PDA

View Full Version : What would you do?


bleach
02-17-2009, 11:06 AM
My teammates (USTA league match) had this issue last night, I wanted to see how you would handle it. I know what I would have done.

Player A & B vs. C & D.

A hits ball deep to C near baseline. C returns ball over net, but B intercepts and hits a winner. D, who was at the net, then goes to check the mark from A's shot and declares that is was out and takes the point.

We all know what the rules/code/common sense say, but what would you do if you were in that situation? There are no linesmen/umpires/officials around. It's you vs. them.

For me, my exact actions would depend on some things. Is the match close? Does this point lose/win a game for me/them? Have there been other "bad" calls?

If it was a close match and/or a breakpoint either way, then I would stand up and say no way. I always carry a rule book (Friend at Court) and have not problems bringing it out.

If the call meant nothing, 40-0 in a 5-0 set, then I would at least let them know that the call was improper, but allow it. Sometimes better just to get a match over with, than to start an argument.

How far would you be willing to take it?

spot
02-17-2009, 11:41 AM
Its clear that player D can't do that-- its not even close to being a call that they can make at that point. I'd have zero problem telling them that because it was just something they didn't know about the rules. Timely calls are a critically important part of tennis- not some hypertechnical detail. They didn't do it maliciously- they should just be told what the rule is. After that its up to them how far they want to carry it out.

mikeler
02-17-2009, 11:53 AM
They sound like misinformed players. I play on clay all the time and nobody would ever dream of calling a ball out that late. It's just like the pro players who try and get instant replay on a ball they thought was out a few strokes earlier.

I would nicely say that you must make the call immediately and claim the point if the match was close. If we were way up or way down, then I would let it go.

rasajadad
02-17-2009, 12:10 PM
Bleach- Out of curiousity, was this match on a hard or clay court? Anyway, as my understanding of the rules go, calls must be timely. Also, it was not his call to make. (Was B's shot really in?)

Nellie
02-17-2009, 12:15 PM
Call shots the same way, regardless of the point's importance in the match. Othewise, you let a call go at 5-0 in the set and then everyone gets upset when the opposite call is made at 5-5 in the set.

mikeler
02-17-2009, 12:23 PM
Call shots the same way, regardless of the point's importance in the match. Othewise, you let a call go at 5-0 in the set and then everyone gets upset when the opposite call is made at 5-5 in the set.


I just reread the post and saw this was a USTA league match, so I'm going to have to agree with Nellie. If this was a friendly match, then I'd make a judgment call based on the score.

bleach
02-17-2009, 12:36 PM
My question was not whether the guys made a bad call or broke the rules, no doubt they did. My question is how far would you take it? The same question pertains to any rule conflict (not a judgement line call). If the other player(s) were standing their ground.


Would you refuse to play any further?
Play on - a file a grievence?
Get Captains envolved?
Go Postal on them?
Just take one on the chin and not start a fight?
Get to point back by calling one of their's out?

Jim A
02-17-2009, 12:43 PM
You just need to let them know the ruling and all calls must be timely, therefore you win the point. If they have an issue and don't know the rule, show them the rulebook

mikeler
02-17-2009, 12:53 PM
My question was not whether the guys made a bad call or broke the rules, no doubt they did. My question is how far would you take it? The same question pertains to any rule conflict (not a judgement line call). If the other player(s) were standing their ground.


Would you refuse to play any further?
Play on - a file a grievence?
Get Captains envolved?
Go Postal on them?
Just take one on the chin and not start a fight?
Get to point back by calling one of their's out?


1. Give them a calm explanation of the rules and claim the point.
2. Get captains involved if they refuse to give you the point.
3. Do the same thing to them later in the match. Was this clay?
4. File a grievance later.

JavierLW
02-17-2009, 12:54 PM
My question was not whether the guys made a bad call or broke the rules, no doubt they did. My question is how far would you take it? The same question pertains to any rule conflict (not a judgement line call). If the other player(s) were standing their ground.


Would you refuse to play any further?
Play on - a file a grievence?
Get Captains envolved?
Go Postal on them?
Just take one on the chin and not start a fight?
Get to point back by calling one of their's out?

You have to at least mention that they are not allowed to do that, you cant just let it go totally. Perhaps they dont even know the rules or they are trying to pull one over on you.

Like spot said, there is nothing wrong with calling them out on it and just flat out telling them that. "I'm sorry but you cant do that....."

Dont get upset over it obviously and dont get confrontational, but you have to at least point it out to them. If they are cool it's up to them to let it go, not you, they are the ones that are wrong here.

If they want to fight over it instead, well then hopefully you brought your rulebook. (or make them show you there rulebook)

The funny thing in these suggestions is the person trying to enforce the rules for themselves is sometimes made out to be the bad guy because they are being "mean", but I think it's the other person's problem for either not knowing the rules, or trying to pull one over on you.

spot
02-17-2009, 01:05 PM
I think if you are talking about a more arcane and more technical rule (foot fault, hindrance) then its a different conversation. But in this case its cut and dried. You just calmly tell the person what the rule is. If they don't believe you then you show them the rule in the rulebook. I don't really see where the problem is.How far you take it? The question is how far your opponents are goign to take it when they are wrong on the rules. I don't really see what control you have over that. If they got heated about it then I think it would be even more important for them to know what the real rule is so they could be spared from embarassing themselves in the future.

JavierLW
02-17-2009, 02:43 PM
I think if you are talking about a more arcane and more technical rule (foot fault, hindrance) then its a different conversation. But in this case its cut and dried. You just calmly tell the person what the rule is. If they don't believe you then you show them the rule in the rulebook. I don't really see where the problem is.How far you take it? The question is how far your opponents are goign to take it when they are wrong on the rules. I don't really see what control you have over that. If they got heated about it then I think it would be even more important for them to know what the real rule is so they could be spared from embarassing themselves in the future.

Sorry but I dont think you can pick and choose what an "arcane rule" is. What is arcane to you is not arcane to everyone.

And sometimes in the case of hindrance, it's not an arcane rule, it's just not used because most people dont know it's there. Yet if you have an opponent making annoying noises or groaning when he thinks his shots are going out yet they fall in (I had one of those Monday, he does that all the time), you may get really annoyed. And guess what? There is a rule to cover that situation...

Either way someone is in the wrong and it's their problem if it's getting taken too far, not the person who's pointing out that they are wrong.

That's the problem in a lot of these cases, people pick and choose what rules are "important" or just "technical".

(and Im talking about clear cases where we assume it's obvious that either someone's foot faulting or it's clear hindrance, like talking right about someone is about to hit the ball, etc.....)

cknobman
02-17-2009, 03:08 PM
Tell player D hes wrong and if he argues place the frame of my racquet against the side of his head.

Spokewench
02-17-2009, 03:11 PM
I would tell them that they cannot make late calls like that; that for the rest of the match, they need to call their balls timely. I would concede the point if this was the first time this had happened; and go on and play the rest of the game.

After all, I'm thinking the ball was out if he could see that it was out.

spoke

Geezer Guy
02-17-2009, 03:43 PM
My understanding is that it's OK - ON CLAY - to inspect the mark of the last ball hit in a point to see if it's in or out, and make the appropriate call.

That's ONLY on clay. On a hardcourt, you must make a call immediately.

JavierLW
02-17-2009, 04:11 PM
My understanding is that it's OK - ON CLAY - to inspect the mark of the last ball hit in a point to see if it's in or out, and make the appropriate call.

That's ONLY on clay. On a hardcourt, you must make a call immediately.

That seems to be true, although if we carefully read the OP's situation it says:

A hits ball deep to C near baseline. C returns ball over net, but B intercepts and hits a winner. D, who was at the net, then goes to check the mark from A's shot and declares that is was out and takes the point.


It says that he went to look at A's shot, not B's shot. So he's making a call based on a shot that they didnt call promptly when it happened.

He cant do that, calls must be made promptly to eliminate the two-chance option. (even on clay you cant have the ball go back and forth a million times and then claim the first shot was out)

GMN
02-18-2009, 08:24 AM
I would personally stop play and confront him. I would probably tell him to f himself and then walk over to his side of the court and take his racquet out of his hands. And if he didn't like that I would give him a time-out.

GMN
02-18-2009, 08:26 AM
Oops never mind comments above, they were intended for another post. Sorry.

LuckyR
02-18-2009, 08:48 AM
If D called A's shot out, clearly this would be the correct procedure (although B would not have hit the winner). However, the missing component (as many have pointed out) is the lack of a call on D's part. Playing on clay does not change the responsibilities of players to make verbal calls. So no change in the rule in that area.

As to how to handle it: I would approach the issue impassionately and simply correct the other team that "no, in fact you don't get the point and here's why:..." I would approach it as a teaching opportunity rather than a confrontation. Let them take it to the next level if they want.

TheGreatestAudia
02-18-2009, 09:17 AM
Couldn't you call a "let" and play the point over due to the disagreement? This happens all the time without incident where I come from.

DANMAN
02-18-2009, 09:23 AM
Contrary to popular practice and belief, it is not ok to go look for a ball mark to make a call on clay. Calls should be made promptly, not after searching for a mark that could have been made earlier in the match, let alone the day before.

Geezer Guy
02-18-2009, 09:50 AM
That seems to be true, although if we carefully read the OP's situation it says:

A hits ball deep to C near baseline. C returns ball over net, but B intercepts and hits a winner. D, who was at the net, then goes to check the mark from A's shot and declares that is was out and takes the point.


It says that he went to look at A's shot, not B's shot. So he's making a call based on a shot that they didnt call promptly when it happened.

He cant do that, calls must be made promptly to eliminate the two-chance option. (even on clay you cant have the ball go back and forth a million times and then claim the first shot was out)

Oops. My bad. Thanks for catching that. Yes, what D did was wrong.

mikeler
02-18-2009, 10:14 AM
Contrary to popular practice and belief, it is not ok to go look for a ball mark to make a call on clay. Calls should be made promptly, not after searching for a mark that could have been made earlier in the match, let alone the day before.


Agreed, but I think it is OK if I call a ball out to give my opponent the courtesy of checking the mark to verify the call. I almost never call in balls out, but on the rare times I do, I just award the point to my opponent even though I know the code says we can play a let.

woodrow1029
02-18-2009, 10:24 AM
Contrary to popular practice and belief, it is not ok to go look for a ball mark to make a call on clay. Calls should be made promptly, not after searching for a mark that could have been made earlier in the match, let alone the day before.
I don't know where you are getting this information from, but you are allowed to look at the mark on clay as quoted below. The problem in this situation is that it is too late. It must be done immediately during a point, or after a point ending shot.

6. Out calls must be made immediately. “Out” calls must be made
immediately. The call shall be made before either an opponent has
hit the return or the return has gone out of play. If no immediate
audible or visible call is made, the ball shall be considered good.
a. Clay court procedure. A player may quickly check a mark
before making a call on his side of the net.

randomname
02-18-2009, 11:00 AM
I would tell them that they can't do that either way, because either:

A. the guys a cheater and by saying nothing he's just going to keep trying to get away with more and more

or

B. he'll try it again in a serious match not knowing that he isn't allowed to and possibly cause a fight or get the other team to start hooking him since they would think hes trying to steal points

mikeler
02-18-2009, 12:02 PM
I don't know where you are getting this information from, but you are allowed to look at the mark on clay as quoted below. The problem in this situation is that it is too late. It must be done immediately during a point, or after a point ending shot.

6. Out calls must be made immediately. “Out” calls must be made
immediately. The call shall be made before either an opponent has
hit the return or the return has gone out of play. If no immediate
audible or visible call is made, the ball shall be considered good.
a. Clay court procedure. A player may quickly check a mark
before making a call on his side of the net.



Good to know. I'll stuff this rule down a few people's throats who get mad if I take a 1/2 second delay to ensure the mark was out. :twisted:

JavierLW
02-18-2009, 01:18 PM
Couldn't you call a "let" and play the point over due to the disagreement? This happens all the time without incident where I come from.

That's a common practice for some, and it's not any fairer then just following the rules.

It's not fair that someone should get to play out an entire point and then when finally they've lost the point, they get to say "no sorry, that point you hit 10 minutes ago was out so I win the point".

Making it a "let" is not any fairer, either way you're being robbed out of a point that you should of won.

(dont get me wrong though if you and everyone you play with wants to play that way, then who cares? But when you encounter people who want to play by the rules then you have to defer to them)

JavierLW
02-18-2009, 01:20 PM
Agreed, but I think it is OK if I call a ball out to give my opponent the courtesy of checking the mark to verify the call. I almost never call in balls out, but on the rare times I do, I just award the point to my opponent even though I know the code says we can play a let.

Actually according to the rules (and I just re-read this because of this subject), you are not allowed to cross the net to inspect a mark.

woodrow1029
02-18-2009, 01:47 PM
Actually according to the rules (and I just re-read this because of this subject), you are not allowed to cross the net to inspect a mark.
That is correct. However, if you invite the player to come look, then it takes the unsportsmanlike conduct out of coming to look at the mark, and a roving umpire would be fine with it. AS LONG AS IT IS INVITED.

TheGreatestAudia
02-19-2009, 11:52 AM
That's a common practice for some, and it's not any fairer then just following the rules.

It's not fair that someone should get to play out an entire point and then when finally they've lost the point, they get to say "no sorry, that point you hit 10 minutes ago was out so I win the point".

Making it a "let" is not any fairer, either way you're being robbed out of a point that you should of won.

(dont get me wrong though if you and everyone you play with wants to play that way, then who cares? But when you encounter people who want to play by the rules then you have to defer to them)

You're absolutely right about it not being fair to a person who beautifully constructed a point and hit what seemed to be a winner only to have the "enemy" call it out. Obviously, if you can figure it out via the rules, figure it out with the other player in a rational way but, rules or no rules, and no official around, 9 times out of 10, you play a let so that you can continue. In a perfect world, Javier, what you said would be great. However, we're not in a perfect world and people get testy when they think they're right no matter what. The only way to defuse the situation, without an official around, is to play a let.

mikeler
02-19-2009, 12:09 PM
Actually according to the rules (and I just re-read this because of this subject), you are not allowed to cross the net to inspect a mark.


I was just talking about my own calls on my side of the net.

mikeler
02-19-2009, 12:12 PM
That is correct. However, if you invite the player to come look, then it takes the unsportsmanlike conduct out of coming to look at the mark, and a roving umpire would be fine with it. AS LONG AS IT IS INVITED.


Where I play, it is common to invite your opponent over to inspect the mark. While I do agree that this is probably a good rule, it is hard to see clay marks close to your opponent's baseline. It's never happened to me, but I could imagine a situation where you can't really tell where the mark is until the next change over and realize your opponent hooked you and it is too late.

JavierLW
02-19-2009, 12:48 PM
You're absolutely right about it not being fair to a person who beautifully constructed a point and hit what seemed to be a winner only to have the "enemy" call it out. Obviously, if you can figure it out via the rules, figure it out with the other player in a rational way but, rules or no rules, and no official around, 9 times out of 10, you play a let so that you can continue. In a perfect world, Javier, what you said would be great. However, we're not in a perfect world and people get testy when they think they're right no matter what. The only way to defuse the situation, without an official around, is to play a let.

No it's not, that only works because you're playing with a bunch of people who see that as somehow acceptable.

If someone is following the rules, there is already an accepted way to handle that.

Most people who call the ball out, believe that it was out, so you have to accept their call, not call a "let" just because you disagree.

In the OP's case, it's pretty clear that they lost their chance to call it so thru the continuation of the point A&B should of won that point.

It would be cheap to take the point away from them just because "players disagree". Calling it a "let" does nothing and it's not really that much better then what did happen. Some people just seem to think it's "fair" somehow that's why that solution is presented occasionally. (I dont actually see it with who I play with though, I used to see it with people who just occasionally played and didnt understand or care about the rules)

Also keep in mind that in whatever way you approach it, it's just a game. If you look at it that way there really is no need to do what "seems nice to you" versus just following the rules.

That's why the solution is player A&B should say something to the effect of "you cant claim that point based on.....". That's the rule, if players C&D are cool they will accept it, and if they are not that's their problem.

Geezer Guy
02-19-2009, 05:55 PM
It would take a really long time to play a match if all four players met after each point to all agree that all the balls hit in the rally were good. If any player thought any ball was out, they'ed play a let.

DANMAN
02-19-2009, 07:44 PM
I don't know where you are getting this information from, but you are allowed to look at the mark on clay as quoted below. The problem in this situation is that it is too late. It must be done immediately during a point, or after a point ending shot.

6. Out calls must be made immediately. “Out” calls must be made
immediately. The call shall be made before either an opponent has
hit the return or the return has gone out of play. If no immediate
audible or visible call is made, the ball shall be considered good.
a. Clay court procedure. A player may quickly check a mark
before making a call on his side of the net.


My statement was correct. You cannot search for a mark, but you can check one. Too many times people go look for a mark because they aren't sure where the ball landed. They then pick one in the general vicinity. The only time the aforementioned rule would really apply is if you see a ball very near the line and want to make sure it clipped/didn't clip it. Otherwise, you make an immediate call.

TheGreatestAudia
02-20-2009, 06:09 AM
No it's not, that only works because you're playing with a bunch of people who see that as somehow acceptable.

If someone is following the rules, there is already an accepted way to handle that.

Most people who call the ball out, believe that it was out, so you have to accept their call, not call a "let" just because you disagree.

In the OP's case, it's pretty clear that they lost their chance to call it so thru the continuation of the point A&B should of won that point.

It would be cheap to take the point away from them just because "players disagree". Calling it a "let" does nothing and it's not really that much better then what did happen. Some people just seem to think it's "fair" somehow that's why that solution is presented occasionally. (I dont actually see it with who I play with though, I used to see it with people who just occasionally played and didnt understand or care about the rules)

Also keep in mind that in whatever way you approach it, it's just a game. If you look at it that way there really is no need to do what "seems nice to you" versus just following the rules.

That's why the solution is player A&B should say something to the effect of "you cant claim that point based on.....". That's the rule, if players C&D are cool they will accept it, and if they are not that's their problem.

Granted, I just realized that we all are discussing that the guy was questioning a shot hit in the middle of the point, not the winner. THAT is unacceptable. If you thought a ball was out, you don't get to wait till the end of the point to then re-visit. If he had won the point, he wouldn't have said anything. I apologize for the confusion. But, just curious, what is your stance on D overturning the call on the winner itself? What would you have done with that situation?

I'll also pretend that what you said, "I dont actually see it with who I play with though, I used to see it with people who just occasionally played and didnt understand or care about the rules," wasn't condescending at all. There are plenty of people in tennis who know the rules, live and die by tennis, who call lets because it really is "just a game."

JavierLW
02-20-2009, 06:58 AM
Granted, I just realized that we all are discussing that the guy was questioning a shot hit in the middle of the point, not the winner. THAT is unacceptable. If you thought a ball was out, you don't get to wait till the end of the point to then re-visit. If he had won the point, he wouldn't have said anything. I apologize for the confusion. But, just curious, what is your stance on D overturning the call on the winner itself? What would you have done with that situation?

I'll also pretend that what you said, "I dont actually see it with who I play with though, I used to see it with people who just occasionally played and didnt understand or care about the rules," wasn't condescending at all. There are plenty of people in tennis who know the rules, live and die by tennis, who call lets because it really is "just a game."

Right Im not saying that there is anything wrong with calling a let if that's what you and the other 3 people agree on.

Im just being counter-condesending, because calling "let" isnt really any more fair or needed or nice then just following the rules and going with what the call that is made (by the one who's responsible for making it).

The rules spell that part of it out, if they call it out, you have a right to question it, and if they still say it was out, you move on (rather than call let). After all it really is "just a game".

As far as the OP's situation though Im not sure if D was right or not, there seems to be some debate on that.

I dont play on clay a whole lot, but it does seem sort of weird to me if there is there is any delay and someone has to go FIND a mark just so they can call the ball out.

If they are standing right there when it happens and they point down and say hey, it's out, then I may be more inclined to believe them, but if they have to walk over, look for it, and then say it's out that's weird.

I think we need to establish that because that still goes along with whether you clearly saw it go out or not. In the first case at least the person clearly knows (or it's believable at least) which mark it was and they can make a more accurate call.

In the second case, that's not so clear so I would think it goes along with them know really knowing where the ball went. (which usually makes it in)

But players can get away with all sorts of shenigans (like calling the ball out when it clearly landed in by several feet) if they really want to lower themselves to that, so you might have to just give them "the benefit of the doubt" anyway.

Playing a let hardly ever solves anything and it's not necessarily nice anyway. You could lose the point on the re-play, and then you'll feel bad because you were robbed on a point that you really should of won. (I dont know how many times Ive heard people whine about things like that)

Or perhaps you dont care that much because "it's just a game". Well if that's the case there is no reason to call a let either, just let the point stand and move on....

Again, not saying that there is anything wrong with calling a let if that's what everyone wants to do as well, but if you encounter people who dont want to, you cant act like it's somehow a better solution to the issue, letting the point stand is just as good.

woodrow1029
02-20-2009, 08:29 AM
My statement was correct. You cannot search for a mark, but you can check one. Too many times people go look for a mark because they aren't sure where the ball landed. They then pick one in the general vicinity. The only time the aforementioned rule would really apply is if you see a ball very near the line and want to make sure it clipped/didn't clip it. Otherwise, you make an immediate call.
I misread your post. I didn't realize you said "look for" instead of "look at" the mark.

mikeler
02-20-2009, 11:12 AM
I misread your post. I didn't realize you said "look for" instead of "look at" the mark.


Yep, that is an important distinction.

rich s
02-20-2009, 12:29 PM
If it was on a hard court I'd tell player D to pound sand.....you can't make calls on hard courts using ball marks.

If it was a clay court I'd tell player D to pound sand anyway, if s/he couldn't call it at the time it bounced s/he can't wait until the point is over and examine all the ball marks on the court.