award today.

We walked back to our respective baselines. I can't speak for him, but I'm guessing he was shell-shocked after my outburst. He blasted his practice serves as hard as he could--right at me. He muttered that this was how you're supposed to serve, without foot faulting. Now he's giving me a tennis lesson? I thought. Oh, it was on! Risking a dislocated shoulder, I returned the favor by serving bullets back at him. Clearly, I'd lost my mind.

By the time the match finally started, I had never been more fired up on a tennis court. And that's when things turned really weird. After breaking him to start the match, I prepared to serve. But he didn't have his racquet in the ready position. He stood there with one hand on his hip. I served the ball in.

"Foot fault," he said, pointing to my feet and shaking his head disapprovingly.

I was as dumbstruck as K-Fed in a library. "I'm taking the point," I shouted, and headed to the ad side. Another serve. He let that one go, too. That was 30-love in my book. Completely rattled, I double-faulted on the next point. Keep it together, I told myself. Serve underhand if you have to, just get the ball in! I was on the verge of hyperventilating by this point, and my arm felt like a lead pipe. But I was able to muscle my racquet up and over my head and meekly push two balls into the serve box, which he made no attempt to return. Two-love, me.

My opponent looked toward his teammate in the lounge as if to say, "Can you believe this guy?" After he lost the first point of the next game, he walked to the sideline, grabbed his bag, and, without a word, walked off the court. "Where are you going?" I said. "Let's finish this." No response. My captain, still playing on an adjacent court, shouted, "Let him go." He knew that our team would get a win. This strange debacle would go down in the books as a simple default.

Voltron
03-31-2007, 10:32 PM
Heh heh, nice find. I guess that guy is going to be forever marked then.

Attila the tennis Bum
03-31-2007, 10:35 PM
Heh heh, nice find. I guess that guy is going to be forever marked then.

Yeah...did you read what that jerk did?? He called a foot fault from the other side of the court! WOW!! Does anyone know this guy?? Has anyone ever played against him or played against the Saw Mill Club?

Voltron
03-31-2007, 11:03 PM
I did, and that guy was a ******, plain and simple.

EZRA
04-01-2007, 12:54 AM
Great.... I'm playing 4.5 Westchester league this season

joeyscl
04-01-2007, 01:36 AM
So what happened Exactly?

Raiden.Kaminari
04-01-2007, 03:09 AM
LOL ... the power of the Internet.

Plug in the author's name ... look up whoever defaulted against him. Instant info ;)

Of course, he had to leave the opponent's name out because he might get sued for libel :(

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 08:23 AM
So what happened Exactly?

There was almost a fistfight on the court between the author James martin and this dude Callwood. Here is an excerpt from the article:

"I had just taken the court for the second singles against my opponent, a dapper Englishman with a yachtsman's tan. The Trouble began when I was taking my warmup serves:

"Foot fault" my opponent said .

"Excuse me?"

"you're foot faulting"

In my 25 years of playong tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm ups? I walked up to my service line, "don't even think about it ," I said. "Don't start."

They started firing practice serves at each other as hard as they could. It gets even crazier with a fist fight almost breaking out but what ended up happening is that Callwood of the Saw Mill club simply gave up and walked off the court in the first set being down 3-0.

Read the article it really sheds a new light on league play. It is the first article I have seen that talks about ringers and stacking in public. It is a must read!

Serve and Volley
04-01-2007, 08:45 AM
Here is PART of the article:

A Season on the Edge
by James Martin

League Tennis is fun, but it has a dark side. Just ask the author, who joined a U.S.T.A. team for the first time last year. (Names have been left out to protect the innocent -- and the guilty.)

Competition warps the minds of men. grown men with families. Men with highfalutin-sounding jobs. Men, in other words, who should know better.

There's no other way I can begin to explain the theater of the absurd that unfolded last spring during one of my USTA 4.5 league matches. I had just taken the court for the second singles against my opponent, a dapper Englishman with a yachtsman's tan. The trouble began when I was taking my warm-up serves.

"Foot fault," my opponent said.
"Excuse me?"
"You're foot faulting."

In my 25 years of playing tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm-ups? I walked up to my service line. "Don't even think about it," I said. "Don't start."

I returned to the baseline and hit another practice serve. "You're foot faulting," he said. "You can't do that."

I had a strong suspicion why he was acting like this. Fifteen minutes earlier, I had been in the lounge watching my team's captain play his match. The Englishman was there, too, upset that my skipper was, in his word, "bullying" his opponent. Whatever the reality, it was clear both players were sniping at each other over line calls. My soon-to-be opponent inched closer to the glass and said to his friend standing nearby, "Look, he's foot faulting." He tried pointing this out to his player from behind the glass. He eventually walked onto the court, interrupted play, and accused my captain of foot faulting.

Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

My 8-year-old daughter could have constructed a better argument, but it left me with little place to go. The man spoke softly with a dignified air, a stark contrast to the nonsense he was spewing. The combination made him seem slightly sinister. As he pressed his point, he reminded me of a villain from a James bond movie, a diabolical blue blood hellbent on destroying 007. Unfortunately, his plot for revenge was being carried out on me. As we continued to argue, I grew agitated. I don't know why--maybe because I've never been in such a bizarre altercation, perhaps it was the negative vibes in the air--but something took hold of me. Possessed me. I went from the voice of reason to the voice of madness.

"Look, if you're not going to play properly, let's take it outside," I said.

"Take it outside?" Who did I think I was, Russell Crowe? Adrenaline had overwhelmed my internal editor. "Let's step outside," I repeated, before throwing in a "Don't [expletive] with me" for good measure.

No, no one was going to win a sportsmanship award today.

We walked back to our respective baselines. I can't speak for him, but I'm guessing he was shell-shocked after my outburst. He blasted his practice serves as hard as he could--right at me. He muttered that this was how you're supposed to serve, without foot faulting. Now he's giving me a tennis lesson? I thought. Oh, it was on! Risking a dislocated shoulder, I returned the favor by serving bullets back at him. Clearly, I'd lost my mind.

By the time the match finally started, I had never been more fired up on a tennis court. And that's when things turned really weird. After breaking him to start the match, I prepared to serve. But he didn't have his racquet in the ready position. He stood there with one hand on his hip. I served the ball in.

"Foot fault," he said, pointing to my feet and shaking his head disapprovingly.

I was as dumbstruck as K-Fed in a library. "I'm taking the point," I shouted, and headed to the ad side. Another serve. He let that one go, too. That was 30-love in my book. Completely rattled, I double-faulted on the next point. Keep it together, I told myself. Serve underhand if you have to, just get the ball in! I was on the verge of hyperventilating by this point, and my arm felt like a lead pipe. But I was able to muscle my racquet up and over my head and meekly push two balls into the serve box, which he made no attempt to return. Two-love, me.

My opponent looked toward his teammate in the lounge as if to say, "Can you believe this guy?" After he lost the first point of the next game, he walked to the sideline, grabbed his bag, and, without a word, walked off the court. "Where are you going?" I said. "Let's finish this." No response. My captain, still playing on an adjacent court, shouted, "Let him go." He knew that our team would get a win. This strange debacle would go down in the books as a simple default.

rleidle
04-01-2007, 10:22 AM
LOL ... the power of the Internet.

Plug in the author's name ... look up whoever defaulted against him. Instant info ;)

Of course, he had to leave the opponent's name out because he might get sued for libel :(

It's not libel if it is true. However, a private citizen has an expectation of privacy. Public figures like movie stars give up that right.

beernutz
04-01-2007, 10:47 AM
Neither one of them should get any pats on the back for their behavior that day.

Pleepers
04-01-2007, 10:47 AM
It's not libel if it is true. However, a private citizen has an expectation of privacy. Public figures like movie stars give up that right.

I think the author should have written that article anonymously?

raiden031
04-01-2007, 10:51 AM
I disagree with the author. I don't think he should be allowed to serve with his feet crossing the line and his opponent should have a right to protest it if he sees it happening. And asking him to take it outside is a little out of line.

I don't understand why the opponent would comment on foot-faulting during warmups, but in a match its fine.

goober
04-01-2007, 10:58 AM
I disagree with the author. I don't think he should be allowed to serve with his feet crossing the line and his opponent should have a right to protest it if he sees it happening. And asking him to take it outside is a little out of line.

I don't understand why the opponent would comment on foot-faulting during warmups, but in a match its fine.

Well if you read the story, his opponent went onto the court of a previous match and interrupted play to accuse the author's captain of footfaulting-something he had no right to do as a spectator. Asking to take it outside is out of line, but they both exhibited terrible behavior.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-01-2007, 11:16 AM
Well if you read the story, his opponent went onto the court of a previous match and interrupted play to accuse the author's captain of footfaulting-something he had no right to do as a spectator. Asking to take it outside is out of line, but they both exhibited terrible behavior.

Yes, poor sportsmanship by one player isn't excuse for another to react to it ... but it is human nature unfortunately.

For someone who claims to be knowledgable about rules, going onto a court and interrupting the match to declare foot faults was out of line. Then declaring foot faults across the court in a singles match was also out of line. For doubles, your partner would be able to call warning about the foot faults, but a court monitor would have to be called in order to actually call the foot fault.

nyc
04-01-2007, 11:25 AM
sounds like james martin is a bit of a hot head himself, regardless whether the other guy's a jerk.

"Look, if you're not going to play properly, let's take it outside," I said. ????

I mean, it's LEAGUE tennis, it's supposed to be fun, not some kinda bar brawl.

:rolleyes:

goober
04-01-2007, 11:30 AM
I did find it funny though during the final match of the season for the top spot, the opposing team brings in this self rated player with a heavy Spanish accent, that didn't even know who was on the team he was showing up for. He then proceeds to blow the #1 player for the authors team off the court. :)

Serve and Volley
04-01-2007, 12:11 PM
I don't understand why the opponent would comment on foot-faulting during warmups, but in a match its fine.

I disagree. There is no way you can see if someone is foot faulting from the other side of the court. Unless of course its a HUGE foot fault. But from the other side of the court you really cannot see that well enough to make the call. Its ridiculous. The dude from the Saw Mill Club was way out of line.

beernutz
04-01-2007, 12:35 PM
I disagree. There is no way you can see if someone is foot faulting from the other side of the court. Unless of course its a HUGE foot fault. But from the other side of the court you really cannot see that well enough to make the call. Its ridiculous. The dude from the Saw Mill Club was way out of line.

Whether you agree or disagree is immaterial. The Code gives a player the right to first warn, then call foot faults on their opponent. Just because your eyesight is unable to percieve foot faults doesn't mean everyone else's is.

Both players were out of line, IMO.

kylebarendrick
04-01-2007, 12:46 PM
Keep in mind that he was calling foot faults during the warm-up! That can't be anything other than trying to game your opponent.

beernutz
04-01-2007, 12:58 PM
Keep in mind that he was calling foot faults during the warm-up! That can't be anything other than trying to game your opponent.

Agreed. I was talking about during the game.

Serve and Volley
04-01-2007, 01:38 PM
Whether you agree or disagree is immaterial. The Code gives a player the right to first warn, then call foot faults on their opponent. Just because your eyesight is unable to percieve foot faults doesn't mean everyone else's is.

Both players were out of line, IMO.


No its not my eyesight its all human beings eyesight. There is just no way humanly possible a human can fairly see a slight foot fault from the other side of the court. Thats why in professional tennis only the basline Judge or the main one can call the foot fault. The far Judge is not even allowed to make that call. Ever wonder why??? Because its impossible for a himan to make that call from that vantage point.

Think about it,.....when you hit a ball close to the baseline you basically have to trust your opponent to make that call because its tough for you to see it. A minor footfault is even more difficult to see.

The dude from Saw Mill was out of line.

There is just no way you can honestly make that call unless its a HUGE HUGE foot fault.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 01:47 PM
Great.... I'm playing 4.5 Westchester league this season

Really? That means that you are going to play against the Saw Mill club! You have got to report back to us if they are as much jerks as the article says they are.

I heard some really nasty stories about those guys. I heard they pulled a really gross move in doubles.

The net man of the receiving team actually stood in the box where the serve was to be served into!! This is completely legal but damn is that distracting!!

rfprse
04-01-2007, 01:56 PM
"Foot fault," he said, pointing to my feet and shaking his head disapprovingly.

I was as dumbstruck as K-Fed in a library. "I'm taking the point," I shouted, and headed to the ad side.
Can he do this despite the opponent called foot fault?

rfprse
04-01-2007, 02:05 PM
I think the author should have written that article anonymously?
Maybe Tennis magazine should invite the person in question to write his side of story about the incident & to vent on something like what a jerk the author was...? :)

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 02:34 PM
Maybe Tennis magazine should invite the person in question to write his side of story about the incident & to vent on something like what a jerk the author was...? :)

Dude if some jerk called a foot fault on me from way over on the other side of the court then there would be a battle. I'm sorry, I dont care what the hell the rules say...you just cannot make that call all the way from the other side of the court. That type of a call would get anyone angry.

Look at todays match when Canas got called for it. He freaked out!! And that was a legit call by someone at the baseline. Can you imagine of the ump from way over on the other end had made that call?? It would have been a war!

Now put that into perspective. In USTA you are concentrating on returning a hard 4.5 serve and also making the call if the ball is in or out. Now do you also think its humanly possible to call a foot fault as well??

Ace
04-01-2007, 02:41 PM
I did find it funny though during the final match of the season for the top spot, the opposing team brings in this self rated player with a heavy Spanish accent, that didn't even know who was on the team he was showing up for. He then proceeds to blow the #1 player for the authors team off the court. :)

hahah, yeah, you can look up that name too. Raul Mendez. He's a 5.0 now.

beernutz
04-01-2007, 02:58 PM
No its not my eyesight its all human beings eyesight. There is just no way humanly possible a human can fairly see a slight foot fault from the other side of the court. Thats why in professional tennis only the basline Judge or the main one can call the foot fault. The far Judge is not even allowed to make that call. Ever wonder why??? Because its impossible for a himan to make that call from that vantage point.

Think about it,.....when you hit a ball close to the baseline you basically have to trust your opponent to make that call because its tough for you to see it. A minor footfault is even more difficult to see.

The dude from Saw Mill was out of line.

There is just no way you can honestly make that call unless its a HUGE HUGE foot fault.


Then why is calling foot faults on an opponent specifically ALLOWED by the Code?

rfprse
04-01-2007, 03:16 PM
Dude if some jerk called a foot fault on me from way over on the other side of the court then there would be a battle. I'm sorry, I dont care what the hell the rules say...you just cannot make that call all the way from the other side of the court. That type of a call would get anyone angry.

Look at todays match when Canas got called for it. He freaked out!! And that was a legit call by someone at the baseline. Can you imagine of the ump from way over on the other end had made that call?? It would have been a war!

Now put that into perspective. In USTA you are concentrating on returning a hard 4.5 serve and also making the call if the ball is in or out. Now do you also think its humanly possible to call a foot fault as well??

And what's the relevence? You have sympathy for the author? You'd acted the same way? Good for you.
I would get ****ed, too. Just what's that has to do with my post?:confused:
(However, I would've asked for a judge from either team to watch for the foot fault.)

If you don't get the joke and what would be funny if the "jerk" in the article wrote back a rebuttal against the author describing the author as a jerk, it's fine.

On the serious side, I think the author took advantage of his position and took a public shot at the guy.
Why not give the other guy fair shot and access to the media? It'll be fun, if not to see how the story could change from the other side. :)

ximian
04-01-2007, 03:31 PM
Then why is calling foot faults on an opponent specifically ALLOWED by the Code?

you'll have to show me the code, because I've always been under the impression that your opponent can only warn you of foot faulting, never call you on it. Only a USTA official can call foot faults.

EZRA
04-01-2007, 03:33 PM
Really? That means that you are going to play against the Saw Mill club! You have got to report back to us if they are as much jerks as the article says they are.

I heard some really nasty stories about those guys. I heard they pulled a really gross move in doubles.

The net man of the receiving team actually stood in the box where the serve was to be served into!! This is completely legal but damn is that distracting!!


I'm actually looking forward to this... the schedule's not up yet so I don't know when we're meeting that team. I've been checking the rosters, that infamous guy hasn't signed up yet but the story's author is already on his team's roster.

goober
04-01-2007, 03:41 PM
I'm actually looking forward to this... the schedule's not up yet so I don't know when we're meeting that team. I've been checking the rosters, that infamous guy hasn't signed up yet but the story's author is already on his team's roster.

Throw a little humor in your match and call him on a couple of foot faults during warm up :) Then add, " Don't even think about taking this outside, before I took up tennis, cage fighting was my sport."

tennismike33
04-01-2007, 03:47 PM
I played in a tournament this weekend where all of the players were NTRP 4.5 and higher. From the vantage point of seating abovethe court 3 out of 4 of the players playing on the first 2 courts were guilty of foot faulting. One guy was so bad he had BOTH feet inside of the baseline, you would think that players at that level would KNOW they are foot faulting.

Fewer and fewer tournaments have roving umpires and there is less and less emphasis placed on this item of the serve when pros are teaching the serve. Watching many teaching sessions I can't remember any professional teacher mention to a client to watch the FF. I am not sure why there are fewer umpires, tournament directors don't even walk around the courts.

beernutz
04-01-2007, 04:24 PM
you'll have to show me the code, because I've always been under the impression that your opponent can only warn you of foot faulting, never call you on it. Only a USTA official can call foot faults.

You are incapable of looking it up yourself? There is a great line in the movie Arthur which I am tempted to use here but since this is a family forum...

http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_2292.pdf

See #24.

goober
04-01-2007, 05:21 PM
Then why is calling foot faults on an opponent specifically ALLOWED by the Code?

Calling flagrant foot fault is allowed by the code. I doubt if somebody has been playing tennis as the author claims (25 years) and apparently in competitive situations and has never been called for a foot fault even once that he is making flagrant foot faults. If it were that obvious his opponent should have called an official.

Ace
04-01-2007, 05:23 PM
Calling flagrant foot fault is allowed by the code. I doubt if somebody has been playing tennis as the author claims (25 years) and apparently in competitive situations and has never been called for a foot fault even once that he is making flagrant foot faults. If it were that obvious his opponent should have called an official.

An official? Who's USTA league (during the regular league season) has officials?
We have some guy that gives us balls and numbers, then goes and drinks our beer with our spectators!

beernutz
04-01-2007, 05:30 PM
Calling flagrant foot fault is allowed by the code. I doubt if somebody has been playing tennis as the author claims (25 years) and apparently in competitive situations and has never been called for a foot fault even once that he is making flagrant foot faults. If it were that obvious his opponent should have called an official.

Goober, why are you saying this like I don't know it? Where have I said anything to support the idea that the player playing the jerk was actually foot faulting? Someone said that a player CAN'T call any foot faults on an opponent. I responded that they can and posted the link to the Code to support my assertion.

I know the player calling foot faults in this case was being a dick. All I was arguing is that the Code does allow him to call those foot faults, not that he was right in calling them the way he did.

And as someone else has already pointed out, you must play in a very high and mighty USTA league if you have officials on hand for your matches.

goober
04-01-2007, 05:40 PM
An official? Who's USTA league (during the regular league season) has officials?
We have some guy that gives us balls and numbers, then goes and drinks our beer with our spectators!

When I say officials I am not saying an official USTA referee only. Many USTA leagues allow for "court monitors" which is a person acceptable to both sides that can over rule calls if asked and can call footfaults.

I can remember getting court monitors setup for several matches ahead of time when we knew the opposing team called things close or participated in other shannigans.



.

goober
04-01-2007, 05:47 PM
Goober, why are you saying this like I don't know it? Where have I said anything to support the idea that the player playing the jerk was actually foot faulting? Someone said that a player CAN'T call any foot faults on an opponent. I responded that they can and posted the link to the Code to support my assertion.

I know the player calling foot faults in this case was being a dick. All I was arguing is that the Code does allow him to call those foot faults, not that he was right in calling them the way he did.


I probably should not have quoted you. My comments were more a general comment not directed specifically at you- that yes foot faults are allowed to be called in the code but I have doubts about if it applied in this case.

nyc
04-01-2007, 06:04 PM
Maybe it's time to start a Fight Club League and bring wooden racquets back...

beernutz
04-01-2007, 06:29 PM
I probably should not have quoted you. My comments were more a general comment not directed specifically at you- that yes foot faults are allowed to be called in the code but I have doubts about if it applied in this case.

Ok, carry on then, because I agree with that 100%. :-D I thought you were addressing me specifically because of the quote.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 07:16 PM
Calling flagrant foot fault is allowed by the code. I doubt if somebody has been playing tennis as the author claims (25 years) and apparently in competitive situations and has never been called for a foot fault even once that he is making flagrant foot faults. If it were that obvious his opponent should have called an official.

The key word is "FLAGRANT".

The bottom line I think is if someone is flagrantly foot faulting so that he gets a huge advantage in getting to the net then one should absolutely make that call!!

On the other hand if someone is like a centimeter over the line or someone footfaults the way Canas did today the who really gives a damn!! Just play the freaking match!

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 07:17 PM
I did, and that guy was a ******, plain and simple.

Did you realluy play against the Saw Mill club or are you just making a joke? If you did I would love to hear what happened in your story.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-01-2007, 07:30 PM
By the way if anyone wants to see the USTA match summary of the Saw Mill team vs. The Arsenal team here it is. Just scroll down to James Martin vs. Rich Callwood and you will see it says "retired":

http://tennislink.usta.com/leagues/reports/TennisLinkReports.asp?Level=M&MatchID=1950999

Kevo
04-01-2007, 08:26 PM
I see people foot fault all the time in my league. Some guys do it practically every serve. It's easy to see. Most of the time its a step or a slide before contact. I don't call these anymore though. I almost got into it with a guy one time because I called him for a foot fault. Man was he ****ed. He claimed that I only called it because his serve was an ace, but I called it immediately and didn't even attempt to return the serve. I told him that he had been foot faulting for quite some time and at this point he was 6 inches over the line and I couldn't overlook it anymore. He was yelling and calling me names. He calmed down after a minute, but when the match was over he muttered some more names under his breath and I asked him what he said. That was a mistake. It almost came to blows. Anyway, I decided I wouldn't call them any more, and I don't. Almost 50% of the players in my 4.0 league foot fault. The only time I mention it any more is after the match as a courtesy in case they care. Some people have apologized and some have thanked me for mentioning it. No one has gotten upset about it. Makes me wonder what would have happened if I called it in the match though.

EZRA
04-01-2007, 09:23 PM
An official? Who's USTA league (during the regular league season) has officials?
We have some guy that gives us balls and numbers, then goes and drinks our beer with our spectators!


I was playing a mixer this Winter and we were playing for a place for the playoffs. The previous match a week before turned ugly and there were cheating, shouting, and threats involved between players and team captains that an offical had to show up and officiate the deciding match.
There was only one guy looking over 3 courts and every now and then he would make line calls call foot-fault calls. It was actually very effective and people stayed calm and civilized throughout the match... sad to say our team got beat.

AndrewD
04-02-2007, 12:11 AM
Seriously, just because it appears in a magazine, everyone seems to think that the author's version of events is gospel. How in the world do we know that the author isn't the one in the wrong and that the other guy, after warning him several times that he was foot-faulting (and yes, it can be so obvious you can see it from the opposite baseline), decided to call it quits rather than put up with such deliberate cheating? That is an entirely possible scenario.

Just remember, he who writes history, makes history.

jelle v
04-02-2007, 04:37 AM
Throw a little humor in your match and call him on a couple of foot faults during warm up :) Then add, " Don't even think about taking this outside, before I took up tennis, cage fighting was my sport."

LOL :mrgreen:

Great thread this is.. it demonstrates how fanatic everybody gets when you're playing league-tennis. Doesn't matter what the level of play is, it will always generate a "us versus them" attitude among the players. Everybody wants to win and everybody get's that warrior-like feeling. It's pure war on the tenniscourts, no matter what level. :mrgreen:

I don't know the USTA rules, but the man calling the footfault actually was right in my opinion, strictly speaking. If it was necessary to call the footfault, that is another question, depends on how big the footfault was I guess. I don't call footfaults when I notice them. One opponent of mine (a female - it was mixed doubles-) actually took one giant step into the court. Must have passed the baseline by about two feet. Didn't call it.

And yes, you can see a footfault from players on the other side. You can see the baseline can't you? But with your eyes on your opponents feet it will be more difficult to get a decent return.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 05:36 AM
I guess it really depends on how bad the foot fault is. Lets face it if someone steps over the line by a centimeter you are not going to notice it. And even if you were somehow able to notice it does it really make a difference?

On the other hand a flagrant foot fault is a whole dofferent issue.

I believe in this present case at the 4.5 level there could not be much of a foot fault. Plus the dude from Saw Mill was calling foot faults during warm up!

Finally if you read the article the dude from Saw Mill admitted that he was calling them because the captain of the Saw Mill team was having a line call problem with the authors team!

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 05:38 AM
LOL :mrgreen:

And yes, you can see a footfault from players on the other side. You can see the baseline can't you? But with your eyes on your opponents feet it will be more difficult to get a decent return.

Even a minor one? Then answer this question. In professional tennis why is the line Judge from the other end of the court barred from making such a call?

But even more importantly does a very minor footfault really even make a difference?

EZRA
04-02-2007, 06:30 AM
Calling footfault when warming up is stupid.

Calling footfault from the other side of the court is stupid as well... unless, the guy is actually stepping way inside the baseline then it's obvious. But stepping in on the line isn't something to cry about... (I don't footfault myself, but if my opponent footfaults a bit, I wouldn't complain about it).

Serve and Volley
04-02-2007, 06:55 AM
Calling footfault when warming up is stupid.

Calling footfault from the other side of the court is stupid as well... unless, the guy is actually stepping way inside the baseline then it's obvious. But stepping in on the line isn't something to cry about... (I don't footfault myself, but if my opponent footfaults a bit, I wouldn't complain about it).

I agree with that and I am shocked that there is even a debate about this. It just goes to show you how many jerks there are at USTA.

I am there to have fun. If someone foot faults by a centimeter I would not be able to see it and even if I were able to see it there is no way in hell I would even make that call. Who the hell cares!

On the other hand a flagrant foot fault is wrong. I have seen people actually step all the way into "No Mans land" and get the the net EXTREMELY quickly. This is just wrong!

So it comes down to whether the foot fault is Flagrant or is minor. If its flagrant then by all means make the call but if its minor then just shut up and play tennis. A centimeter is just not going to make a difference nor could you really even see that!

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 07:00 AM
I noticed something that the author James martin did actually do that may not be so honest.

I was doing more reasearch on www.USTA.com and I noticed that James Martin actually entered into the league as a self rated 4.0. The computer bumped him up to 4.5 because he destroyed everyone at the 4.0 level.

The question is as an editor of tennis magazine shouldn't James Martin have known his level just a little better before self rating himself as a 4.0?

TennezSport
04-02-2007, 07:32 AM
I noticed something that the author James martin did actually do that may not be so honest.

I was doing more reasearch on www.USTA.com and I noticed that James Martin actually entered into the league as a self rated 4.0. The computer bumped him up to 4.5 because he destroyed everyone at the 4.0 level.

The question is as an editor of tennis magazine shouldn't James Martin have known his level just a little better before self rating himself as a 4.0?


Depends where Mr. Martin is from. If you took a NE 4.0 and put him up again a West coast or Southern 3.5, the NE4.0 would get blown away. The Western and Southern regions are so much better that the NE and the USTA rates by region, so it's hard to say.

TennezSport :cool:

spot
04-02-2007, 08:00 AM
There are people who grossly footfault and you can certainly see it from the other side of the court. I think that footfaulting is a tough situation that isn't properly addressed in the code. The problem is that it is perfectly within the rules for your opponent to call you for a footfault but most people think that for minor infractions it should not be called. But there are many people in league tennis who footfault on every single serve. Its a tough issue.

andfor
04-02-2007, 08:58 AM
Depends where Mr. Martin is from. If you took a NE 4.0 and put him up again a West coast or Southern 3.5, the NE4.0 would get blown away. The Western and Southern regions are so much better that the NE and the USTA rates by region, so it's hard to say.

TennezSport :cool:

How come this incorrect perception of one section NTRP strength verses another continues on and on? What makes this argument so rediculous is with this logic the Southern 3.5 champs would beat the NE 4.0 champs, wrong. Sure the Southern's have more players at a given level than the NE but this does not change the level in question itself.

Your either correctly rated in the NTRP system or not. Period.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 09:47 AM
Depends where Mr. Martin is from. If you took a NE 4.0 and put him up again a West coast or Southern 3.5, the NE4.0 would get blown away. The Western and Southern regions are so much better that the NE and the USTA rates by region, so it's hard to say.

TennezSport :cool:


Well it does not apply to Mr. Martin because he is from Westchester and plays in Westchester. Furthermore since the USTA is in Westchester I would also assume that he works there as well.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 09:50 AM
There are people who grossly footfault and you can certainly see it from the other side of the court. I think that footfaulting is a tough situation that isn't properly addressed in the code. The problem is that it is perfectly within the rules for your opponent to call you for a footfault but most people think that for minor infractions it should not be called. But there are many people in league tennis who footfault on every single serve. Its a tough issue.

Its just common courtesy. A minor footfault like the one canas just made should not be called. I mean big deal...lets say somenes backfoot went over the center line by a milimeter...who the hell cares! I mean on the professional level where you have a line judge right on top of you ...well thats one thing. But this is a freaking USTA match....I gurantee you that every single player footfaults at least once a match by a milimeter. Who the hell cares!!!

If its flagrant then call it ...otheriwse just play tennis.

Kevo
04-02-2007, 12:40 PM
How come this incorrect perception of one section NTRP strength verses another continues on and on? What makes this argument so rediculous is with this logic the Southern 3.5 champs would beat the NE 4.0 champs, wrong. Sure the Southern's have more players at a given level than the NE but this does not change the level in question itself.

Your either correctly rated in the NTRP system or not. Period.

It's not as black and white as that. Computer ratings are based on wins and losses. If you can't hit a backhand to save your life, but you have the serve of Roddick and the forehand of Federer then you will beat all the 4.0s and will move up to 4.5 at least. However, according to the NTRP guidelines you would not be a 4.0 or 4.5 because you "should" have some kind of backhand. So this is a contrived example, but there are pushers who hit defensively all the time that are 4.0. Not because they fit the guidelines, but because they can compete with other 4.0s. As far as the regional sections being a half point or more off, I don't know about that. I'd need to see it for myself.

Fedace
04-02-2007, 12:45 PM
Did you guys read the tennis mag article this month "A season on the Edge"?

The author tells a story of a jerk he played in league. But he intentionally keeps the identity of the team and the player a secret to "protect the guilty".

Well the secret is now out!! The team he is talking about is the Saw Mill Club in Westchester NY and the player he is talking about is Rich Callwood .

How do I know?? Well all you have to do is plug in the authors name James Martin into the USTA website. Next you look up his matches in 4.5 league. There is only one match where his opponent defaulted and it was Rich Callwood of the Saw Mill Club. ( he mention in the article that his opponent defaulted and that it was 4.5 league).

Call me Sherlock Holmes.:)
I dare Rich Callwood to respond to this accusations ;) :confused: :grin: :

Joeyg
04-02-2007, 01:00 PM
Rich Callwood was wrong to try and psych out his opponent by calling footfaults during warm-ups. However, foot faulting even one inch in a league match is BS. If you have been warned and you continue to do it, you are CHEATING!!! League tennis is ultimately a team endeavor and most players take it very seriously.

I cannot believe that there are people on these boards that say "no big deal". It can be a VERY big deal to gain an advantage by moving in to the court before you are supposed to. Foot faulting is against the rules. If it wasn't there would be no reason not to move in and get a running start into the court. To try and say a little bit is OK is crap. It is notamatter of degrees. If it was, how far in is OK?

I know there are those of you that will say I am taking it too seriously. To those of you with that opinion, start playing by the rules. end of rant!

Moves
04-02-2007, 01:36 PM
But this is a freaking USTA match....I gurantee you that every single player footfaults at least once a match by a milimeter.

Nope. I don't move my feet until I go vertical and I never touch the line at set-up. I never even considered touching the line before I hit the ball an option. :confused:

The foot fault I always see is the set up behind the line, then the toss, then the big step into the court, then the hit. I mean, how do you even develop that habit unless you disrespect the game? :confused:

- Moves

ps. I have a size 13 foot. :p

Attila the tennis Bum
04-02-2007, 08:28 PM
Nope. I don't move my feet until I go vertical and I never touch the line at set-up. I never even considered touching the line before I hit the ball an option. :confused:

The foot fault I always see is the set up behind the line, then the toss, then the big step into the court, then the hit. I mean, how do you even develop that habit unless you disrespect the game? :confused:

- Moves

ps. I have a size 13 foot. :p


There is no way you can honestly make that call from the other end of the court unless its flagrant. If you make a call like that when its by like a centimeter then you are completely dishonest.

First you have the net as an obstruction. Next you are really freaking far away. After that you have sunlight or tough lighting indoors to deal with. Next you have to watch if the serve is in. Then you have to try to return it.

Its a freaking silly call from that vantage point. You cannot make an honest call from that vantage point unless its a very flagrant step.

Finally I'm not even sure you are allowed to make that call from that point. I believe you are only allowed to give a warning.....but I am not sure of the rule.

ClimbK2
04-02-2007, 08:41 PM
Seriously, just because it appears in a magazine, everyone seems to think that the author's version of events is gospel. How in the world do we know that the author isn't the one in the wrong and that the other guy, after warning him several times that he was foot-faulting (and yes, it can be so obvious you can see it from the opposite baseline), decided to call it quits rather than put up with such deliberate cheating? That is an entirely possible scenario.

Just remember, he who writes history, makes history.

Good point. This thread appears first if you do a Google search "Rich Callwood" -- if the author, CLEARLY no saint by his own admission, exagerated the story, Rich is unfairly hosed for all history.

AndrewD
04-02-2007, 10:29 PM
Finally if you read the article the dude from Saw Mill admitted that he was calling them because the captain of the Saw Mill team was having a line call problem with the authors team!

The other guy admitted nothing: all you have are the author's words and his interpretation of events. You have absolutely no idea whether the words attributed to the guy from Saw Mill (what you call an admission) are in context or not. For all you, or any of us know, he could have been referring to something else altogether.

I will say, however, in all my time playing sport (not just tennis) I've very rarely seen cheats give up after only 3 games. Usually, those guys stick around for the long haul and it's their opponents who are move to defaulting. I wonder why, in this case, the exact opposite happened?

gonzo2000
04-02-2007, 11:19 PM
Neither one of them should get any pats on the back for their behavior that day.

Bad sportsmanship was exhibited by both parties-by supposed adults. What a shame.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-03-2007, 10:05 AM
The other guy admitted nothing: all you have are the author's words and his interpretation of events. You have absolutely no idea whether the words attributed to the guy from Saw Mill (what you call an admission) are in context or not. For all you, or any of us know, he could have been referring to something else altogether.

I will say, however, in all my time playing sport (not just tennis) I've very rarely seen cheats give up after only 3 games. Usually, those guys stick around for the long haul and it's their opponents who are move to defaulting. I wonder why, in this case, the exact opposite happened?

Probably because he was getting the crap kicked out of him. It was 3-0 when the cheater from Saw Mill quit. Usually my experience with cheaters is that if their crap is not working then they do give up. Saw Mill was going to be very embarrassed. Foot fault or not the score was 3-0!

Secondly where is Callwood? I would love to hear his side of the story and why he was calling footfaults from all the way on the other side of the court? Are you on the Saw Mill team because you are defending this cheater a bit too much.

If you want to hear Callwoods side of his cheating story so badly just contact the Saw Mill Club. I am sure they would be interested to hear how their club is being portrayed by the media . Please let them know that thousands of people read the boards at TW and it would be in their best interest to give their side of the story. I think we would all like to see that! Here you go big shot...send them an email:
www.sawmillclub.com...If callwood even has the balls to respond then we can prin his response here on TW!!! We can even write to James Martin and demand that he print the rebuttal.

Cruzer
04-03-2007, 10:52 AM
The other guy admitted nothing: all you have are the author's words and his interpretation of events. You have absolutely no idea whether the words attributed to the guy from Saw Mill (what you call an admission) are in context or not. For all you, or any of us know, he could have been referring to something else altogether.

Very good point. As the saying goes there are two sides to every story and the truth always somewhere between the two.

Moves
04-03-2007, 12:01 PM
There is no way you can honestly make that call from the other end of the court unless its flagrant.

Oh, I never call it in singles because you can't watch the foot and the ball at the same time. The only way to do that is to predict he is going to fault his first serve and just watch the foot. Also difficult to do. :p

Only when I'm on the net in doubles do I even think about checking. Then after the serve I will nicely say, "John, you're foot faulting", just like a good coach would say, not a bad sport would say.

- Moves

beernutz
04-03-2007, 12:33 PM
There is no way you can honestly make that call from the other end of the court unless its flagrant. If you make a call like that when its by like a centimeter then you are completely dishonest.

First you have the net as an obstruction. Next you are really freaking far away. After that you have sunlight or tough lighting indoors to deal with. Next you have to watch if the serve is in. Then you have to try to return it.

Its a freaking silly call from that vantage point. You cannot make an honest call from that vantage point unless its a very flagrant step.

Finally I'm not even sure you are allowed to make that call from that point. I believe you are only allowed to give a warning.....but I am not sure of the rule.


You are not supposed to make a foot fault call of any kind UNLESS it is FLAGRANT. I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise, and that is what the Code specifies.

You have very strong opinions about this for someone who won't even be bothered to go look up what the rules say. I think there is a commonly used name for such a person...

spot
04-03-2007, 01:07 PM
Anyone find it odd that the author is the only one that broke the rules? He footfaulted and when his opponent claimed the point he just blatantly disregarded it.

oldguysrule
04-03-2007, 01:39 PM
Anyone find it odd that the author is the only one that broke the rules? He footfaulted and when his opponent claimed the point he just blatantly disregarded it.

I was wondering if someone else would mention this....good call.

Moves
04-03-2007, 02:58 PM
I was wondering if someone else would mention this....good call.

That is the one weak part of the story. At no point does the author say, "I don't foot fault." I could have said, "It's not possible as I don't move my feet."

- Moves

EZRA
04-03-2007, 03:20 PM
Rich Callwood was wrong to try and psych out his opponent by calling footfaults during warm-ups. However, foot faulting even one inch in a league match is BS. If you have been warned and you continue to do it, you are CHEATING!!! League tennis is ultimately a team endeavor and most players take it very seriously.

I cannot believe that there are people on these boards that say "no big deal". It can be a VERY big deal to gain an advantage by moving in to the court before you are supposed to. Foot faulting is against the rules. If it wasn't there would be no reason not to move in and get a running start into the court. To try and say a little bit is OK is crap. It is notamatter of degrees. If it was, how far in is OK?

I know there are those of you that will say I am taking it too seriously. To those of you with that opinion, start playing by the rules. end of rant!


Why take USTA League matches seriously? Do you get anything from it? It's just a league match.. there's nothing at stake except for bragging rights (if that really matters to you).

Yes, footfaulting is wrong and is against the rules of the game. I agree that it would be great if there were USTA officials to officate every match.. looking after the footfaults, double-bounces, faulty line-calls, etc.... but sad to say we usually don't have that luxury in the USTA. And somehow, honesty is optional in the league matches as I've observed. Sad but true... but then again, you shouldn't let those keep you from having fun.

I've played against people who constantly footfaults - who steps on the line upon service impact. But that doesn't bother me the very least... unless of course he steps way over the line then that's a little too much to ignore... and I do call their attention about them overly foot-faulting (in a very polite manner of course... I don't wanna take the fun out of the game).

Personally, I never footfault... emphasis on the word NEVER. I always have my lead foot at least 2 inches behind the baseline before serving. I've been taught and trained not to footfault since I started playing all throughout age-group and college tennis. These habits are hard to break and I have no intention in breaking them.

tennismike33
04-03-2007, 06:05 PM
I sent this link to the head pro out at Saw Mill, as I am sure that others have done.

AndrewD
04-03-2007, 09:54 PM
Are you on the Saw Mill team because you are defending this cheater a bit too much.

Here you go big shot...send them an email:


Just because I point out that any story has two sides to it and that, without hearing from the other party and not having seen the event take place, you have no intelligent reason to use the tag cheater, that means I'm defending someone too much? Seems more like I'm just pointing out the obvious to someone who appears far too interested in attacking an anonymous party. Your last name wouldn't be McCarthy by any chance?

Big shot? LOL.

Oh, and by the way, I'm in Australia, as a quick look at my profile would have told you

christo
04-04-2007, 10:21 AM
Calling out "footfault" is a terrific way to get in to someone's head as the "offender" has no way to determine if he IS footfaulting. I think the gentleman in question might use this strategy on all of his opponents to distract them before even 1 point has been played. At the 4.5 level there are many players who foot fault, does it give them an advantage? Not unless they are the reincarnation of Pat Rafter.
Gamesmanship is rampant at USTA level and it usually starts at the warm-up.
IMO the author got sucked in by his opponent, and his threat of physical violence should have warranted a review by the USTA. It is NEVER acceptable to threaten your opponent, even if he is a jerk. Both players need to examine their part in the incident, I don't believe either are lilywhite in this one. Just my 2 cents worth.

BigJEFF
04-05-2007, 12:28 AM
Good its Not me.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 06:25 AM
Nope. I don't move my feet until I go vertical and I never touch the line at set-up. I never even considered touching the line before I hit the ball an option. :confused:



Calling out "footfault" is a terrific way to get in to someone's head as the "offender" has no way to determine if he IS footfaulting.


I do not think that one is qaulified to make the call even as to your own footfault. You can't see your own foot fault! You may think you are not foot faulting but there is no way you can tell for sure.

Thats my point...from all the way from the other side of the court, with a net obstructing your view, with having to try and return the serve, with sunlight and shade, and watching the line to see of the serve is in...do you really think its possible to honestly call a minor footfault?

The issue therefore is: Is it possible to see a minor footfault from all the way from the other side of the court?

In my opinion, unless it flagrant you really can't see it from that vantage point.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 06:31 AM
I sent this link to the head pro out at Saw Mill, as I am sure that others have done.


You might want to send the link over to James Martin the editor of Tennis magazine as well. he is over at www.tennis.com. I would love to see a debate between Callwood & The Saw Mill Club.

Fedace
04-05-2007, 06:46 AM
You might want to send the link over to James Martin the editor of Tennis magazine as well. he is over at www.tennis.com. I would love to see a debate between Callwood & The Saw Mill Club.

What i don't understand Attilla is that how seriously these people take tennis so much that they will go these length to make a mockery of these situations. I myself take tennis pretty seriously and i myself had filed one complaint against a psycho tennis player in the past but that was the extent of it. one thing though is that USTA needs to have more strict rules against guys like these

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 06:49 AM
What i don't understand Attilla is that how seriously these people take tennis so much that they will go these length to make a mockery of these situations. I myself take tennis pretty seriously and i myself had filed one complaint against a psycho tennis player in the past but that was the extent of it. one thing though is that USTA needs to have more strict rules against guys like these

I agree. Hey this guy James Martin really does look like Steve O from jackass. Check it out:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2813206&name=tennis

flash9
04-05-2007, 09:52 AM
Last season I was a playing 4.0 doubles match, and one of the players we were to play, I had watch pay a couple weeks before against a different team from my club. During this match he was taking a large step into the court before hitting his serve. It was very flagrant foot faulting. This player also charges the net on most serves so he was definitely gaining an unfair advantage. As we began to warm-up our serves his partner and I ended up at the net and I commented that he was taking an awful big step into the court, and his partner agreed. Note: I never said foot fault, just that he was stepping onto the court before making contact. So, as we all met at the net before beginning the match, I commented that we would be watching, warning and if necessary calling flagrant foot faults. We could tell this upset him, because he had to know he foot faults and in essence cheats. So, he and his partner had a long talk, and it was obvious that his partner explained what we had noticed. Even though he was the more powerful server, his partner served first. When it came to be his turn to serve, he stood a good foot or two off the line and still was foot faulting about 50% of the time. We did not call this or even warn him, since he appeared to be making an effort to not foot fault. He served terrible and lost both his serves in the first set. For the second set I guess he decided to see if we really would call it and stood in his typical spot and proceeded to step a foot or two into the court before making contact. So, we warned him. He was rather peeved, but once again moved back off the line. We never had to actually call a foot fault that resulted in a fault, but we would have if he had not moved off the line.

Why are players OK with letting flagrant foot faults slide? Flagrant foot falters in all likelihood know they are foot faulting, which is just a form of cheating. Is it any different then calling a ball out that you know was in?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 10:04 AM
Oh I agree with the above. I gave seen flagrant foot faulters step all the way inot no mans land and get to the net. This is way out of line and shoul absolutely be called.

I do not think there is even a debate as to the flagrant foot faults. I think everyone agrees that they should be called.

The minor foot faults are the ones that are aproblem...because i do not believe that those can even be seen. If those are called then they are called for only one reason: To cheat.

rasajadad
04-05-2007, 11:13 AM
I used to play in an open league in Westchester County in the summer. Most of the same guys. (The 4.5's would play doubles and there would be significant ringers playing 1st and 2nd singles.) Anyway, the league was full of stuff like this. Too many type-a's!

spot
04-05-2007, 01:31 PM
attilla- there is a major disagreement about calling footfaults at all. Many people think that because its a social match that footfaults shouldn't be called. For the purposes of this discussion lets say that a flagrant footfault is one where the player steps across the line by 4 inches. There are many recreational players who footfault like this on almost every serve. This is clearly visible from the other side of the court. Would you call the footfault in this situation? What would you do if you called the footfault and your opponent just disregarded your call like the author of the article did?

tennismike33
04-05-2007, 02:22 PM
attilla- there is a major disagreement about calling footfaults at all. Many people think that because its a social match that footfaults shouldn't be called. For the purposes of this discussion lets say that a flagrant footfault is one where the player steps across the line by 4 inches. There are many recreational players who footfault like this on almost every serve. This is clearly visible from the other side of the court. Would you call the footfault in this situation? What would you do if you called the footfault and your opponent just disregarded your call like the author of the article did?

The only footfault I ever called was on a guy who was crossing the center service line on the add side of the court. His left foot was obviously touching across into the court BEFORE he struck his serve. Between changeovers I mentioned it to him, he too probably thought I was trying to get into his head. The next time he served I caught his serve, advised him again he was footfaulting, that is when the disagreement started. He shouted back that he was a tennis coach and he knew the rules, he was not foot faulting. When he did it again I called for a referee, thus the end of the footfault, when the ref called him on it he just glared at me, I shrugged my shoulders and smiled.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 02:37 PM
Hello sir Jay of kay. Just wanted to say hello.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 02:44 PM
attilla- there is a major disagreement about calling footfaults at all. Many people think that because its a social match that footfaults shouldn't be called. For the purposes of this discussion lets say that a flagrant footfault is one where the player steps across the line by 4 inches. There are many recreational players who footfault like this on almost every serve. This is clearly visible from the other side of the court. Would you call the footfault in this situation? What would you do if you called the footfault and your opponent just disregarded your call like the author of the article did?

I agree. I certainly would not blame anyone for calling a footfault by four inches or so However you asked if I would make such a call. I personally would not make that call. I dont think four inches gives you any advantage at all. I would let it slip.

On the other hand I have seen dudes foot fault all the way in no mans land and then run to the net for a huge advantage. Even I would call such a foot fault. But four inches??? I personally wouldnt say a word. Who cares!

spot
04-05-2007, 03:35 PM
So lets say that the author of the article footfaults by 4 inches on every serve but no one has ever called him on it. Doesn't that change your opinion of the participants a great deal?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 04:11 PM
So lets say that the author of the article footfaults by 4 inches on every serve but no one has ever called him on it. Doesn't that change your opinion of the participants a great deal?

Before I get into this I promised my friend M0m0shir0 that I would say hello in this post. So Shout out to you pal!

As to an answer to your question....let me ask you this :

Do you think you are losing the match 3-0 because of a four inch foot fault?

I personally think its an excuse because you are getting your butt kicked.

kylebarendrick
04-05-2007, 04:13 PM
That may be true, but if the server doesn't want to give his opponent that excuse he should stay behind the line.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 04:17 PM
That may be true, but if the server doesn't want to give his opponent that excuse he should stay behind the line.


He probably does not even know that he is doing it. A minor infraction is not done purposely.

When Canas did it to Djocic it was a complete accident. he did not even know he did it.

Now on the pro level with a line judge right there I completely understand. But lets say that was a league match. Do you think that Canas got any advantage by stepping over the middle line by an inch? I don't think it gave him any advantage and if that were a league match I would not say a word. Far more improtantly ...there is no way I would even honestly be able to make that call from all the way on the other side of the court.

Oh and hello again M0m0shir0 and JayKay. Yes its really me your good friend babble!

Ace
04-05-2007, 04:29 PM
I agree. Hey this guy James Martin really does look like Steve O from jackass. Check it out:

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=2813206&name=tennis

Steve-O with some serious hair plugs!

spot
04-05-2007, 04:47 PM
Attila- I haven't ever called a footfault and I doubt I ever will- but if I made a call and my opponent just disregarded it out of hand even though it was the correct call then I would be pretty ****ed off. The Author is the one at fault here- not the guy who was calling him for footfaults. I might not have called the footfaults in the same situation but he is fully within his rights to do so and for the server to just ignore it is absolutely ridiculous.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-05-2007, 08:38 PM
Attila- I haven't ever called a footfault and I doubt I ever will- but if I made a call and my opponent just disregarded it out of hand even though it was the correct call then I would be pretty ****ed off. The Author is the one at fault here- not the guy who was calling him for footfaults. I might not have called the footfaults in the same situation but he is fully within his rights to do so and for the server to just ignore it is absolutely ridiculous.


actually I am not so sure that he is within his rights. Are you allowed to call a foot fault all the way from the other side? Whats the rule?

SB
04-05-2007, 08:39 PM
This thread reminds me of something I had forgotten ... in mixed playoffs about 3 years ago, our guy opponent started calling foot faults on my (guy) partner. He kind of laughed about it, but the opponent kept on. Then the opponent started fussing about line calls, so some of his teammates who were observing went to get a referee for us.

I wasn't too put out by all this, because I was trying not to pay attention (easier to do in doubles, let your partner deal with them), and I didn't think we were doing anything wrong.

I guess I was right, because when the line judge got there, the only foot faults he called and line calls he overruled were on the other team, not on us. LOL. And we did win the match, in a third-set tiebreak.

spot
04-06-2007, 04:46 AM
Attila- thats the point. You are allowed to call footfaults after you warn your opponent. The guy was warned and then the footfaults were called. The Author was the one at fault in this story.

rasajadad
04-06-2007, 05:27 AM
[QUOTE=EZRA;1353285]Calling footfault when warming up is stupid.

I agree with you 100%. It's just as stupid as calling balls out during a warm-up. I can't believe it was anything but an attempt to get into someone's head.

armand
04-06-2007, 06:01 AM
Steve-O with some serious hair plugs!Hahaha, I saw the pic, funny stuffs! I know very little about hairplugs but if someone got them, why would they have them so short:confused:

Attila the tennis Bum
04-06-2007, 07:40 AM
Attila- thats the point. You are allowed to call footfaults after you warn your opponent. The guy was warned and then the footfaults were called. The Author was the one at fault in this story.


There are a few issues here that really should be addressed:

1- Can a minor foot fault be seen clearly from the other side of the court?

2- If a minor foot fault does not give the player really any advantage then moraly should it be called even though you are technically allowed to call it?

3- If someone is losing 3-0 then is it the foot fault that is bothering or is it because he was really losing?

kylebarendrick
04-06-2007, 09:04 AM
1 - Most likely not.
2 - Generally not, but since it is a rules violation I'd give the moral high ground to the person making the call rather than the person stepping on/over the line.
3 - Could go either way. Some people get really freaked out by foot faults and it affects their game. I agree that minor ones provide no real advantage so I choose not to worry about it. However, if someone is violating the rules they have no right to complain about someone calling them on it - regardless of their motivation for calling it.

Stand back another 6 inches. It won't affect the serve at all and you take away your opponent's opportunity to game you.

jaykay
04-06-2007, 09:53 AM
Hello sir Jay of kay. Just wanted to say hello.

Hey Attila The Babbler: watsup? :) Good to know that you are around here as well...

beernutz
04-06-2007, 10:27 AM
There are a few issues here that really should be addressed:

1- Can a minor foot fault be seen clearly from the other side of the court?

2- If a minor foot fault does not give the player really any advantage then moraly should it be called even though you are technically allowed to call it?

3- If someone is losing 3-0 then is it the foot fault that is bothering or is it because he was really losing?

1. It doesn't matter whether a minor foot fault can be seen or not since the rules (The Code) specifies that you can only issue warnings and then call FLAGRANT foot faults.

2. Again, this is a non-issue since by the rules you are prohibited from calling minor foot faults. The foot fault must be flagrant in order to be called.

Just in case (from dictionary.com):
fla·grant /ˈfleɪgrənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fley-gruhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. shockingly noticeable or evident; obvious; glaring: a flagrant error.

3. Like the answer to most hard questions in life, "it depends". What if on two of those three games the other player served and took advantage of huge foot faults to charge the net and win key points? Would it matter then?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-06-2007, 01:43 PM
1 - Most likely not.
2 - Generally not, but since it is a rules violation I'd give the moral high ground to the person making the call rather than the person stepping on/over the line.
3 - Could go either way. Some people get really freaked out by foot faults and it affects their game. I agree that minor ones provide no real advantage so I choose not to worry about it. However, if someone is violating the rules they have no right to complain about someone calling them on it - regardless of their motivation for calling it.

Stand back another 6 inches. It won't affect the serve at all and you take away your opponent's opportunity to game you.


well the most important thing then is #1.

If you agree that you really cannot honestly see a minor foot fault then how can you make the call?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-06-2007, 01:46 PM
1. It doesn't matter whether a minor foot fault can be seen or not since the rules (The Code) specifies that you can only issue warnings and then call FLAGRANT foot faults.

2. Again, this is a non-issue since by the rules you are prohibited from calling minor foot faults. The foot fault must be flagrant in order to be called.

Just in case (from dictionary.com):
fla·grant /ˈfleɪgrənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fley-gruhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. shockingly noticeable or evident; obvious; glaring: a flagrant error.

3. Like the answer to most hard questions in life, "it depends". What if on two of those three games the other player served and took advantage of huge foot faults to charge the net and win key points? Would it matter then?


OK great! Problem solved! Now that just leaves us with only one issue:

1- What is a flagrant foot fault and what is a minor one?

HellBunni
04-06-2007, 02:15 PM
OK great! Problem solved! Now that just leaves us with only one issue:

1- What is a flagrant foot fault and what is a minor one?

simple! if you can see it, its flagrant, it you can't it's minor (by your def). So it's all relative.

I think the author of the article is one that's on the wrong.
He even said:

In my 25 years of playong tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm ups? I walked up to my service line, "don't even think about it ," I said. "Don't start."


that pretty much saids, "I know I foot fault, I have never been called, so don't start now!" What kind of attitude is that???
He knows he is in the wrong, but since it's "acceptable" to have "minor" (all relative) foot faults, it's the NEW rule!

10sfreak
04-06-2007, 04:22 PM
simple! if you can see it, its flagrant, it you can't it's minor (by your def). So it's all relative.

I think the author of the article is one that's on the wrong.
He even said:

In my 25 years of playong tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm ups? I walked up to my service line, "don't even think about it ," I said. "Don't start."


that pretty much saids, "I know I foot fault, I have never been called, so don't start now!" What kind of attitude is that???
He knows he is in the wrong, but since it's "acceptable" to have "minor" (all relative) foot faults, it's the NEW rule!
Hmm, that's not the way I read his story at all! To me, he's simply writing that he's human, and can not for sure say that he's NEVER crossed the white line. To me, that's not admitting that he foot-faults, only that if he has, it's been so relatively minor that no one has called him on it in 25 years of match play. In other words, if he's foot-faulted, it's been so minor that it could not be reliably called from 78 feet or so away.
To put it another way: To my knowledge, no one has ever questioned my line-calling, and I pride myself on being meticulously honest about calling the lines (I give my opponent every benefit of the doubt), but I'm not arrogant enough to say that I've NEVER made an incorrect call. I don't claim to be perfect, so there might be a couple of calls that were actually in that I called out. BUT, I am saying that if I was incorrect in any of my line-calls, then it was definitely an honest mistake, not something I'm shrugging off as "no big deal."

Attila the tennis Bum
04-06-2007, 04:48 PM
simple! if you can see it, its flagrant, it you can't it's minor (by your def). So it's all relative.

I think the author of the article is one that's on the wrong.
He even said:

In my 25 years of playong tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm ups? I walked up to my service line, "don't even think about it ," I said. "Don't start."


that pretty much saids, "I know I foot fault, I have never been called, so don't start now!" What kind of attitude is that???
He knows he is in the wrong, but since it's "acceptable" to have "minor" (all relative) foot faults, it's the NEW rule!


Well I agree...if you can see it then it has got be flagrant. Personally since the author was winning 3-0 I truly believe that the Saw Mill club player was screwing around and just doing anything he could to win. Furthermore according tothe articel the Saw Mill player admitted that it was simply revenge.

Seconldy OI believe that you have misread his quote. What the author is saying in that 25 years he has never been called on a foot fault because he rarely does it. He admits that he is human and may have inadvertently crossed the line a couple of times in his life but it was minor.

35ft6
04-07-2007, 03:43 AM
I wouldn't even call foot faults unless it was a match where I could call an impartial ump over to confirm it.

rasajadad
04-07-2007, 07:00 AM
Judging by how fast this issue has gone over 100 posts, my conclusion is this: No one thinks they foot fault (even though 2/3 of the guys I play against do it) AND when a foot fault is called (refer to any professional match) there is a huge reaction from the player it's being called on. Whether the call is right or wrong, whether the foot fault is minor or flagrant, the reaction will be the same. The guy its called on is going to begin to lose his mind. Judging by the story (not the reality) that's what the deal was here.

As far as how to deal with cheaters, thats a whole other story.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-07-2007, 10:42 AM
Judging by how fast this issue has gone over 100 posts, my conclusion is this: No one thinks they foot fault (even though 2/3 of the guys I play against do it) AND when a foot fault is called (refer to any professional match) there is a huge reaction from the player it's being called on. Whether the call is right or wrong, whether the foot fault is minor or flagrant, the reaction will be the same. The guy its called on is going to begin to lose his mind. Judging by the story (not the reality) that's what the deal was here.

As far as how to deal with cheaters, thats a whole other story.


Wow! Very good analysis.

Cheaters is a whole different issue. Cheating occurs everyday and I have learned to expect it. In USTA its easy to deal with because all you need to do is call an official.

In club play its a whole different issue. The problem is that really good cheaters are very sneaky. They only make two or three bad calls a match...but it will be on a VERY important point.

I have learned to simply accept it. Its part of the game and there is nothing you can do about it.

On the other hand the flagrant cheater is easy to deal with. Just walk off the court and tell the management.

The problem however arises in a club tournament. In this case you have a serious problem. Unlike a regular club match you cannot just walk off the court because you really want to win. Furthermore unlike a USTA match there is no USTA official to call out . heres what happened to me:

We were playing on clay and I hit a ball that was clearly in. The cheater called it out. I asked him to simply show me the mark. Since the match had just started there were absolutely zero marks in the doubles alley showing the ball out. Firthermore there was a mark showing that it was in. The cheater would still not give me the point. Therefore I asked him to simply do the point over. he refused and just said "I saw it out". I informed him that the only mark on the ebtire court shows that the ball was in. he responded..."Sometimes the ball does not make a mark". I said fine. The very next point he served smack in the middle of the box. I caught it and with a big smile on my face I said "OUT!!!!". He stopped cheating after that!

Raiden.Kaminari
04-07-2007, 06:54 PM
I've played against people who constantly footfaults - who steps on the line upon service impact.

That isn't a foot fault. A foot fault is making contact with the line, the court, or the center plane of the court prior to making contact with the ball.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-08-2007, 06:40 AM
That isn't a foot fault. A foot fault is making contact with the line, the court, or the center plane of the court prior to making contact with the ball.

well I believe its ok if you cross the plane in the air without touching the ground. But for arguments sake even if somehow that were not legal I do not think it would be humanly possible to make that call in a USTA match while your opponent is literally in the air.

On another note does anyone have any video of the Canas foot fault in Miami against djoccic (clearly mispelled).

EZRA
04-08-2007, 07:35 AM
That isn't a foot fault. A foot fault is making contact with the line, the court, or the center plane of the court prior to making contact with the ball.

So stepping on the line upon ball-impact is not foot fault? The way I understand it, when you step on the line upon ball-impact and anytime before that is foot fault.. unless of course if you don't make an attempt to hit the ball.

Just wondering - I could be wrong.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-08-2007, 07:59 AM
So stepping on the line upon ball-impact is not foot fault? The way I understand it, when you step on the line upon ball-impact and anytime before that is foot fault.. unless of course if you don't make an attempt to hit the ball.

Just wondering - I could be wrong.


good question. Is stepping on the line ok? Or do you have to go over the line?...hmmmmm?

Raiden.Kaminari
04-08-2007, 11:22 AM
So stepping on the line upon ball-impact is not foot fault? The way I understand it, when you step on the line upon ball-impact and anytime before that is foot fault.. unless of course if you don't make an attempt to hit the ball.

Just wondering - I could be wrong.

The key words are upon and prior. Once the ball is struck, the ball is considered in play, so foot fault and service rules no longer apply. It is also difficult to declare that someone steps on the line at impact, so the measure has always been prior to contact.

If contact with the court (including the line, of course) prior to ball contact, that is indeed a foot fault.

If a player steps over the center plane, that is also a foot fault.

However, if the person only crosses the plane of the baseline without making contact with the court, that is not a foot fault. But ... if the service motion is considered a running serve (ie. the player doesn't start with a static position, and jumps into the court to make the serve like a volleyball serve (jumping into the court from a static position is fine)), then that is an illegal serve.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-08-2007, 01:20 PM
if the service motion is considered a running serve (ie. the player doesn't start with a static position, and jumps into the court to make the serve like a volleyball serve (jumping into the court from a static position is fine)), then that is an illegal serve.

Now that would be cool to watch! Why the hell is that illegal??

EZRA
04-08-2007, 09:04 PM
I don't think that's illegal.. there's this guy named Karsten Braasch who used to serve like he's doing a running jump serve (volleyball style) ... it was legal.
-----
I think stepping on the line UPON contact is also considered as foot-fault. BUT, crossing over the line (being AIRBORNE) isn't since you're not actually stepping on it and you launched from before the baseline (same rule as a 3point shot in basketball... you can launch yourself forward beyond the 3 point line but if your point of take-off is behind the line, then it will still be counted as a 3 pointer).

Mark Jensen
04-09-2007, 04:24 AM
http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_16051.pdf?2/9/2007%208:54:17%20PM

USTA Comment 18.2: What does the rule mean when it says
that the server may “not change position by walking or running”?

This rule is intended to prevent the server from taking advantage of the receiver by serving while “on the move” and requiring the receiver to guess the position from which the serve will be launched, and the rule should be enforced with that intent in mind.

• A server who takes more than one step with either foot after
the “feet at rest” position described above is at risk for
being called for a foot fault. The serve becomes a foot fault
when, in the judgment of an experienced official, the server
has materially changed position before or during any racket
or arm motion.

• A server whose footwork changes significantly from one
serve to the next is at risk for being called for a foot fault.

• Serves that look like the running volleyball serve violate the
rule. Serves in which the server runs or walks from a point
well behind the baseline to the baseline are also illegal, as are
serves in which the server walks or runs along the baseline
before choosing a spot from which to deliver the serve.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-09-2007, 07:54 AM
http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_16051.pdf?2/9/2007%208:54:17%20PM

USTA Comment 18.2: What does the rule mean when it says
that the server may “not change position by walking or running”?

• A server who takes more than one step with either foot after
the “feet at rest” position described above is at risk for
being called for a foot fault. The serve becomes a foot fault
when, in the judgment of an experienced official, the server
has materially changed position before or during any racket
or arm motion.

• A server whose footwork changes significantly from one
serve to the next is at risk for being called for a foot fault.




These two rules are terrible!!! They do not even make sense. It has nothing to do with crossing the line. According to this rule an official can basically call a foot fault if he feels like it!

So take a guy like Nadal. Imagaine that one day he develops his game to include playing with his right hand. If he switches serving lefty and then to righty an official could legitimately call a "footfault" because Nadal changed his footwork?? Thats bogus!

EZRA
04-09-2007, 08:03 AM
http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/usta/doc/content/doc_13_16051.pdf?2/9/2007%208:54:17%20PM

USTA Comment 18.2: What does the rule mean when it says
that the server may “not change position by walking or running”?

This rule is intended to prevent the server from taking advantage of the receiver by serving while “on the move” and requiring the receiver to guess the position from which the serve will be launched, and the rule should be enforced with that intent in mind.

• A server who takes more than one step with either foot after
the “feet at rest” position described above is at risk for
being called for a foot fault. The serve becomes a foot fault
when, in the judgment of an experienced official, the server
has materially changed position before or during any racket
or arm motion.

• A server whose footwork changes significantly from one
serve to the next is at risk for being called for a foot fault.

• Serves that look like the running volleyball serve violate the
rule. Serves in which the server runs or walks from a point
well behind the baseline to the baseline are also illegal, as are
serves in which the server walks or runs along the baseline
before choosing a spot from which to deliver the serve.


Braasch can't play USTA rules then... LOL, although he was in the ATP.

rasajadad
04-09-2007, 09:20 AM
These two rules are terrible!!! They do not even make sense. It has nothing to do with crossing the line. According to this rule an official can basically call a foot fault if he feels like it!

So take a guy like Nadal. Imagaine that one day he develops his game to include playing with his right hand. If he switches serving lefty and then to righty an official could legitimately call a "footfault" because Nadal changed his footwork?? Thats bogus!

Funny, but whenever I see this rule I think of a guy I played against in High School in NJ (in the early 70's). He only had one arm and stood about 6 feet behind the baseline, tossed the ball high up with his right hand (while holding the racquet,) took four steps in, then hit his serve. I should have called a foot fault! Don't flame me! I'm only kidding. (About calling the footfault, not about the boy with one arm.)

Mark Jensen
04-09-2007, 11:00 AM
Originally Posted by Attila the tennis Bum
These two rules are terrible!!! They do not even make sense. It has nothing to do with crossing the line. According to this rule an official can basically call a foot fault if he feels like it!
I posted this particular USTA comment on Rule 18 to address the "volleyball" style of service. Would reading all of rule 18 instead of just one of the USTA's comments help you in making sense of the foot fault?
And as far as your hypothetical Nadal scenario...re-read the intent of the rule.

Originally Posted by EZRA
Braasch can't play USTA rules then... LOL, although he was in the ATP.
If I'm not mistaken, the Rules of Tennis are the official rules of the International Tennis Federation (ITF), of which the United States Tennis Association (USTA) is a member.
Isn't the ITF "the world governing body of tennis"? and aren't the ATP and WTA also members of the ITF?
I don't know?

EZRA
04-09-2007, 11:14 AM
Well.. Braasch did have a running type serve ... at least he had 2 steps prior to hitting the ball... this should be a violation to the rules you posted yet Braasch was allowed to compete regardless.

Mark Jensen
04-09-2007, 11:41 AM
Yeah, you got me EZRA. I assume we all play under the same basic rules with the pros operating under a few more.

Here's a link to the ATP rule book I found at the ATP site.
It's flippin' 248 pages long!
http://www.atptennis.com/en/common/TrackIt.asp?file=/en/players/ATP_Rulebook2007.pdf

I guess the pros do have one or two more rules than us league geeks.

whoa.

EZRA
04-09-2007, 12:16 PM
But I never heard of that rule you posted though.. honestly, I never looked at the Tennis rule book.. I just go by what I know and learned... hahaha.

It just sucks though, that if serve in a certain way and you have to change it according to the rule.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-10-2007, 12:27 AM
Funny, but whenever I see this rule I think of a guy I played against in High School in NJ (in the early 70's). He only had one arm and stood about 6 feet behind the baseline, tossed the ball high up with his right hand (while holding the racquet,) took four steps in, then hit his serve. I should have called a foot fault! Don't flame me! I'm only kidding. (About calling the footfault, not about the boy with one arm.)

Actually, there are different rules for players with handicaps or disabilities.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-10-2007, 06:18 AM
And as far as your hypothetical Nadal scenario...re-read the intent of the rule.


Yeah I re-read the rule and now its even more stupid!

I mean how in hell is an "expierienced" official (whatever that is) going to determine what the server was "intending" to do in his mind? Are we now going to put the server on the stand and cross examine him? How are you ever going to know the state of mind of the server?

For example, in the Nadal situation, lets say he started to serve righty. Lets also say that in Nadals mind he was only doing that to screw with federer. How the hell is an official going to prove that???

The rule is idiotic.

spot
04-10-2007, 09:48 AM
You are missing the point Attila- the rule should be vague so that when you see someone trying to break it the official has the leeway to step in without needing to analyze video footage. Watch a guy and see if he is trying to fundamentally change his service position. No one on the tour comes anywhere close to breaking the rule- they all want a stable base to explode out of.

Geezer Guy
04-10-2007, 10:53 AM
... So take a guy like Nadal. Imagaine that one day he develops his game to include playing with his right hand. If he switches serving lefty and then to righty an official could legitimately call a "footfault" because Nadal changed his footwork?? Thats bogus!

Luke Jensen could and did serve with either hand, depending on the situation. There's nothing preventing him from doing that. The only thing requirement is that you step up to the line, take your position, then hit your serve. You can't take a running start from way behind the line, and you can't start out behind the doubles alley, then sprint along the baseline and hit a serve down the tee from the center hash. You're allowed a SMALL step or two as part of your motion, but not so much that it changes your location significantly. It's no big deal.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-10-2007, 01:18 PM
You are missing the point Attila- the rule should be vague so that when you see someone trying to break it the official has the leeway to step in without needing to analyze video footage. Watch a guy and see if he is trying to fundamentally change his service position. No one on the tour comes anywhere close to breaking the rule- they all want a stable base to explode out of.

I disagree. Rules should not be vague. They should be clear and give notice as to when you are breaking the rules. Could you imagine if the speed limit was:

55 MPH , anything above that will subject you to a speeding ticket unless of course it was not your intent to speed.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-10-2007, 01:21 PM
Luke Jensen could and did serve with either hand, depending on the situation. There's nothing preventing him from doing that. The only thing requirement is that you step up to the line, take your position, then hit your serve. You can't take a running start from way behind the line, and you can't start out behind the doubles alley, then sprint along the baseline and hit a serve down the tee from the center hash. You're allowed a SMALL step or two as part of your motion, but not so much that it changes your location significantly. It's no big deal.


wrong...it is in the umps discretion if he wants to call it or not. They chose not to call it in Jensens case because it was not Jensens "intent" to screw with the opponent. Here are the rules again...its completely discretionary:

USTA Comment 18.2: What does the rule mean when it says
that the server may “not change position by walking or running”?

• A server who takes more than one step with either foot after
the “feet at rest” position described above is at risk for
being called for a foot fault. The serve becomes a foot fault
when, in the judgment of an experienced official, the server
has materially changed position before or during any racket
or arm motion.

• A server whose footwork changes significantly from one
serve to the next is at risk for being called for a foot fault.

Geezer Guy
04-10-2007, 01:47 PM
Not to be picky, but it's not COMPLETELY discretionary.

If the server keeps his feet still, he can't be called for a footfault. If the server does not change his footwork significantly, he can't be called for a footfault. If the server takes ONLY one step with either foot, he can't be called for a footfault. It's only that if he goes above and beyond, then there's a chance of it.

I agree that it would probably be better if it was an absolute rule in black and white - seems like all the other tennis rules are - but still, I don't think it's any big deal.

It's kinda like the noise rule. We're not supposed to make any distracting noises while we play, but a lot of people grunt and they're not called on it.

spot
04-10-2007, 01:53 PM
The only people who think that rule is too restrictive are the ones that really want to cheat

Attila the tennis Bum
04-10-2007, 10:14 PM
Not to be picky, but it's not COMPLETELY discretionary.

If the server keeps his feet still, he can't be called for a footfault. If the server does not change his footwork significantly, he can't be called for a footfault. If the server takes ONLY one step with either foot, he can't be called for a footfault. It's only that if he goes above and beyond, then there's a chance of it.

I agree that it would probably be better if it was an absolute rule in black and white - seems like all the other tennis rules are - but still, I don't think it's any big deal.

It's kinda like the noise rule. We're not supposed to make any distracting noises while we play, but a lot of people grunt and they're not called on it.


are you kidding? It sooo discretionary.

Look at the words you use..."significantly",,,,,,what exactly does that mean? It means different things to different people.

what does "above and beyond " exactly mean?

What exactky is an "experienced" line Judge?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-10-2007, 10:15 PM
The only people who think that rule is too restrictive are the ones that really want to cheat

No...its not restrictive...its ambiguous and vauge. It goes against any form of justice. Its just not right.

spot
04-11-2007, 04:50 AM
If it were so ambiguous you could show me one example of someone on the tour who has been called for this unnecessarily. It Just isn't an issue because everyone besides you understands what the point of the rule is.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-11-2007, 07:19 AM
If it were so ambiguous you could show me one example of someone on the tour who has been called for this unnecessarily. It Just isn't an issue because everyone besides you understands what the point of the rule is.

I beg to differ.

I have not been following the "history of foot faults" so I cannot come up with an example.

I also do not appreciate the personal attacks. Just because I do not agree with you does not mean that you have the right to personally insult me. You are out of line.

Apparently you have not read the Constitution of the United Staes of America. We are all entitled to Due Process of the laws. Laws must be made so that they are not overbroad or vague. Otherwise the potential is there for the goverment to simply throw you in jail.

This foot fault rule gives to much discretion and does not give clear notice of what exactly even violates the rule. The potential is there for abuse. It needs to be rewritten.

spot
04-11-2007, 07:37 AM
where is the personal attack? The rule is clear to people who actually play the game. There has never been any controversy about it. You are just not seeing the point.

bleach
04-11-2007, 07:48 AM
Are you implying the the foot fault rule is unconstitutional?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-11-2007, 02:29 PM
where is the personal attack? .

are you joking? I dont think you could get any more personal:


everyone besides you understands what the point of the rule is.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-11-2007, 02:31 PM
Are you implying the the foot fault rule is unconstitutional?

LOL...no of course not. But the rule does go against our sense of fairness. Its so ambiguous and vague that t can be used agaionst someone. Anyone can substantiate a foot fault if they wanted to.

In any event we digress. The point is that Saw Mill club was way out of line.

spot
04-11-2007, 03:46 PM
Thats not a personal attack- thats a statement of fact. There just isn't any controversy about the footfault rule. The rule would have to be changed if people had trouble understanding what the intention was. It is a complete non-issue.

And the saw mill club was not out of line- the Author is the only one that broke the rules. If you have an opponent who is simply ignoring calls that are your right to make what other recourse is there but to walk off of the court? A footfault was called on him and he just chose to ignore the call. It is absolutely no different than if you called a ball out- but because your opponent disagreed with you he just claimed the point for himself and disregarded your call. Absolutely no difference at all. The fact is that he is perfectly within the rules to call the footfault- the fact that people don't normally call them is irrelevant. The Author was completely out of line.

EZRA
04-11-2007, 06:14 PM
Wait.... did the author kept on foot-faulting when the game started or was he foot-faulting during practice.

Can you really tell if someone was foot-faulting all across the lenth of the court?

guynamedsean
04-11-2007, 07:46 PM
One time I was playing a friendly singles match after group lessons at my club. There were some folks drinking beer at tables next to us as normal. This drunk lady player kept calling foot faults while I was serving.

I wanted to kill her. I was serving hard and flat and tossing way out in front and high to the right. I was serving great till she started calling foot faults. She totally threw me off for a while. Then I moved back way back so everyone could see, and started hitting real hard kick serves on first and second serves. After that nobody bothered me again. I was new there.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-12-2007, 12:14 AM
And the saw mill club was not out of line- the Author is the only one that broke the rules. If you have an opponent who is simply ignoring calls that are your right to make what other recourse is there but to walk off of the court? A footfault was called on him and he just chose to ignore the call. It is absolutely no different than if you called a ball out- but because your opponent disagreed with you he just claimed the point for himself and disregarded your call. Absolutely no difference at all. The fact is that he is perfectly within the rules to call the footfault- the fact that people don't normally call them is irrelevant. The Author was completely out of line.

The Saw Mill Club player violated "The Code." The Code is "used as a guide for unofficiated matches."

Principle 1 Courtesy: Violated
Principle 17: Spectators never to make calls: Violated (captain's match)
Principle 24 Foot Faults: Violated
Principle 40 Requesting an official: Violated

I can't remember the rule/principle/section about retaliatory calls, which of course violates "The Code."

Raiden.Kaminari
04-12-2007, 12:16 AM
Ummm ... Attila, what exactly are you attempting to argue?

The ITF rule 18 is very clear, as well as the USTA comments (18.1, 18.2, 18.3, 18.4, 18.5, 18.6).

spot
04-12-2007, 04:47 AM
Raiden- he was making the footfault calls in his match- that doesn't violate the code at all. How on earth do you think he was violating the code on the footfault calls?! He warned his opponent that he was footfaulting and then he called him on it. It wasn't a tournament- there aren't any officials to call. You warn your opponent then you are entitled to call footfaults. Thats 100% exactly how it is supposed to go according to the code.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-12-2007, 07:02 AM
Thats not a personal attack- thats a statement of fact. There just isn't any controversy about the footfault rule. The rule would have to be changed if people had trouble understanding what the intention was. It is a complete non-issue.

And the saw mill club was not out of line- the Author is the only one that broke the rules. If you have an opponent who is simply ignoring calls that are your right to make what other recourse is there but to walk off of the court? A footfault was called on him and he just chose to ignore the call. It is absolutely no different than if you called a ball out- but because your opponent disagreed with you he just claimed the point for himself and disregarded your call. Absolutely no difference at all. The fact is that he is perfectly within the rules to call the footfault- the fact that people don't normally call them is irrelevant. The Author was completely out of line.

First of all you are the only who cannot see that the foot fault rule can be discretionary Whether you agree or disagree the fact is that there is quite a bit of discretion.

You are wrong. There is quite a bit of controversy herein. Thats why over 3,000 people have viewed this post.

As far as Saw Mill having the right to make the call . You are again wrong. The right to make the call is "discretionary". In a USTA a match you are only allowed to call a "Flagrant" foot fault. The term is not defined and therefore "Flagrant: can mean just about anything to anyone. If you agree with that then thats your right. I personally think its a stupid way to write the rule.

As far as whether a ball is out or not...thats completely different. The rules are very clear as to what is out and what is in. However as to what is a "flagrant" foot fault is not quite as clear.

As far as the saw Mill clubs choice to walk off the court...that was not his only choice. He could have simply called a USTA official. The fact is he was losing 3-0 and that is why he really walked off the court and that is also why he was really calling foot faults. he was a jerk.

Finally....are you a member of the Saw Mill Club?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-12-2007, 07:03 AM
Ummm ... Attila, what exactly are you attempting to argue?

The ITF rule 18 is very clear, as well as the USTA comments (18.1, 18.2, 18.3, 18.4, 18.5, 18.6).



ummmm....scroll back lazy . You will see that its not clear. There is much discretion. Just as an example a foot fault can be called because you switched footwork with the "intent" to bother the other play. There is quite a bit of discussion on this. Scroll back...you will see.

spot
04-12-2007, 07:09 AM
The Author never disputes that he was footfaulting. He only says that he had never been called for it before. there are many players that fragantly footfault on every serve and its fully within the rights of the opponent to call it- they just choose not to. Have you ever been to a USTA match? Do you really think there are USTA officials just standing around in case someone needs to call footfaults? THis wasn't a tournament- if there are no officials around then its up to the players to call footfaults. He was warned and then he was called for them. He chose to disregard the rules which is just as bad as ignoring a line call.

And there is no ambiguity on the footfault rule on the tour when there are officials to call it. I do think that the code leaves something to be desired but I don't know what else they could say. A flagrant footfault is one that can be clearly seen from the other side of the court. Just because people are accustomed to not being called for them it doesn't mean that they are legal serves.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-12-2007, 08:24 AM
The Author never disputes that he was footfaulting. He only says that he had never been called for it before. there are many players that fragantly footfault on every serve and its fully within the rights of the opponent to call it- they just choose not to. Have you ever been to a USTA match? Do you really think there are USTA officials just standing around in case someone needs to call footfaults? THis wasn't a tournament- if there are no officials around then its up to the players to call footfaults. He was warned and then he was called for them. He chose to disregard the rules which is just as bad as ignoring a line call.

And there is no ambiguity on the footfault rule on the tour when there are officials to call it. I do think that the code leaves something to be desired but I don't know what else they could say. A flagrant footfault is one that can be clearly seen from the other side of the court. Just because people are accustomed to not being called for them it doesn't mean that they are legal serves.

Wow ...now I really think that you are from the Saw Mill club.

1- yes usually there are people to act as a line judge at USTA matches. According to the article however you friend at the Saw Mill club didnt even try. he was losing 3-0 (because of foot faults...yeah right!!!???) and walked off the court. Face it he walked off the court because he was losing. His serve was broken not because of foot faults my friend ...it was broken because he was the weaker player.

2- Your bias has soared to a new level. How can the author dispute whether he footfaulted or not? There is no way a server can see a foot fault as the server has his eye on the ball. How biased can you possibly be?

3- No ambiguity? Can you at least just pretend to be fair? The rules say there is no right to call a foot fault unless its "Flagrant". What does that exactly mean!! I appreciate that you have taken the liberty of defining what "flagrant" means...but with all due respect this is not the "USTA rules according to Spot". There must be a definition of flagrant otherwise it is completely open to interpretation. In fact you have proved my point. Since there is no definition of what the USTA means by flagrant you had to come up with your own interpretation and your own rule. You just proved my point.

4- truth is that your pal over at the Saw Mill was down 3-0 not because of foot faults but because he was getting his butt kicked. Thats the truth!

spot
04-12-2007, 08:33 AM
Attila- asking a spectator to officiate footfaults is not within the rules. Some local leagues allow for captains to be called in to act as officials but there isn't anything to indicate that was the case here. Unless there is an actual official like there would be in a tournament the only recourse is for the players themselves to call footfaults.

The author never disputes that he footfaults. He never said that every single person watching confirmed that he didn't footfault or anything like that. So many recreational players footfault on every serve and simply aren't aware of it. The author is just ****ed off because someone decided to call him on it.

The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague to try and leave wiggle room for people who barely touch the line once very occasionally. If someone is consistently crossing the line then the opponent is fully within their rights to call the footfault- it just isn't often done. If you actually read the code you will see that it explicitly says: The plea that a Server should not be penalized because the Server only just touched the line and did not rush the net is not acceptable. Habitual foot faulting, whether intentional or careless, is just as surely cheating as is making a deliberate bad line call.

Maybe you should actually try reading the code before you waste so many words talking about something you know little about.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-12-2007, 09:17 AM
The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague. .

You want to use the term "Vague" rather than "ambiguous" Be my guest! In my opinion Rules should not be vague or ambiguous. Could you imagine if the speed limit was changed from "55mph" to "Falgrantly above 55mph" . In any event I think you see my point.

Therefore the issue here is whether a rule should be clear or vague. You think its ok for a rule to be vague and I think it should be clear.

I have already responded to the rest of your points and I see no need to go through that dance again. I would like to say that you have now ignored me I believe three times now on the issue of whether you are a memebr of the Saw Mill club thereofr I believe it is safe to assume that you are a memebr.

Are you Rich Callwood?

spot
04-12-2007, 09:23 AM
Attila- I ignored it because I didn't think it was possible you were serious. I live in Atlanta and have never heard of Saw Mill club before this.

The rule is not ambigious- if someone is crossing the line on the serve then they are in violation of the rules and can be called for the footfault. The code allows for people to ignore it if they wish to- and most people choose to ignore it. But that doesn't change the fact that you are fully within your rights to call the footfault if someone is repeatedly doing it. Thats the point you are continually missing.

bleach
04-12-2007, 09:31 AM
Wow, what lengths some will go to protect cheaters... yes cheaters. If you foot fault you are cheating, end of story. If you defend foot faulters, you are defending cheaters.

First it's the old , "You aren't allowed to make that call"
then, "you can't make that call from the other side of the court"
followed by, "Flagrent who defines flagrent"
now to, "The rules are unfair" (this is a new one BTW)

Never once asking the only question that matters:

"Did the player foot fault?"

if yes, except it move on. If no (and this truly may be the case here) then why was it being called.

IMO (and only my opinion) the term flagrent is placed to make sure that foul is such that there is no question that it is taking place. Thus, if a player can see a foot fault from his side (while preparing to return server), then it must be a no-brainer! Who am I to tell someone what they can and can not see.

ATXtennisaddict
04-12-2007, 10:54 AM
If I were the author, I'd make sure I wasn't foot-faulting in the first place, then this wouldn't have happened. Some opponents are just anal so be sure not to break rules first.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-12-2007, 02:19 PM
Wow, what lengths some will go to protect cheaters... yes cheaters. If you foot fault you are cheating, end of story. If you defend foot faulters, you are defending cheaters.

First it's the old , "You aren't allowed to make that call"
then, "you can't make that call from the other side of the court"
followed by, "Flagrent who defines flagrent"
now to, "The rules are unfair" (this is a new one BTW)

Never once asking the only question that matters:

"Did the player foot fault?"

if yes, except it move on. If no (and this truly may be the case here) then why was it being called.

IMO (and only my opinion) the term flagrent is placed to make sure that foul is such that there is no question that it is taking place. Thus, if a player can see a foot fault from his side (while preparing to return server), then it must be a no-brainer! Who am I to tell someone what they can and can not see.

We aren't protecting cheaters. Some people just simply can't read. Or are just trying to start flame wars.

The article clearly states that the player was making retaliatory calls because of his hostile nature PRIOR to the match. The Code wasn't being followed by the one player at all.

In the past, at a USTA tournament that I was officiating, a spectator ran up and got me because of a problem at one of the courts. One player started calling footfaults on his opponent before he even served. The player that was serving was not even in his service motion, nor did he make an attempt to contact the ball. He just tossed up the ball (his foot was clearly behind the baseline), yet the footfault was called. The match felt extremely hostile. After witnessing the first call, I called out "overrule." The player was pretty upset, and stupidly tried again to call a foot fault the next ball toss. Again, I overruled him again, this time cautioning him that any other overrules would be a code violation for unsportsmanlike conduct. He argued with me, and I started thinking about all the code violations I would have to potentially write up and submit. I told him either calm down and return to the match, or be defaulted, after giving him one more caution regarding delay of game (his arguing with me) and his conduct. I continued watching the match since I knew the player would continue being a jerk. True enough, he missed a service return, and cussed. Code violation: Conduct (loss of another point). Next point, ball abuse. Code violation: conduct (loss of game). Then he threw his racquet. Final code violation: conduct. I defaulted the match, and had to submit a report that led to the player being suspended for 6 months from tournament play. Sadly, his father was suspended for verbally abusing me. Lucky for the one player on court that an official had been present, eh?

Too bad many section ALC are not as progressive as NorCal. The LLAR is clear, and even specifies a procedure for court monitors (and calling footfaults) (http://www.norcal.usta.com/generic/custom.sps?iType=2057&icustompageid=18725) for unofficiated league matches.

Now here are examples of flagrant footfaults:

1. Serving from the AD side to the opponent's AD side (ie. down the line)
2. Serving from the Deuce side to the opponent's AD side (ie. down the line)
2. Start serving while in the middle of the court to the opponent.
3. Prior to contact, foot clearly on the court past the baseline.
4. In Singles, serving from the doubles alley
5. In doubles, serving from the side of the court past the alleys.

PushyPushster
04-12-2007, 04:04 PM
The article clearly states that the player was making retaliatory calls because of his hostile nature PRIOR to the match. The Code wasn't being followed by the one player at all.


In my opinion, the author of that article came off as a knucklehead. I know what he was was *implying*, but that's all it is - an implication. For all we know his opponent was merely pointing out, during warm-ups, that he was foot-faulting. In the beginning part of the column he says the following:

"In my 25 years of playing tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it)."

That looks pretty bad to me. He never denies that he might have been faulting - he's just ****ed that someone called him on it. Maybe he felt it wasn't "flagrant" enough to warrant a call. Beats me. Still, to threaten his opponent and ask him to 'take it outside' is pretty dumb. I can easily envision an alternate scenario - one the author doesn't want to bring to light - where his opponent decided to quit because it became apparent that he was being forced to play with a lunatic (the author) who refused to abide by the rules.

10sfreak
04-12-2007, 06:12 PM
Spot and Pushy, I don't see the need for the author to acually write that he WASN'T foot-faulting - that he didn't consider himself to be foot-faulting is implied. Would you two completely reverse your opinion if the author had written that "I wasn't foot-faulting"? Since no one on this board was there, we kinda have to take the author's word for what happened. And since he didn't write that he WAS actually foot-faulting, and simply chose to ignore it, I tend to infer that he felt that we wasn't foot-faulting. His assertion that he's never been called for foot-faulting in 25 years of league play is NOT an admission on his part that he has been foot-faulting, but just hasn't been called on it before.
I know this whole post of mine sounds real convoluted, but I hope it makes some sense...

spot
04-13-2007, 05:02 AM
10sfreak- if you read the article you can see that the author explicitly states that he does know that he footfaults. He doesn't know how often it happens- and he is ****ed that it got called.

The fact that he has never been called for a footfault before is pretty irrelevant. A guy on my team footfaults on every serve- and until this year had never been called for it in his life. He was convinced that he didn't footfault because he hadn't ever been called for it. One of his opponents in a doubles match started calling him for footfaults and my teammate completely lost his composure. He is the one that ended up retiring the match because he was absolutely convinced that he wasn't footfaulting. Instead of just moving back a few inches- he got stubborn and kept his normal service motion over and over. People become accustomed to not being called for footfaults in recreational leagues but its fully within the rights of the opponent to call it if they want to.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 05:50 AM
Never once asking the only question that matters:

"Did the player foot fault?"



Very good point. Thanks for bringing this home.

Let us consider the evidence.

-James Martin was leadin 3-0.

-The Samill Club player admitted that He had been making the line calls because his captain was involved in an altercation on another court.

-As editor of Tennis magazine James Martin has quite a bit of credibility.

-The Saw Mill Player walked off the court at 3-0

Conclusion: The Saw Mill Club player had the motive and the opportunity to make the line calls. Rich Callwood was losing 3-0. I believe therefore that he was more upset at the score than merely foot faults. Its one thing to walk off the court if you are losing 3-0 because someone is dishonestly calling balls out . But to walk off the court because of an alleged foot fault is just not believable.

Saw Mill Club is guilty as Charged.

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 05:51 AM
Since no one on this board was there, we kinda have to take the author's word for what happened.


I'm not willing to give the author the benefit of the doubt due to other inconsistencies in his article. Just because he puts something in print doesn't make it true. The whole column felt like one of those stories your buddy tells you about his wife/girlfriend that is so ridiculously biased that you mentally add in the details of What Really Happened. Your wife chucked a skillet at your head for no reason? Gee, that's strange. Are you sure it didn't have anything to do with you going to that strip club on Saturday? Here are a couple items that made me suspiscious:

1.) In an effort to point out the ultra competitiveness of league play the author makes this statement,

"In one of our early matches, for example, our opponents wouldn't give us directions to their courts. All we knew was that they were located at a country club out in the sticks. How about an address? 'Sorry," they said. Our only hope: Yahoo! Maps.

No. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on that. If someone here who plays in Westchester wants to confirm that part of league play is being a good enough detective to find your opponents, then I'll revise my opinion. Until then, it sounds like bullcrap. Also - if you don't have an address or any directions then what exactly are you MapQuesting? The Captain's name?

2.) Also, we've got this quote from the actual match they were playing. The Saw Mill guy is calling foot faults and the author is ignoring those calls.

My opponent looked toward his team-mate in the lounge as if to say, 'Can you believe this guy?' After he lost the first point of the next game, he walked to the sideline, grabbed his bag, and, without a word, walked off the court."

If he's hooking the author then why is he looking to the sidelines for support? That's not the action of a cheater. At this point he's been cursed at, threatened, and challenged to 'take it outside'. The author continues to ignore his calls. It's easy for me to believe that he's looking to the sidelines and thinking, "what the hell am I supposed to do now? Ah, screw it - I've got better things to do with my Saturday afternoon."

Anyhow, I don't have any more information than you - maybe my interpretation is way off. I'd love to hear the Saw Mill guy's version of events, though.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 05:55 AM
10sfreak- if you read the article you can see that the author explicitly states that he does know that he footfaults. He doesn't know how often it happens- and he is ****ed that it got called.
.

You never answered my question. How does a server ever know he is foot faulting?

As a serve you are watching the ball not your feet!

Therefore the opportunity for the receiver to cheat is there big time!

What you also ignore is that the Saw Mill player admits that he was falsely making foot faults!! How on earth can you defend that???

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 06:03 AM
.

I do think that the code leaves something to be desired .


The code is ambiguous/vague .You have already basically conceded this point to me.

The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague


Therefore following that line of logic how on earth can one enforce a rule that has no clear definition?

I submit to you that since we all agree that the code is vague as to what constitutes a foot fault then it is therefore logically impossible to make the call.

Lets for arguments sake say that Martin stepped over the line by one inch...is that flagrant??? How about three inches...is that flagrant??? Who the hell knows!! Do you now get my point?

according to the rules you are actually allowed to foot fault...you are simply not allowed to "flagrantly" foot fault.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

*** footnote---To me what the USTA was simply trying to say by using the undefined term of "flagrant" foot was:

" Hey guys,...this is for fun. We don't want you to call foot faults unless they are ridiculously insanely bad foot faults...like just before the "T" or something. But if its only a few inches then just look away and have fun"...

at least thats my interpretation. I dont see how a few inches can be called flagrant...but you may disagree. There are can be many interpretations .

spot
04-13-2007, 06:54 AM
Attila- the footfault rule is clear. If you cross the line before making contact with the ball then its a footfault. If you see your opponent do it and you are 100% sure of the call then you are completely within your rights to call it. You can choose not to, and most people go that route, but if someone wants to call it they are perfectly entitled to do so. I think its pretty funny that you keep trying to belabor this point when you have no idea what you are talking about. You might not like the rules- but they couldn't be any more clear. Talking about vague rules was referring to whether the person was materially changing their position during the serve. Thats not the point of the article. If you cross the line before you make contact with the ball then it is a footfault.

And do people here really think the opponent was making FALSE footfault calls in warmups? I think that he was just warning his opponent that he was footfaulting and that he should probably move back. If he were planning to call false calls he gains nothing by starting in warmups.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 07:24 AM
Attila- the footfault rule is clear.

I think you need to take your medication because I think you have multiple personalities. First you say the rule is vague and has something to be desired and now all of a sudden when you have lost the argument the rule has now become crytsal clear. Check it out:

The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague

.
I do think that the code leaves something to be desired .

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 07:27 AM
And do people here really think the opponent was making FALSE footfault calls in warmups? I think that he was just warning his opponent that he was footfaulting and that he should probably move back.


That's what I believe. It's impossible to call a foot-fault during warm-ups; the game hasn't started yet! Either it's a warning or a mindgame.


As editor of Tennis magazine James Martin has quite a bit of credibility.


Far be it from me to besmirch the integrity of Tennis Magazine, but I'm not willing to give their writers any instant credibility. He's a guy with a column. That's it.


What you also ignore is that the Saw Mill player admits that he was falsely making foot faults!! How on earth can you defend that???


I wouldn't defend that - if it's stated somewhere in the article then I'll retract my comments. Having said that, I didn't see where the Saw Mill player admitted any such thing.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 07:31 AM
Pushy,

I do not want to muddy the waters. I want to make the issue crystal clear unlike the footfault rule.

The issue is simply whether Martin made a Flagrant foot fault.

Merely stepping over the line in a USTA match is not necessarily a foot fault. The foot fault must be "Flagrant". Since there is no definition of the term "Flagrant" how does anyone know if in fact that rule was violated?

Is one inch flagrant? Is three inches "flagrant"? Is five inches "flagrant"? We don't know because there is no definition. Therefore how can one honestly make the call.

Now Martin has been playing for 25 years...do you believe that he made a "Flagrant" foot fault? (whatever that is?).

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 07:49 AM
I wouldn't defend that - if it's stated somewhere in the article then I'll retract my comments. Having said that, I didn't see where the Saw Mill player admitted any such thing.

time for a retraction?:


"Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 07:57 AM
Atilla and Spot,
If I may...Before we break out the boxing gloves. The Foot Fault rules are very clear as it relates to crossing the line before contact with the ball and standing within the court to serve. The FF rules are a bit ambiguous or vague as it relates to taking steps or changing your stance. So both of you are right but you are talking about different parts of the rule.

Atilla, you seem to have a problem with the word "flagrant". From what I can tell, you are the only one that seems to have this problem. It is pretty simple for me. If I see a guy that occasionally steps on the line but doesn't cross it, not flagrant. If a guy consistently steps on the line, that is flagrant, but tough to call in singles. You might could make that call in doubles. If a guy consistenly steps over the line, Flagrant.

I have never called a foot fault in a match, but I have warned guys before. The only time that anyone questioned me (anyone that FF's consistenly, knows they do it or else they are a liar.) was a guy that set up with his back foot outside of the sideline. After the game, I told him that was a foot fault and I would have to call it if he did it again. He didn't believe me, but did move inside the line.

Part of me wants to just ignore all of the foot faults and have friendly games. However, another part of me doesn't like the fact that an opponent is taking advantage of a seldom called rule. If I can be considerate enough to follow the rules of the game, I expect my opponent to do the same.

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 08:00 AM
Pushy,

I do not want to muddy the waters. I want to make the issue crystal clear unlike the footfault rule.

The issue is simply whether Martin made a Flagrant foot fault.

Merely stepping over the line in a USTA match is not necessarily a foot fault. The foot fault must be "Flagrant". Since there is no definition of the term "Flagrant" how does anyone know if in fact that rule was violated?

Is one inch flagrant? Is three inches "flagrant"? Is five inches "flagrant"? We don't know because there is no definition. Therefore how can one honestly make the call.

Now Martin has been playing for 25 years...do you believe that he made a "Flagrant" foot fault? (whatever that is?).

Attila,

I'm not a fan of the wording of that comment either. Here it is, just so we know what we're talking about:

"USTA Comment 18.6: When may the receiver or the receiver’s
partner call foot faults? In a non-officiated match, the receiver or the receiver’s
partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed and the foot faulting is
so flagrant as to be clearly perceptible from the receiver’s side."

My interpretation of that rule is that if you can see it you can call it. Maybe Mr. Martin's opponent has really good eyesight. Maybe he's a cheater. I don't know. My beef with Mr. Martin is that you can't just *ignore* the call. Ask for a third pary to monitor foot faults. Ask your opponent what he sees that you're missing. Something. Anything. Insisting that, "I'm taking the point", and moving over to the other side is wrong.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 08:44 AM
Atilla and Spot,

Atilla, you seem to have a problem with the word "flagrant". From what I can tell, you are the only one that seems to have this problem. It is pretty simple for me.


Actually you are incorrect. I have now read three different meanings of the term "Flagrant" in this very post.

1. Old guy interpretation:

If I see a guy that occasionally steps on the line but doesn't cross it, not flagrant. If a guy consistently steps on the line, that is flagrant, but tough to call in singles. You might could make that call in doubles. If a guy consistenly steps over the line, Flagrant.


2. Pushys interpretation

"My interpretation of that rule is that if you can see it you can call it.

3. My interpreation:

"To me what the USTA was simply trying to say by using the undefined term of "flagrant" foot was:

Hey guys,...this is for fun. We don't want you to call foot faults unless they are ridiculously insanely bad foot faults...like just before the "T" or something. But if its only a few inches then just look away and have fun"...

Therefore how can a rule be enforced if there is no clear understanding of what "Flagrant" means?. Is 3 inches flagrant? What if someone step over the line once by 5 inches but only once?


****footnote: Pushy ...you said you would retract your argument if I showed you where the Saw Mill guy admitted that he was falsely calling foot faults. Where is your retratction? Did you miss my post?? Scoll up.

SB
04-13-2007, 08:53 AM
I haven't read this whole thread, so forgive me if I'm belaboring something, but the problem with ignoring rules is that often your mind doesn't really ignore them. If it's in the back of your head, it's a distraction. And we need as few distractions as possible in tennis.

If someone is flagrantly footfaulting, and you DON'T call it, but you notice it, that could be one thing you are thinking about that is taking away from your focus. It's just like playing an out ball. Sometimes I do it, for one reason or the other, and I always regret it, because it distracts me for a while.

But even if the ball IS just barely out and pretty much plays like a ball that hit the line, it is out. And even if someone isn't gaining much advantage by footfaulting, they ARE faulting.

If it doesn't bother you, that's great. If it does, you should do something about it.

I will say that I wouldn't bring it up beforehand unless you're planning on calling it, though. I have a good friend who used to take a huge step before she hit the ball; when serving from the ad side in singles, she would cross the center mark, as well as when she lined up toward the middle when playing Aussie in doubles. I never called it on her because it didn't bother me, but I did alert her AFTER we played that she was doing it. She plays lot of tournaments and occasionally goes to playoffs, and I thought she should know.

But another friend of ours was to play her in the finals of a tournament and actually called her on the phone at home to warn her that she was planning on calling the ff during the match if it happened. This really ****ed off the footfaulter, because she thought it was gamesmanship. I honestly don't think it was, really and truly, because I know the lady who made the call, and I think she was distracted by the giant step (even though it was sideways, not forward) and trying to be a friend and warn ff'er. But it just made ff'er stew all day and she played like crap in the match.

So ... I'm not sure what the point of that was. LOL. Friend did retool her motion and she doesn't do that anymore.

bleach
04-13-2007, 08:58 AM
Merely stepping over the line in a USTA match is not necessarily a foot fault.

Yes it is! This may not be "Flagrant" enough to be called by your opponent, but it is a foot fault. Also, it's cheating, just as much as someone making a unintentional bad call.

As far as this match (described in the article) is concerned; I take everything written with a grain of salt. I doubt very little happened "just" the way the writer described. Although I didn't read the complete article (can't find my magazine), it does sound like both players were jerks. But threatening an opponent on the court (IMO), is over the line and should be grounds for some severe punishment.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 09:57 AM
Actually you are incorrect. I have now read three different meanings of the term "Flagrant" in this very post.

1. Old guy interpretation:

If I see a guy that occasionally steps on the line but doesn't cross it, not flagrant. If a guy consistently steps on the line, that is flagrant, but tough to call in singles. You might could make that call in doubles. If a guy consistenly steps over the line, Flagrant.


2. Pushys interpretation

"My interpretation of that rule is that if you can see it you can call it.

3. My interpreation:

"To me what the USTA was simply trying to say by using the undefined term of "flagrant" foot was:

Hey guys,...this is for fun. We don't want you to call foot faults unless they are ridiculously insanely bad foot faults...like just before the "T" or something. But if its only a few inches then just look away and have fun"...

Therefore how can a rule be enforced if there is no clear understanding of what "Flagrant" means?. Is 3 inches flagrant? What if someone step over the line once by 5 inches but only once?


****footnote: Pushy ...you said you would retract your argument if I showed you where the Saw Mill guy admitted that he was falsely calling foot faults. Where is your retratction? Did you miss my post?? Scoll up.

You are intentionally exaggerating an interpretation to fit your arguement. Pushy and I agree...You have to be able to see it to call it. I just went into more detail about what you can see and can't see. Bottom line is, if you can see it, it is flagrant. If it happens "only once" you probably won't see it. If it is only an inch or two, you probably won't see it.

Regardless of how you define "flagrant", do you agree that if you step on the line, even by an inch, you have committed a foot fault? If not, then you clearly do not understand the rules of tennis. If so, then the only question is: When can you call a foot fault on an opponent? The answer is in the code and it is not ambiguous or vague: "...the receiver or the receiver’s
partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed and the foot faulting is
so flagrant as to be clearly perceptible from the receiver’s side."

The code defines flagrant in the statement above: Namely, if you can see it, you can call it.

Also, Pushy does not need to retract anything. The sawmill guy did not say he was "falsely" calling foot faults. He said he was calling them because of what happened on the other court. That doesn't reveal to us if the author was actually foot faulting or not. However, I am not commenting on whether either player in the article was right or wrong. I think they both screwed up. My comments only refer to 1.) what is a foot fault? and 2.) When can you call a foot fault? I think the code is very clear in this.

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 09:59 AM
time for a retraction?:


"Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

Nope, no retraction. I read that part. First, keep in mind that I believe the author is painting himself in the best possible light. Second, the guy calling the foot-faults had originally thrown a hissy fit because he believed Martin's captain was doing the exact same thing. When he says, "your captain started it", I think he's referring to the fact that the captain just got away with foot faulting through an entire game. He wasn't going to let Martin do the same thing.


Atilla, you seem to have a problem with the word "flagrant". From what I can tell, you are the only one that seems to have this problem.


I don't like how it's worded either. There is no reason for the word "flagrant" to be in the rulebook, in my opinion. Either it's a violation or it's not. The degree of "flagrantness" shouldn't be a factor.

spot
04-13-2007, 10:25 AM
Attila- if the receiver is 100% sure that a footfault occurred then they are perfectly entitled to make the call. The rules about crossing the line before the ball is contacted is perfectly laid out and if someone calls you for doing it you have no recourse and have to accept the call. Thats what the author didn't do.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 10:56 AM
...I don't like how it's worded either. There is no reason for the word "flagrant" to be in the rulebook, in my opinion. Either it's a violation or it's not. The degree of "flagrantness" shouldn't be a factor.

Ok, one more time on the word "flagrant"....

This word is not used in the definition of a foot fault. The degree of "flagrantness" is not a factor. A foot fault is clearly defined. (except for the walking, running, and moving of feet, etc. which I think is clear but some may not) Flagrant is used in the sentence to determine if you should actually call the foot fault. As in, if you can see it, it is flagrant. There is no wiggle room here guys. It is what it is.

And, if you are still hung up on the vagueness issue, there is at least one precedent in another sport that gives officials room for interpretation. In basketball you have fouls and "flagrant" fouls. If you don't know about this, let me know and I will explain it to you. How about boxing, when there is no clear winner, the officials make a judgement call. Or golf, not only do you call infractions on yourself, but often an official has to be called in to make a judgement call on a situation. Football? Almost every clipping call, roughing the passer/kicker and interference calls are judgement calls. How about baseball...the strike zone changes from game to game and sometimes from inning to inning.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 11:01 AM
I am officially ressurecting KK's club: PUT-OFF, Player's Unwilling To Overlook Foot Faults. Sign me up.

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 11:21 AM
OGR,

I still don't like the wording. Flagrant can't be clearly defined because it will mean different things to different people. You made an argument earlier in the thread stating that you thought flagrant should only apply to an opponent who was consistently stepping on the line rather than just rarely stepping on the line:


oldguysrule: It is pretty simple for me. If I see a guy that occasionally steps on the line but doesn't cross it, not flagrant. If a guy consistently steps on the line, that is flagrant, but tough to call in singles. You might could make that call in doubles. If a guy consistenly steps over the line, Flagrant.


This doesn't match up with what I believe the rule is meant to do. And the reason for our confusion is the word "flagrant". Remove that word and we'll both be in complete agreement. In fact, I don't even like the term "clearly perceptible". Either something is perceptible or it isn't. If I see a foot-fault then I saw a foot-fault. If there's any doubt, then it wasn't perceptible and no call can be made. I don't see the need for the extra verbage.

edit: About the comparison to other sports - I don't think that's helping your case, especially regarding football. One of the rules that has ticked a lot of people off in recent years is defensive pass interference. Nobody knows what the hell the NFL is talking about. Some DB's get called for one thing, and other DB's get called for something else. Some ref's call almost nothing. It's frustrating for the players and the fans. Vagueness is really hurting them on that issue.

edit again: Go Cowboys!

EZRA
04-13-2007, 11:28 AM
-Just wondering though..
Why is the receiver focused on his opponent's foot instead of paying attention to the ball.
Can you really see that well from across the court? At that point of view? across the net?

Kinda absurd if you ask me ..

spot
04-13-2007, 11:35 AM
Ezra- there are many rec players who step across the line on every serve. If someone is footfaulting that repeatedly and refuses to move back then it is not a difficult call to make if you want to.

spot
04-13-2007, 11:38 AM
I still can't believe this is going on so far... From the rules itself: USTA Comment 18.6: When may the receiver or the receiver’s
partner call foot faults? In a non-officiated match, the receiver or the receiver’s
partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed and the foot faulting is
so flagrant as to be clearly perceptible from the receiver’s side.

There is no ambiguity here. It clearly states what is meant by fragrant and it is clearly a call that the receiver is entitled to make.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 11:52 AM
OGR,

I still don't like the wording. Flagrant can't be clearly defined because it will mean different things to different people. You made an argument earlier in the thread stating that you thought flagrant should only apply to an opponent who was consistently stepping on the line rather than just rarely stepping on the line:


oldguysrule: It is pretty simple for me. If I see a guy that occasionally steps on the line but doesn't cross it, not flagrant. If a guy consistently steps on the line, that is flagrant, but tough to call in singles. You might could make that call in doubles. If a guy consistenly steps over the line, Flagrant.


This doesn't match up with what I believe the rule is meant to do. And the reason for our confusion is the word "flagrant". Remove that word and we'll both be in complete agreement. In fact, I don't even like the term "clearly perceptible". Either something is perceptible or it isn't. If I see a foot-fault then I saw a foot-fault. If there's any doubt, then it wasn't perceptible and no call can be made. I don't see the need for the extra verbage.

Good point. All this debate proves one thing:

the rule on foot faulting is ambiguous (or as Spot pointed out : Vague).


Therefore there are two issue that mst be addressed:

Issue #1- Whether Martin foot faulted at all or was the Saw Mill Club seeking revenge for what happened on another court. and

Issue #2 - If Martin did foot fault was it enough to be considered a "Flagrant foot fault".
------------------------------------------------------------------------

evidence for issue #1: Whether Martin foot faulted at all or was the Saw Mill Club seeking revenge for what happened on another court.

-The credibility issue is very strong here. This comes down to he said / she said.

credibilty of Martin: He is the chief editor of Tennis magazine. he has worked with many professionals and is involved in the rankings of ATP players.

Mr. Martins ATP record speaks for itself. Mr martin has played many matches with no complaints and he has soundly beaten most opponents quite soundly. He is an awesome player.

Credibility of the Saw Mill Player: He was losing 3-0. Fithermore when he was accused of purposely making false calls his response was " Your captain started it"




Evidence for issue#2: If Martin did foot fault was it enough to be considered a "Flagrant foot fault".

Mr martin has been playing tennis for 25 years. he is a 4.5 player and one of the best 4.5 players in all of Westchester.

As chief editor of Tennis magazine (The most prominent publication our sport has), his life revolves around tennis and the love of the sport.



-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ruling on issue #1:I am the Judge I must rule in favor of Mr Martin. As author of Tennis magazine his reputation precedes him. As a USTA player his reputation is incredible and as a tennis player he has soundly defeated most of his oponents.

Secondly footfaulting in a USTA match is a VERY VERY rare call. It is almost never made. That it was made on numerous occasion speaks volumes. There also coincidentally happened to be an altercation on the other court.
It is highly unlikely that someone is going to walk off the court simply because of foot faults. The truth is that Mr. Callood was losing badly...in fact he could not have been losing much worse...and he walked off the court. That says it all.

Ruling on issue #2:

I find it unbelievable that a player as experienced and credible as Mr. martin would be guilty of a repeated "Flagrant" foot fault. maybe at the 3.5 level but not by one the best 4.5 players in Westchester.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 11:55 AM
I think you need to take your medication because I think you have multiple personalities. First you say the rule is vague and has something to be desired and now all of a sudden when you have lost the argument the rule has now become crytsal clear. Check it out:

The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague

.
I do think that the code leaves something to be desired .

the footfault rule is clear.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 11:58 AM
You are not supposed to make a foot fault call of any kind UNLESS it is FLAGRANT. I don't think anyone is arguing otherwise, and that is what the Code specifies.


hmmmmmmmmmmmm????

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 12:01 PM
1. It doesn't matter whether a minor foot fault can be seen or not since the rules (The Code) specifies that you can only issue warnings and then call FLAGRANT foot faults.

2. Again, this is a non-issue since by the rules you are prohibited from calling minor foot faults. The foot fault must be flagrant in order to be called.

Just in case (from dictionary.com):
fla·grant /ˈfleɪgrənt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fley-gruhnt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective
1. shockingly noticeable or evident; obvious; glaring: a flagrant error.

3. Like the answer to most hard questions in life, "it depends". What if on two of those three games the other player served and took advantage of huge foot faults to charge the net and win key points? Would it matter then?


hmmmm.....more food for thought.

spot
04-13-2007, 12:08 PM
Attila- there are different ways to footfault in an officiated match- and for those there are times when they leave the rules vague so they don't have to go into hypertechinical detail describing what is allowed when it comes to "significantly changing position along the baseline". There simply isn't any controversy on the tour as to what constitutes a footfault so the rules seem to be just fine how they are to me and everyone else in the game.

The rule for footfaults concerning crossing the line before contacting the ball could not be any more clear. If the opponent is footfaulting so fraglantly as to be visible on the receivers side of the court then they are entitled to make the call if they choose to. You can run away from it- but thats a very clear rule. The receiver was 100% entitled to amke that call and the Author of the piece is the one that broke the rules.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 12:11 PM
Ok, one more time on the word "flagrant"....

Flagrant is used in the sentence to determine if you should actually call the foot fault. As in, if you can see it, it is flagrant. There is no wiggle room here guys. It is what it is.



And yet another interpretation. According to you "Flagrant" means if you can see it its flagrant. Well your own supporter Mr. Spot disagrees with you on the "wiggle" room issue. Spot has quite a different interpretation of the rule than you do:

The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague to try and leave wiggle room for people who barely touch the line once very occasionally.

and yet another interpretation:

1. It doesn't matter whether a minor foot fault can be seen or not since the rules (The Code) specifies that you can only issue warnings and then call FLAGRANT foot faults.

2. Again, this is a non-issue since by the rules you are prohibited from calling minor foot faults. The foot fault must be flagrant in order to be called.

3. Like the answer to most hard questions in life, "it depends". What if on two of those three games the other player served and took advantage of huge foot faults to charge the net and win key points? Would it matter then?

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 12:17 PM
In any event lets assume arguendo That Martin foot faulted.....was it a flagrant foot fault? Someone with martin experience and credibity is going to "flagrantly" continously foot fault???

spot
04-13-2007, 12:18 PM
Attila- thats not a different interpretation. It means that the receiver can choose to ignore the footfault if they want to. If its a minor footfault that cannot be discerned from the other side then it cannot be called. I don't know why you have trouble understanding. Other than the fact that its obvious you are wrong and are just spinning your wheels.

spot
04-13-2007, 12:19 PM
If it was visible from across the net then it is perfectly reasonable to call. many people with Credibility footfault on every serve. He broke the code in an egregious way by completely ignoring a call from the opponent that they were entitled to make.

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 12:45 PM
Attila,

I agree with you that the rule is too vague. Needlessly vague, in my opinion.

Regarding Martin v Opponent:

It doesn't matter to me that Mr. Martin in the chief editor of Tennis magazine and ranks ATP players. It doesn't matter to me that he is an awesome player. If his foot is going over the white line then he's violating the rules and is subject to getting called on that violation. His accredidations don't give him a get-out-of-playing-by-the-rules-free card.

On an unrelated note, is Tennis Magazine really that prestigious? I'm new to the USTA and my association with TM is by way of throwing it in the trash shortly after receiving it each month. It seems to be about 85% advertisements, coupled with an obligatory "Pro Player Profile" in each issue. Whoop-dee-Doo.

As for the credibility of the Saw Mill player being damaged due to leaving at 0-3 ... that just doesn't seem like a big deal to me. If you look at his tennislink profile, that was the first default he ever recorded. And he was down 0-6 on at least two other occassions. Based on the on-court events I still think it's more likely that he left either because he didn't want to get into a fistfight, or he didn't want to deal with a player that was unwilling to play by the rules. And both of those issues rest clearly with Mr. Martin.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 01:09 PM
Attila,

I agree with you that the rule is too vague. Needlessly vague, in my opinion.



Well then there is really nothing left to debate about. If the rule is vague then you cannot make the call because no one really knows what the rule says.

Let me put it another way. Do you really think that Rich Callwood knew that he could only call "Flagrant" foot faults?

Personally I never knew the rule before this post. I always thought that if your foot touched the line its a foot fault end of story. In fact thats what I think the rule should be.

I bet you that Rich Callwood , just like the rest of us thought that if you step on the line then its a foot fault. He thought the exact same thing that most of us thought.

Furthermore even in the 1% chance that Rich did know about the "Flagrant" rule....no one even knows what "Flagrant" really means to even make the call.

In a weird way this is what the author was trying to say.Without knowing what the rule is, Martins argument is:

"Hey I don't know if I made a foot fault or not because I was watching the ball....but if I did make a footfault it was very rare and it was really minor. You have to be a real jerk to call something like that"......

In other words, without knowing the rule James was trying to say that if he did make a foot fault it was a minor one and not a flagrant one.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 01:18 PM
Spot ,

You have already admitted that the rule is vague. I have quoted you quite a few times. I am now getting embarrased for you.

spot
04-13-2007, 01:23 PM
Personally I never knew the rule before this post.

You never read the rules even during this post. That is brutally obvious.

Attila- the rule about materially changing position on the baseline is vague- not the rule about crossing the line before contact. And if Rich Callwood clearly saw his opponent footfault then is he 100% entitled to call it. You keep avoiding that part. If you clearly see it then you are fully within your rights to call it. The rules are very clear.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 01:28 PM
You never read the rules even during this post. That is brutally obvious.

Attila- the rule about materially changing position on the baseline is vague- not the rule about crossing the line before contact. And if Rich Callwood clearly saw his opponent footfault then is he 100% entitled to call it. You keep avoiding that part. If you clearly see it then you are fully within your rights to call it. The rules are very clear.

wow! Now that is just dishonest of you. Now at least i know what I am dealing with. Check out your own quote:

Attila-
The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague to try and leave wiggle room for people who barely touch the line once very occasionally. If someone is consistently crossing the line then the opponent is fully within their rights to call the footfault- it just isn't often done. If you actually read the code you will see that it explicitly says:
.

bleach
04-13-2007, 01:35 PM
Personally I never knew the rule before this post. I always thought that if your foot touched the line its a foot fault end of story. In fact thats what I think the rule should be.



How many times must this be said? If you foot touches the line it's a foot fault...end of story!

The question is when can an opponent call it?

As previously point out:

USTA Comment 18.6: When may the receiver or the receiver’s
partner call foot faults? In a non-officiated match, the receiver or the receiver’s
partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed and the foot faulting is
so flagrant as to be CLEARLY PERCEPTIBLE FROM THE RECEIVER'S SIDE.


Good grief read why don't you!

PushyPushster
04-13-2007, 01:36 PM
Well then there is really nothing left to debate about. If the rule is vague then you cannot make the call because no one really knows what the rule says.


I disagree. In my opinion the rule is meant to do exactly what you thought it was meant to do before reading 18.6 - allow a receiver to call a foot fault if they see it. They've just chosen a very poor way to make their "clarification". I think they are trying to say that any fault visible from across the court is, by definition, flagrant, and therefore callable.

Even if you're right in believing that only special flagrant faults can be called that still doesn't mean Callwood was in the wrong, though. He could easily have thought the fault was flagrant. Heck, he could have thought the fault was Super-Duper Flagrant. Which, according to an even more obscure ruling, gets him two bonus points + another free year's subscription to Tennis Magazine.

spot
04-13-2007, 01:42 PM
I think that its clear that attilla has no intention of actually reading the rule because it would just prove that he has wasted several pages blathering on about a rule that he hasn't even bothered to read.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:17 PM
I think that its clear that attilla has no intention of actually reading the rule because it would just prove that he has wasted several pages blathering on about a rule that he hasn't even bothered to read.

Wow ...Now I see why you are on Rich callwoods side. You are a Cheater.

You have said on numerous occasions that the rule is UNCLEAR. Now its clear???? Maybe we should just call you John Kerry.

I did read the rule...you printed it out yourself and you said that it was purposely made vague to give people "wiggle" room if they merely touch the line.

Then in a later quote you just come out and lie. You actually say that the flagrant rule only applies to footwork and nothing else. Thats just dishonest dude.

Its one thing to have an opinion as to the rules but you have been completely dishonest and that has become evident .

Pushy,

With friends like spot ...you don't need any enemies. I am glad that he is on the Saw Mill side!

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:27 PM
Even if you're right in believing that only special flagrant faults can be called that still doesn't mean Callwood was in the wrong, though. He could easily have thought the fault was flagrant. Heck, he could have thought the fault was Super-Duper Flagrant. Which, according to an even more obscure ruling, gets him two bonus points + another free year's subscription to Tennis Magazine.


The point is that we all agree that the rule is vague (except for Spot who changes his viewpoint whenever the wind blows).

Therefore if the rule has no clear definition you cannot make the call because we do not know what it means.

It really comes down to whether you believe a vague rule can and should be enforced. I do not believe that in this case it can be enforced.

I agree with Spots argument (before he changed his mind) that the USTA pirposely made the rule vague to give "wiggle" room (spots term). They could have easily defined the term "Flagrant" but chose not to.

The reason I believe that the USTA made it so difficult to make this call is because they don't really want you to make the call at all unless its like ridiculously over the line on a continuous basis. They want as you say a "Super Duper" in your face continual foot fault.

I have spoken to people who have played martin. They have told me that Martin is a gentleman and they never saw a foot fault at all. I'm sorry but from what I have heard of Mr. Martin , I really do not believe that he was guilty of a "Super Duper mother F@#ker foot fault". Callwood was down 3-0 because Martin was the better player.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 02:31 PM
This is my understanding of Foot Faults and how to call them...

The Foot Fault rule from the ITF Rules of Tennis:

18. FOOT FAULT (OLD 7 & 8)
During the service motion, the server shall not:
a. Change position by walking or running, although slight movements of
the feet are permitted; or
b. Touch the baseline or the court with either foot; or
c. Touch the area outside the imaginary extension of the sideline with
either foot; or
d. Touch the imaginary extension of the centre mark with either foot.
If the server breaks this rule it is a “Foot Fault”.

If anybody chooses to twist the above words into something it is not, they are out of touch with reality. The above rule is not vague or ambiguous. You either committ a foot fault or you don't. Just like all rules, if you break it, it can be called on you. If you knowingly break it and ignore the rule you are a cheater.

The obvious question is, how do you call foot faults and who gets to call them?

This has been posted before, but I guess it bears repeating...

This is from "The Code"

"24. Foot Faults. A player may warn an opponent that the opponent has
committed a flagrant foot fault. If the foot faulting continues, the player may
attempt to locate an official. If no official is available, the player may call flagrant foot faults. Compliance with the foot fault rule is very much a function of a player’s personal honor system. The plea that a Server should not be penalized because the Server only just touched the line and did not rush the net is not acceptable. Habitual foot faulting, whether intentional or careless, is just as surely cheating as is making a deliberate bad line call."

and this from the USTA comments on the rules:

USTA Comment 18.6: When may the receiver or the receiver’s
partner call foot faults? In a non-officiated match, the receiver or the receiver’s partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed and the foot faulting is
so flagrant as to be clearly perceptible from the receiver’s side.

You may want to argue that "The Code" and "USTA comment 18.6" are vague or ambiguous...You may have problems with the words flagrant, habitual, perceptible, and honor...Maybe you just don't agree with these two "interpretations" of how to make the call...

I am at a loss to understand how someone can read the above rules and not know what constitutes a foot fault, and how to call it.

spot
04-13-2007, 02:36 PM
Attila- I said that there was room for the footfault to not be called if someone just touches the line- that can't be clearly seen from the other side of the court. As long as the footfault can be seen with 100% confidence then there is no controversy at all and you are 100% allowed to call the footfault. Maybe you think the rule is unfair- but it is perfectly clear.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:39 PM
I am at a loss to understand how someone can read the above rules and not know what constitutes a foot fault, and how to call it.


first of all I do not believe the ITF rules apply to USTA matches. But just correct me if I am wrong.

Secondly, I do not know why you are at a loss. There have been at least four different interpretations and everyone has agreed that the rules are vague. (except for Spot who chnages his mind as often as Bill cheats on Hillary).

Third, the fact is that there have already been at least 4 different interpretations of this rule on this very post .

Conclusion: Everyone has agreed that the rule is vague. Therefore following that line of logic we are all forced to apply a rule which we all have agreed that there is no clear meaning of.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:41 PM
Attila- I said that there was room for the footfault to not be called if someone just touches the line- that can't be clearly seen from the other side of the court. As long as the footfault can be seen with 100% confidence then there is no controversy at all and you are 100% allowed to call the footfault. Maybe you think the rule is unfair- but it is perfectly clear.


I am really tired of cut and pasting your lies. Everyone has already seen how dishonest you are. Pushy and others are quite intelligent.

We may not agree but we all can "spot" a liar when they show their face. You are a liar and really should just stay quiet at this point.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:42 PM
The rule is not ambiguous. The rule is vague

.
I do think that the code leaves something to be desired .

the footfault rule is clear.

liar.................

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 02:45 PM
first of all I do not believe the ITF rules apply to USTA matches. But just correct me if I am wrong.

Secondly, I do not know why you are at a loss. There have been at least four different interpretations and everyone has agreed that the rules are vague. (except for Spot who chnages his mind as often as Bill cheats on Hillary).

Third, the fact is that there have already been at least 4 different interpretations of this rule on this very post .

Conclusion: Everyone has agreed that the rule is vague. Therefore following that line of logic we are all forced to apply a rule which we all have agreed that there is no clear meaning of.

Yes, the USTA follows the ITF rules of tennis. Are you kidding me?

Secondly, I am not talking about the interpretations of the rules by the posters. I am talking about the interpretations of the rules by THE CODE and the USTA.

Third, I am not talking about the interpretations of the rules by the posters, etc.

Your Conclusion? Please tell me one thing in the ITF Rules of Tennis regarding Foot Faults that is vague.

spot
04-13-2007, 02:51 PM
I think the code does leave something to be desired. The rule about reaching your hand across to touch the net being solely the call of the person hitting the ball is misplaced to me. And for the footfault rule I do think that they should let a spectator call footfaults if all players agree to it. I don't think the rule is perfect- but when it comes to crossing the line before contact the rule is perfectly clear and its is laid out very clearly when you are allowed to call it.

The Author of the piece didn't like it because he was called for a footfault where other opponents have been nice enough to ignore it. Personally I would have ignored it as well. That doesn't change the fact that the opponent was entirely within his rights to call it.

You do understand that your (current) position is a footfault can never be called regardless of what the rule says. Think about what you are actually saying for once.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 02:55 PM
Spot,

as I said you are just completely dishonest. You are probably one of those jerks that this post is about. IO am really happy that you are defending Callwood.

spot
04-13-2007, 03:02 PM
Sorry for being so dishonest as to quote the actual rule to you (Since you admit you didn't know it).

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 03:05 PM
Sorry for being so dishonest.


apology not accepted. and by the way...I don;t know if you noticed but no one has come to your aid. I think you should change your name to:

"It was Just out";)

Attila the tennis Bum
04-13-2007, 03:08 PM
Please tell me one thing in the ITF Rules of Tennis regarding Foot Faults that is vague.

It is the USTA "code" that is ambiguous.

spot
04-13-2007, 04:18 PM
Attila- I will take one last try at explaining this to you. Of course you won't actually respond but this is the clearest way to put it.

During warmups of a match your opponent warns you that you are footfaulting. This is a normal league match where there are no officials standing around to jump in and resolve the dispute. on your first serve your Opponent calls you for a footfault and doesn't attempt to hit the ball. Is the proper response to:

A- Ignore the call and claim the point for your own.

B- Argue that you barely touched the line and weren't rushing the net so it shouldn't count.

C- Argue that your footfault wasn't flagrant enough to call.

D- Threaten to settle the footfault dispute through fisticuffs.

E- accept your opponents decision and move back so you don't footfault on the next serve.

The code is absolutely clear on which one is the proper response. The author broke the rules.

randomname
04-13-2007, 04:33 PM
umm, no, actually, because the guy who was calling the footfaults did not make any efforts to locate an official so according to the code he couldnt make the actual call yet. for future reference, acting like a condescending jerk works alot better when your actually right

drakulie
04-13-2007, 04:40 PM
Well, the author never states whether he was foot faulting or not, and probably was but has never been called on it.

Anyways, I think they are both jerks, for varying reasons.

oldguysrule
04-13-2007, 07:39 PM
It is the USTA "code" that is ambiguous.

Are you talking about "The Code" or the USTA comments?

What is ambiguous about it?

10sfreak
04-13-2007, 09:00 PM
Spot, a couple of things. One, sorry, but the author DID NOT admit to foot-faulting. He merely wrote that "I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it." That is NOT an admission of guilt; it's simply an admission that at some point in his playing career, he MAY have crossed the white line - in other words, he's human, so he can't be totally, 100% sure that he's NEVER crossed the line.
Second, according to USTA Comment 18.6, since the other guy (Callwood)never attempted to locate an official, then he had no right to start calling foot-faults.
One more thing. According to the story, Callwood never even attempted to return the author's first 4 serves - wouldn't even get ready for them (just stood there with his hand on his hip), and instead, called a foot-fault. If that is true, then it seems to me that Callwood was just using gamesmanship to try to get in the author's head.

spot
04-14-2007, 05:00 AM
10sfreak- unless it was a tournament (and it wasn't) then there aren't any officials standing around waiting to officiate the match. It just doesn't work that way in normal league matches. Seriously do you play in a league where impartial officials are just milling about waiting to call footfaults?!

and if you know that your opponent footfaults on every serve and he isn't moving back then there isn't a need to even make an attempt at the ball. Just stand there- let him footfault and call it. If people watching told the author that he wasn't footfaulting and the guy was just making it up then he would have mentioned that in the story. Never once does he even imply that his opponent was calling false footfaults.

10sfreak
04-14-2007, 07:16 AM
Hmm, to me, reading the story, that the author wasn't foot-faulting is implied. The fact that he's taking the points, rather than just giving the points to Callwood, leads me to infer that he knew he wasn't foot-faulting, and that Callwood was just trying to game him.
As for getting an official, it doesn't matter that there weren't any around, since we don't know whether there were or not, as Callwood never tried to locate one (according to the story). So, since he didn't even try to locate an official, then, as per the USTA Comment 18.6, he had no right to call foot-faults. Remember, Callwood didn't actually have to successfully locate an official, but he DID need to at least ATTEMPT to do so, which, according to the story (and let's face it, it's the only version we have to go on), he never did. To not even attempt to return a serve, with only the intention of calling a foot-fault (how could he KNOW the author was going to foot-fault before he even began his service motion?) tells me that Callwood was just playing headgames, which backfired on him and his team.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-14-2007, 09:45 AM
1.) In an effort to point out the ultra competitiveness of league play the author makes this statement,

"In one of our early matches, for example, our opponents wouldn't give us directions to their courts. All we knew was that they were located at a country club out in the sticks. How about an address? 'Sorry," they said. Our only hope: Yahoo! Maps.

No. I'm going to have to call shenanigans on that. If someone here who plays in Westchester wants to confirm that part of league play is being a good enough detective to find your opponents, then I'll revise my opinion. Until then, it sounds like bullcrap. Also - if you don't have an address or any directions then what exactly are you MapQuesting? The Captain's name?

There are many captains out there that assume other teams know where a facility is. Some of the captains, who understand their facility may be difficult to find, will send information prior to a match to warn them how difficult their facility is.

For example, a good captain would send an e-mail saying, "our courts are located at the back of the country club, so please use the rear entrance which should ensure you arrive promptly to the match."

The bad captain would not provide any information and just try to default you.

I've seen a grievance filed when another team defaulted another team completely. In the case, two facilities were next to each other, with similar names. And the players for all of the away team were at the wrong facility because that is what Yahoo Maps and MapQuest provided.

Signs for the facilities were obscured. Heck, even I got lost trying to find the facility while attempting to research the grievance. The 3.0 away captain submitted several e-mail attempts, but never received a response from the home captain. The 3.0 home captain who defaulted the entire team was reprimanded for not contacting the other captain and providing clear directions to the match. The 3.0 home captain was also told she lost her home court, and would have to play (and pay) at the away court.

10sfreak
04-14-2007, 10:21 AM
Raiden, so rather than just playing the match and letting the chips fall, this 3.0 captain would rather take a full team default by not giving clear directions to their home courts? Wow, that's un-freakin'-believable!

Raiden.Kaminari
04-14-2007, 11:13 AM
Raiden, so rather than just playing the match and letting the chips fall, this 3.0 captain would rather take a full team default by not giving clear directions to their home courts? Wow, that's un-freakin'-believable!

Believe it or not, there are nasty captains out there.

Which is why the grievance committee reprimanded her and told her to replay the match (with her team paying for the court rental).

Attila the tennis Bum
04-15-2007, 08:11 AM
Doesn't this say it all? How can anyone defend Saw Mill after this?:


Callwood never even attempted to return the author's first 4 serves - wouldn't even get ready for them (just stood there with his hand on his hip), and instead, called a foot-fault. If that is true, then it seems to me that Callwood was just using gamesmanship to try to get in the author's head.

or how can anyone defend the jerk after this?


"Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

EZRA
04-15-2007, 08:57 AM
Ezra- there are many rec players who step across the line on every serve. If someone is footfaulting that repeatedly and refuses to move back then it is not a difficult call to make if you want to.

I agree, there's a lot of recreational players who footfaults (most of them not done in purpose... they've been serving that way and had really no idea that they've been footfaulting all this time) BUT, it's just common sense that when a person is called on such offense, he corrects it on the next opportunity. Now, the author is an experienced player... used to play at a college level (correct me if I'm wrong) ... I really doubt that he's footfaulting at all.

Now, this Callwood guy just stood there and simply called footfaults instead of playing the point... why? You should ask yourself that instead. IMO, he's trying to play dirty but it didn't work. Then he walked out `cause he couldn't do anything else to upset his opponent's game... that's simply stupid.

If he really wanted to play, he'd ignore the footfaults (I doubt his opponent wasn't flagrantly footfaulting anyways if he was actually footfaulting) and just play the point.

spot
04-15-2007, 07:26 PM
If everyone watching said that he didn't footfault then thats what he would have said that in the story The author didn't move back to make sure that he didn't footfault- he continued to disregard the rules and claimed points that weren't his to take.

I think that when the match on the other court got ugly, the opponent decided to stop letting things slide. Some people are sticklers about defaulting a match if someone is more than 15 minutes late and some people are more flexible- but once things get ugly the flexibility goes away in a hurry. The Author was just incredulous that he was being called for footfaults when they normally wouldn't be called just because people don't care. But whenever you are footfaulting the receiver is 100% entitled to call the footfault if they want to. Its not at all against the code. There is absolutely no justification for the Author claiming the points after his opponent called him for the footfault.

EZRA
04-15-2007, 08:49 PM
The author footfaulting is a mere specualtion.. an assumption at the most. But to have your hands at your hips while it's your turn to receive and yet resorting to call footfaults is utter stupidity.

Instead of playing the point... he'd rather call footfaults. And when he's down 0-3, he walks out... sportsmanship at its best, right? These are people who don't deserve a racquet in their hand. This is a gentleman's game, not for dirty and unethical players.

I don't believe the author footfaulted during the match .... the opponent was just trying to get in his nerve. Look.. who in their right mind would call footfaults on warm-ups... would you??

I'm gonna have a chance to play the author soon... at least I hope so, and if not... I will be watching him from the sidelines. I'll let you know if he footfaults or not.

Raiden.Kaminari
04-16-2007, 02:22 AM
I don't know why spot continues to insist the author was foot faulting. And it would be interesting if ERZA reports back if he does or not (most likely not).

I'm sure a few of us have encountered opponents who decided to be the biggest pain in the world prior to the match starting.

So is the author's story believable? Yes. I have witnessed more than enough problem players that I can take the author's side. I'm a bit surprised that it happened at the 4.5 level.

Then again, at a tournament I was nearly hit by a ball from an adjacent court by a 4.5 player (he hit the ball out of frustration). I walked over to that player, and told him to retire or I would report the incident to the USTA official at the tournament. The fact there were 20+ witnesses didn't bode well for him either if I decided to submit a grievance to suspend him. Luckily, the player apologized to me, and got off the court after saying he knew he needed some anger management training. I felt sorry for the girlfriend of the guy, but then again, she appeared to have some anger management issues herself (as a spectator, she came to argue with me until the guy told her to back off since it was his fault).

spot
04-16-2007, 04:20 AM
Raiden- if objective viewers told the Author that he wasn't footfaulting he woudl have said that in the post. If he wasn't even touching the line and he was being called for footfaults then the story changes completely. Then it isn't about playing a jerk- its about what to do if the opponent is blatantly cheating. You might as well ask what to do if the opponent is calling serves out that hit in the middle of the box- it would be the same conversation.

Ezra- I think that the opponent saw in the warmup that the Author was footfaulting and took that opportunity to warn him about it. If you thought that you were playing a team of jerks and decided to stop letting small things like footfaults slide then you would tell him he was doing it at the first opportunity. To me thats all that happened- the author is used to being able to footfault because in recreational matches its exceptionally rare to be called for one. And when things got testy on the other court the opponent just decided to stop being flexible. THe author never says that he moved back to make sure he didn't touch the line- he broke the rules by claming a point that wasn't his.

spot
04-16-2007, 04:29 AM
And for anyone who is still defending the author for whatever reason please answer this.

During warmups of a match your opponent warns you that you are footfaulting. This is a normal league match where there are no officials standing around to jump in and resolve the dispute. on your first serve your Opponent calls you for a footfault and doesn't attempt to hit the ball. Is the proper response to:

A- Ignore the call and claim the point for your own.

B- Argue that you barely touched the line and weren't rushing the net so it shouldn't count.

C- Argue that your footfault wasn't flagrant enough to call.

D- Threaten to settle the footfault dispute through fisticuffs.

E- accept your opponents decision and move back so you don't footfault on the next serve.

The code is absolutely clear on which one is the proper response. The author broke the rules.

PushyPushster
04-16-2007, 04:32 AM
For those who wonder how anyone can take Callwood's side, just remember you're only hearing one side of the story. It's human nature to present yourself in the best light and I think Martin is doing just that. Early in the article he compares himself to James Bond and his opponent to Goldfinger. Cripes, why not just paint a big "S" on your chest and tell everyone you're Superman? The amazing thing is, even though he's painting himself as the hero, he still sounds like almost as big a jerk as Callwood. If you're willing to believe the footfaults called during warm-ups were warnings (I am), and that Martin just might have been guilty of crossing the white line, then your reaction to the story would be totally different.

OldGuysRule: Thanks for the ITF posting - that cleared up any remaining confusion I had about USTA comment 18.6.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-16-2007, 05:55 AM
anyone who calls a foot fault in a amateur USTA match is a jerk. I don't care if its flagrant, minor or whatever. Its a stupid call merely made because they have no other way of winning. Especially when the receiver admits that he was falsely doing it as is the case here.

There is a moral question here: If you see a footfault then "should " you even call it?

The score was 3-0 not because of footfaults....but because the author was the better player.

Foot faulting is a stupid call made always by the inferior player. The player who is winning will never call a foot fault!


By the way for those of you still defending SawMill...you guys have dismissed glaring facts.

-We are talking about the credibility of the author of Tennis magazine. The premier publication of our sport

-The reciever admitted to falsely calling faults by saying "Your captain started it".

-There was already an altercation on another court.

- Martin is an incredible player who has beaten just about everyone in the league.

-The Saw Mill team has a teribble reputation in Westchester while Martin is regarded as a gentleman and an incredible player.

-Martin was up 3-0.

-Footfaulting is an extremely RARE call which is almost never made. That it was made repeatedly in this case really goes against the odds.

-The footfault rule was intentionally made to be vague because the USTA wants that call to be made very rarely and in only extreme circumstances.

(and by the way the rule is still vague as spot pointed out).

spot
04-16-2007, 06:32 AM
No wonder Attila is so confused about the footfault rule. The book he is using has exceptions for people who write about tennis, people who are good players, people who are winning, and people who have a good reputation. It makes sense that he is so confused about this!

It very well could be that the receiver was a total *** for calling the footfaults when he would have ignored them if the match on the other court didn't get confrontational. But sometimes you can be a total *** and still be correct on the rules. Just like some people are sticklers for making the other team default a match if their player is even a minute past the deadline while others are more flexible. But the author of the piece is the one that broke the rules. If someone calls you for a footfault you move back on your next serve- that is the only way possible to handle the situation. Under no circumstances are you allowed to claim the point because you don't believe a call that the opponent is entitled to make.

PushyPushster
04-16-2007, 06:45 AM
Foot faulting is a stupid call made always by the inferior player. The player who is winning will never call a foot fault!


Maybe the winning player is winning because he's getting an extra 2ft jump toward the net on each of his serves ... :D

Martin might be a great guy and an awesome tennis player, but that still doesn't absolve him from playing by the rules. He should have responded to the foot fault call differently - either asking his opponent to clarify what he saw, or, if he thought Callwood was cheating him, asking a third party to play judge.

oldguysrule
04-16-2007, 07:05 AM
...

-The footfault rule was intentionally made to be vague because the USTA wants that call to be made very rarely and in only extreme circumstances.

(and by the way the rule is still vague as spot pointed out).

Attila, friendly question, but, I am still wondering what exactly you think is vague about the rule?

bleach
04-16-2007, 07:18 AM
The only time I ever called/warned a player for Foot faults was during a doubles match (no officials/non-sactioned). He (big ex-football player) was, seriously, stepping 3-4 feet inside the baseline before hitting the ball. When we warned him, the reaction was simular to ther authors. He threatens us, calls us names and kept on foot faulting. He said that "we were not going to play by those rules". So in the next game, my serve, I lined up about 4 feet inside the baseline to serve. He went crazy, the only time I was ever actually afraid on the courts.

But looking now with all this new information I learned here I see that:

I was the jerk and even though we were winning at the time and ended up winning easily, calling the FF was the only chance we had of winning.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-16-2007, 10:56 AM
Read the article and tell us who you think was a jerk.

A Season on the Edge
by James Martin

League Tennis is fun, but it has a dark side. Just ask the author, who joined a U.S.T.A. team for the first time last year. (Names have been left out to protect the innocent -- and the guilty.)

Competition warps the minds of men. grown men with families. Men with highfalutin-sounding jobs. Men, in other words, who should know better.

There's no other way I can begin to explain the theater of the absurd that unfolded last spring during one of my USTA 4.5 league matches. I had just taken the court for the second singles against my opponent, a dapper Englishman with a yachtsman's tan. The trouble began when I was taking my warm-up serves.

"Foot fault," my opponent said.
"Excuse me?"
"You're foot faulting."

In my 25 years of playing tennis, I'd never been called for a foot fault during a match (I'm not saying I haven't crossed the all-important white line, but no one's taken me to task for doing it). And during warm-ups? I walked up to my service line. "Don't even think about it," I said. "Don't start."

I returned to the baseline and hit another practice serve. "You're foot faulting," he said. "You can't do that."

I had a strong suspicion why he was acting like this. Fifteen minutes earlier, I had been in the lounge watching my team's captain play his match. The Englishman was there, too, upset that my skipper was, in his word, "bullying" his opponent. Whatever the reality, it was clear both players were sniping at each other over line calls. My soon-to-be opponent inched closer to the glass and said to his friend standing nearby, "Look, he's foot faulting." He tried pointing this out to his player from behind the glass. He eventually walked onto the court, interrupted play, and accused my captain of foot faulting.

Now, as I stood eyeballing my opponent, his motivation seemed clear. "Listen," I said. "I want to have a nice match. Whatever's going on over there" --I pointed to the other court--"leave it there. Let's not start this here."

"Well, your captain started it," he said.

My 8-year-old daughter could have constructed a better argument, but it left me with little place to go. The man spoke softly with a dignified air, a stark contrast to the nonsense he was spewing. The combination made him seem slightly sinister. As he pressed his point, he reminded me of a villain from a James bond movie, a diabolical blue blood hellbent on destroying 007. Unfortunately, his plot for revenge was being carried out on me. As we continued to argue, I grew agitated. I don't know why--maybe because I've never been in such a bizarre altercation, perhaps it was the negative vibes in the air--but something took hold of me. Possessed me. I went from the voice of reason to the voice of madness.

"Look, if you're not going to play properly, let's take it outside," I said.

"Take it outside?" Who did I think I was, Russell Crowe? Adrenaline had overwhelmed my internal editor. "Let's step outside," I repeated, before throwing in a "Don't [expletive] with me" for good measure.

No, no one was going to win a sportsmanship award today.

We walked back to our respective baselines. I can't speak for him, but I'm guessing he was shell-shocked after my outburst. He blasted his practice serves as hard as he could--right at me. He muttered that this was how you're supposed to serve, without foot faulting. Now he's giving me a tennis lesson? I thought. Oh, it was on! Risking a dislocated shoulder, I returned the favor by serving bullets back at him. Clearly, I'd lost my mind.

By the time the match finally started, I had never been more fired up on a tennis court. And that's when things turned really weird. After breaking him to start the match, I prepared to serve. But he didn't have his racquet in the ready position. He stood there with one hand on his hip. I served the ball in.

"Foot fault," he said, pointing to my feet and shaking his head disapprovingly.

I was as dumbstruck as K-Fed in a library. "I'm taking the point," I shouted, and headed to the ad side. Another serve. He let that one go, too. That was 30-love in my book. Completely rattled, I double-faulted on the next point. Keep it together, I told myself. Serve underhand if you have to, just get the ball in! I was on the verge of hyperventilating by this point, and my arm felt like a lead pipe. But I was able to muscle my racquet up and over my head and meekly push two balls into the serve box, which he made no attempt to return. Two-love, me.

My opponent looked toward his teammate in the lounge as if to say, "Can you believe this guy?" After he lost the first point of the next game, he walked to the sideline, grabbed his bag, and, without a word, walked off the court. "Where are you going?" I said. "Let's finish this." No response. My captain, still playing on an adjacent court, shouted, "Let him go." He knew that our team would get a win. This strange debacle would go down in the books as a simple default.

Attila the tennis Bum
04-16-2007, 11:00 AM
Attila, friendly question, but, I am still wondering what exactly you think is vague about the rule?


I think spot put his reasoning as to why he thought the rule was vague best. I could cut and paste it but at this point it really does not matter.

When you are dealing with cheaters like spot you come to realize that basically you cannot deal with them.

There is no amount of convincing or evidence to change a cheaters mind. I could show a cheater the exact mark and he would still not admit that he made a bad call.

Therefore I have only one alternative.....I need to call a linesman. I will submit this subject to the TW jury via a poll. that should end this debate once and for all. Go and vote!

Serve and Volley
04-16-2007, 11:02 AM
anyone who calls a foot fault at a USTA match from the other end of the court is a jerk.

Kevo
04-16-2007, 11:22 AM
anyone who calls a foot fault at a USTA match from the other end of the court is a jerk.

So tell us, how far over the line do you serve from?

EZRA
04-16-2007, 11:37 AM
SPOT: first off... there is no proof that the author actually footfaulted. That's about it. What we all have are assumptions.

My team will be playing the author's team real soon, I don't know when since the schedule's not up yet but I'll let you guys know when my team plays TEAM ARSENAL.

If I see the author falsely accused of footfaulting, then that voids all your arguments. If I see him footfaulting, then he's a big fat liar. But until I can see with my own eyes on how he serves, I suggest we all shut up and let go of this issue.

kylebarendrick
04-16-2007, 12:14 PM
FWIW, I was watching a team match last year (I had already finished my match) and both players were routinely foot faulting. I knew both of them, and knew that one habitually stepped a foot inside the line on his serves and I knew that the other has little patience for opponents who footfault (although he often does himself).

Predictably, the player who tends to call footfaults warned his opponent that he was footfaulting. Things got tense and they asked one player from each team to act as monitors to call footfaults (allowed by the NorCal rules). I was one of the players brought in to watch the serves. In an effort to calm things down we (the monitors) noted that we had seen both players clearly footfault prior to being asked to monitor the lines.

Strangely enough, we never had to make a call. Both players cleaned up their service motions once we were on court to make the call.

Serve and Volley
04-16-2007, 01:00 PM
So tell us, how far over the line do you serve from?

I don't....but when I saw you do it I never said a word to you. I just beat the crap out of you anyway.

Sakkijarvi
04-16-2007, 01:55 PM
Hey! There was a guy in our singles league...foot faulting by a mile. Another player actually pointed it out to me while a match was going on. We were watching from the lounge. It was so blatant. Then I says, "great, I'm playing the guy next week."

So our match begins and the guy is doing his leaping gnome thing, like two steps into the court when he makes contact. I never made this call before but figured, what the hell. I call it and it stops the guy in his tracks. He then tries to serve from...um...BEHIND that little ole white line. Gets all angry after dropping a couple of service games. Then declares that he's been 'doing it this way' for however many years...gonna make like Frank and foot fault away. Then goes all out like a berserker, red-faced, PO'd, no fun in this death match. I got a good laugh out of the whole thing and finished out the match with the guy but it was no fun.

End of story: he won the match, the league and moved on. Just another putz passing through on his way to tennis greatness.

Sakki

10sfreak
04-16-2007, 04:23 PM
For those who wonder how anyone can take Callwood's side, just remember you're only hearing one side of the story. It's human nature to present yourself in the best light and I think Martin is doing just that. Early in the article he compares himself to James Bond and his opponent to Goldfinger. Cripes, why not just paint a big "S" on your chest and tell everyone you're Superman? The amazing thing is, even though he's painting himself as the hero, he still sounds like almost as big a jerk as Callwood. If you're willing to believe the footfaults called during warm-ups were warnings (I am), and that Martin just might have been guilty of crossing the white line, then your reaction to the story would be totally different.

OldGuysRule: Thanks for the ITF posting - that cleared up any remaining confusion I had about USTA comment 18.6.
Pushy (and Spot) - that's just it - we only have the author's side of the story, and NOWHERE in that article does he admit or even imply, that he was foot-faulting. If y'all know another, different version of the story, one that isn't based on supposition, please share it with the rest of us. I just don't see how y'all can read the story, decide on your own (without any evidence) that the author MUST be lying, and convict him of cheating.
Try to think of yourselves as jurors in this case. All you have are the "facts" presented in the article. You're NOT allowed to "suppose" anything. What would your verdict be? Remember, your verdict must be based on the facts AS PRESENTED. No jury nulification allowed!

spot
04-16-2007, 04:45 PM
10sfreak- when you are looking at a biased account of what took place oftentimes you need to look at which facts weren't presented to see what the truth is. No where does he say that the opponent was calling false footfaults. Nowhere does he say that people watching said that he wasn't footfaulting. If the footfaults were false he would have said that. He was just ****ed because they were being called at all.

People lose it when they get called on footfaults and they are used to it not being called. Here in atlanta one guy got banned for a year because he cussed out and threatened a woman who was calling him on footfaults in a mixed doubles match. Just because people get accustomed to footfaults not being called doesn't mean that the receiver is no longer entitled to make the call if they want to.

I will ask again- if you get called for a footfault in a match do the rules say you are allowed to claim the point if you don't believe the call?

10sfreak
04-16-2007, 05:03 PM
See Spot, you chose to completely ignore my request to put yourself in the juror's box. You can't just suppose what the facts are...sounds to me like you're using your own past experiences to decide the case. Jury nullification! Not allowed!
Again, nowhere does the author write that he WAS foof-faulting either. The fact that Callwood NEVER MADE AN ATTEMPT TO RETURN THE AUTHORS FIRST FOUR SERVES is very telling to me.
As for your last question. See USTA Comment 18.6, particularly, "the receiver or the receiver’s partner may call foot faults after all efforts (warning the server
and attempting to locate an official) have failed". Ok, did you catch that? The part about "attempting to locate an official"? There was no indication in the story that Callwood did this (unless of course, you wan to SUPPOSE that he did), so the answer is, YES! You DO get to claim the point! Tada!

spot
04-16-2007, 07:00 PM
10sfreak- the guy gave his side of the story and never said that he wasn't footfaulting. If that were true then he had every opportunity to SAY that. How you can assume that he wasn't footfaulting even though he never said that is just beyond me. He has had his chance to present his evidence- he never said that the calls were false.

Have you ever played league tennis before? I have never been at a league match where there was an objective official just standing around waiting to call footfaults. In a tournament there are officials- in league matches all the calls are made on the court. I find it hard to believe that anyone who has ever played league tennis would think that there are officials standing around for this purpose.