PDA

View Full Version : Is this legal?


SirSweetSpot
12-18-2009, 08:25 AM
So to keep from running into the net on my opponent's drop shot, I leaned over the net and used my racquet as a crutch to prop myself up and regain my balance and control, thereby not touching the net. Did I break the rules by touching my opponent's court and/or breaking the plane of the net?

Nellie
12-18-2009, 08:41 AM
Not legal.... Your racket is part of your "body", and your body cannot touch the opponent's court.

SirSweetSpot
12-18-2009, 08:55 AM
Okay thanks!:)

Camilio Pascual
12-18-2009, 09:30 AM
Not legal.... Your racket is part of your "body", and your body cannot touch the opponent's court.
WRONG!!!
Maybe he did and maybe he didn't break the rules, he gave us insufficient information.
At Oz, during JenCap's comeback to win, she leans over the net without touching it and then touches the opponent's court with her racquet on a point she won. This very dramatic point has been replayed on TeeVee quite a few times.
How so?
She did not touch the opponent's court until the ball had bounced twice, thus ending the point. Had she contacted the court or net before the 2nd bounce, she would lose the point.

tfm1973
12-18-2009, 10:31 AM
If the ball bounced twice -- THE POINT IS OVER and you can crash into the net, touch the other side of the court, slam your head against the netpole, do a chicken dance, whatever you want.

Bungalo Bill
12-18-2009, 10:57 AM
If the ball bounced twice -- THE POINT IS OVER and you can crash into the net, touch the other side of the court, slam your head against the netpole, do a chicken dance, whatever you want.

I performed the chicken dance after the ball bounced twice and won the point in front of my parents, friends, and girlfriend. I got an unsportsmanlike code violation warning.

Who would think that some people don't like the chicken dance? I mean c'mon, it's the chicken dance. I know everyone here wants to do the chicken dance now.

SirSweetSpot
12-18-2009, 11:04 AM
Yes, the information given was perhaps insufficient. The shot was too close to call because my reply from the dropper was a steep angle and I had to hit it well below the net. So the ball had eons to bounce twice. I was paying more attention to not crashing the net, and he was more interested in getting his racquet on the ball. It was a nice (lucky) shot off of a nicely executed drop shot. Unfortunately, I might never know the real outcome.

However, I was posing the question assuming the ball HADN"T yet bounced twice. So it's legal in that scenario? Or did the ump blow it in that Capriati match.

EDIT: Nevermind, I just re-read your post and you answered my question.

Storm_Kyori
12-18-2009, 11:24 AM
I thought the point didn't need to be over, but that the opponent wouldn't be able to get to the ball. Like he would've won it anyway.

SirSweetSpot
12-18-2009, 11:47 AM
^^ That's what I thought as well. Perhaps a scenario where the opponent has NO CHANCE of getting to the ball. I think the book states that the ball HAS to bounce twice regardless though, even if it is physically impossible to get the ball.

Storm_Kyori
12-18-2009, 01:58 PM
Sucks. I don't I've come across this scenario during play. Would be interesting to see what the verdict would be around here.

5263
12-18-2009, 02:06 PM
Point must be over before you touch their court or you lose the point.

Geezer Guy
12-18-2009, 04:29 PM
It would be OK if you were near the sidelines and reached over the net and placed your racquet out of bounds.

woodrow1029
12-18-2009, 08:11 PM
If it were a singles match, and your racket hit in the doubles alley, then it's legal. If it hits the court in the singles court, you lose the point.

SystemicAnomaly
12-18-2009, 08:39 PM
... Did I break the rules by touching my opponent's court and/or breaking the plane of the net?

The 1st part of this Q has been answered correctly. On the other hand, there is no foul by breaking the plane of the net prior to "point over". But you cannot actually break the plane to make contact with ball before it has crossed to your side of the net. However, there is one special situation where you can break the plane to contact the ball. If you are unaware of this special case, I can elaborate.

.

Camilio Pascual
12-19-2009, 08:38 AM
However, there is one special situation where you can break the plane to contact the ball. If you are unaware of this special case, I can elaborate.
.
I'm wondering if there are actually two situations, the second one being a case where the ball does not bounce.
The second case most likely requires:
1. a topspin lobber
2. a headwind
and the ball has already broken the plane twice, once in each direction, before the striker breaks the plane.

athiker
12-19-2009, 09:08 AM
No need to hit it then, yes? Unless you had already started your stroke and couldn't stop I guess...or didn't realize it had crossed back over the net plane.

I suppose if the lob had just enough power so that it was falling just a few inches over the net, and blew back on its way down as the player was stroking his overhead. Still no need to hit it, but the player may not realize he was hitting over the net, but it may be apparent to the other players.

It seems like there is a rule or code for everythng, but don't know about this one. My guess is if it didn't bounce you can't legally hit it on your opponet's side of the net, but that's not based on much; other than the rules seem to tend to try to eliminate difficult gray area judgement calls as much as possible in favor of...did the ball land in or out, did the ball hit a player or not, type judgement calls. Gray things like, whether the player has a play on the ball or not doesn't weigh in to rule interpretations. It seems judging both that the ball broke the plane in the air and then rebroke the plane in the air is a lot to ask two or four players to agree on, or judge accurately.

Someone must know for sure.

athiker
12-19-2009, 09:15 AM
BTW, who makes that call? If it is the players responsibility to call their side of the net. The one side says it crossed the plane so I hit it and its my call. The other side says the ball was came back, or even if they say remained on our side of the net when you hit it and its our call b/c the ball is on our side of the net!

I guess either way the rule is, the scenario Pascual describes involves the players accurately judging and agreeing on what they saw happen.

SirSweetSpot
12-19-2009, 10:52 AM
Systemic, can you break the plane of the net to make contact if the ball is in space over the doubles alley?

TBobLP
12-19-2009, 12:16 PM
heavy backspin drop-shot that bounces on your side and is heading back over the net towards the side it came from...you can reach over and hit the ball, no? certainly would be an extremely rare occurrence.

SystemicAnomaly
12-20-2009, 12:38 PM
heavy backspin drop-shot that bounces on your side and is heading back over the net towards the side it came from...you can reach over and hit the ball, no? certainly would be an extremely rare occurrence.

A heavy backspin shot could do this. Most balls that are hit with underspin will have the spin reversed on the bounce -- i.e. they will have topspin after the bounce. However, if the ball still has underspin after the bounce, it will bounce backward, possibly back over the net.

More often than not tho', balls that bounce back over the net, do so primarily because of a headwind. It is rare but not extremely rare. It has happened to me 8 or 9 times since the mid-90s. I was able to reach over, get to the ball and win the point in 6 or 7 of those cases.


I'm wondering if there are actually two situations, the second one being a case where the ball does not bounce.
The second case most likely requires:
1. a topspin lobber
2. a headwind
and the ball has already broken the plane twice, once in each direction, before the striker breaks the plane.

Why would it necessarily be a topspin lob?

If the ball does not bounce on your side, I don't believe that you are required to hit it, even if you think that it may have broken the plane (twice) on a very high shot. Not sure, but if you contact the ball on your opponent's side in this situation, I would think that you are committing a fault.

SystemicAnomaly
12-20-2009, 12:44 PM
Systemic, can you break the plane of the net to make contact if the ball is in space over the doubles alley?

Not sure, but I think that you probably could. But why would you? In one situation that I can visualize, the ball is heading out and will not land in your court at all. In another case, the opposing player is probably way off to the side of his own court. I would think that you could wait for the ball to cross the net since your opponent's court is probably wide open.

Can you provide a scenario where this might even happen?

SirSweetSpot
12-20-2009, 02:59 PM
Not sure, but I think that you probably could. But why would you? In one situation that I can visualize, the ball is heading out and will not land in your court at all. In another case, the opposing player is probably way off to the side of his own court. I would think that you could wait for the ball to cross the net since your opponent's court is probably wide open.

Can you provide a scenario where this might even happen?

I have to go to work now, I'l ltry to envision a scenario (if there even is one.) I was mainly just curious as to the rule. Perhaps your opponent consistently can hook the **** out of the ball on forehand passing shots, and perhaps you could intercept the trajectory in the doubles alley on his side of the net. Just off the top of my head...I have no idea if this is even possible LOL.

woodrow1029
12-20-2009, 07:50 PM
It is a foul stroke if you hit the ball before it crosses the plane of the net, regardless of whether it's over the singles court, or over the doubles alley.

Cindysphinx
12-20-2009, 08:07 PM
Of all of the rules in unofficiated tennis, this rule about not making contact on the other side of the net is the most insane.

Honestly, I am in no position to judge whether I make contact on my side of the net. I have no reference point, especially when I am busy trying to hit the ball, not touch the net, stay on my side, and not botch yet another sitter, all while presumably moving forward and closing the net.

I also don't see why the rule makes sense. You are allowed to make contact with the ball anywhere else -- you can have one shoulder touching the curtain, the bubble or a light fixture. It's all good. But for some reason I can't touch the ball when it is on the other side of the net, although I can follow through onto the other side of the net. Huh?

I tend to be pretty aggressive at net in doubles, so I feel like I have at least one close call per match. Only once has an opponent said, "Hey, you touched the net!" And in that case, I really think she was incorrect and was just mad that I hit this cool angled winner. I make an effort not to make contact on the other side of the net, but I also won't risk blowing the shot.

Silly rule, I say.

Would the game of tennis really suffer if this rule were abolished for unofficiated matches? You still couldn't touch the opponent's court or the net. How come that isn't good enough?

Geezer Guy
12-20-2009, 08:19 PM
One of the guys I play against fairly often always plays extremely close to the net. He often hits angle volleys that just don't seem at all possible without reaching over the net. And they're impossible to return. If he'd at least wait until the ball crosses the net to hit it, his opponents would have half a chance of getting to his shots. I think the rule is fine - it's just hard to call (like a close double-bounce).

woodrow1029
12-21-2009, 08:10 AM
The rule makes complete sense. Like said earlier though, it is hard to call on yourself unless it is very blatant.

Camilio Pascual
12-22-2009, 06:44 AM
Why would it necessarily be a topspin lob?
It wouldn't.
Hence the "most likely" qualifier.
Aerodynamically, a high, heavy topspin lob would be the most likely shot going into a headwind to be blown back across the net. BTW, once its direction has been reversed, it is now an underspinning ball with a tendency to "float." I think a slice lob would be more likely to be blown back across than a ball with little or no spin, too. But, once it reversed direction, it would tend to dive since it is now topspinning, so it might not make it back over the net. Spin, either way, is going to enhance aerodynamic effects.

papa
12-22-2009, 08:40 AM
Unless there has been a very recent rule change which I doubt very much, it doesn't matter if you cross the "plane" of the net either prior to or after you make a shot and it doesn't matter where you are either. The rule states that you have to "strike" the ball on your side of the net with the one exception being when the ball "after" bouncing on your side is headed back over the net. When this happens, you are then entitled to reach over the net and strike the ball - without touching either the net or the opponents court surface. If the ball doesn't strike the surface and is just blown back while in the air, it doesn't count.

woodrow1029
12-22-2009, 09:04 AM
My question is, on a ball hit high up into the air that is being blown back to the opponent's side of the net before it hits the court, why would you want to hit it anyway?

papa
12-22-2009, 09:44 AM
My question is, on a ball hit high up into the air that is being blown back to the opponent's side of the net before it hits the court, why would you want to hit it anyway?

You wouldn't and in the case you talked about if you did indeed strike the ball, you would lose the point because it had not hit the court surface on your side of the net. If you strike the ball on your side prior to the bounce, you must make contact on your side of the court - that does not mean part of you cannot be breaking the plane of the net prior to, at the same time or after you strike the ball. It simply means that the racquet has to make contact with the ball on your side, the exception being the one discussed.

RafaBrain
12-22-2009, 05:21 PM
So to keep from running into the net on my opponent's drop shot, I leaned over the net and used my racquet as a crutch to prop myself up and regain my balance and control, thereby not touching the net. Did I break the rules by touching my opponent's court and/or breaking the plane of the net?


you can crutch your racquet on the other side, as long as your racquet touch on the ground is 'outside' the side line.

you can even jump over the net to the other side as long as your feet land on 'outside' the side line.

mucat
12-22-2009, 08:43 PM
Of all of the rules in unofficiated tennis, this rule about not making contact on the other side of the net is the most insane.

Honestly, I am in no position to judge whether I make contact on my side of the net. I have no reference point, especially when I am busy trying to hit the ball, not touch the net, stay on my side, and not botch yet another sitter, all while presumably moving forward and closing the net.

I also don't see why the rule makes sense. You are allowed to make contact with the ball anywhere else -- you can have one shoulder touching the curtain, the bubble or a light fixture. It's all good. But for some reason I can't touch the ball when it is on the other side of the net, although I can follow through onto the other side of the net. Huh?

I tend to be pretty aggressive at net in doubles, so I feel like I have at least one close call per match. Only once has an opponent said, "Hey, you touched the net!" And in that case, I really think she was incorrect and was just mad that I hit this cool angled winner. I make an effort not to make contact on the other side of the net, but I also won't risk blowing the shot.

Silly rule, I say.

Would the game of tennis really suffer if this rule were abolished for unofficiated matches? You still couldn't touch the opponent's court or the net. How come that isn't good enough?

Sometimes, there are high slow balls that just pass over (but without touch) the net. Those ball are higher than the net at the other side and lower than the net at your side. It will be a totally different shot if you allow to hit the ball before it pass the net.

Also, allowing player to hit a ball crossing the center line means his shots will never hit the net.

And this will create more interference. What if someone decided to try to block shots? It will turn tennis into a contact sport. :)

I am sure there are more and better reasons.

jswinf
12-23-2009, 09:19 AM
Having an opponent mis-hit a volley straight down so it's just laying there on your side of the net is no fun.

Geezer Guy
12-23-2009, 12:36 PM
My question is, on a ball hit high up into the air that is being blown back to the opponent's side of the net before it hits the court, why would you want to hit it anyway?

One scenario is a lob that has obviously crossed the net, but is being blown back in the direction it came from. Sure, if the ball will clearly pass over the net and bounce on your opponents side, just let it go. What if the ball is drifting back and losing altitude so quickly that you think it probably won't clear the net? Worse case, the ball will hit your side of the net and be pretty much unplayable. Slightly better case, the ball bounces on your side, but the momentum continues to carry it back either into or over the net - which are pretty tough shots. Hitting the overhead, before the bounce, is the easiest shot.

Taxvictim
12-23-2009, 12:44 PM
Hitting the overhead, before the bounce, is the easiest shot.

Which is fine, so long as you make initial contact on your side of the net. You are not allowed to make initial contact with the ball if it is on the other side of the net unless it has already bounced on your side.