Totally agree with that and some of those reasons aren't always obvious or intuitive or based on common sense.You either play by the rules or not. They are there for a reason
No. I don't agree with that.and it is not up to anyone to selectively enforce which rules they like. Especially in USTA league matches.
Exactly. If the ball is in FACT going long (10 feet beyond the baseline--think of a lob) and you claim the point just because someone stopped it from hitting the fence, then YOU are cheating--knowing full well that the ball is going LONG, yet enforcing that specific rule. That rule is there to stop hindrances of points, and not for blatant cheating!the rule is there to stop cheating. if you can't stick to that rule, find a better use for your 5 days/week
Exactly. If the ball is in FACT going long (10 feet beyond the baseline--think of a lob) and you claim the point just because someone stopped it from hitting the fence, then YOU are cheating--knowing full well that the ball is going LONG, yet enforcing that specific rule. That rule is there to stop hindrances of points, and not for blatant cheating!
And I'm the one who's dense? There's a lot more to stopping the ball than those reasons. Think about it. (Maybe because the ball is obviously out, and there is no way in h*ll that it will go in?) Use your imagination, certain shots will obviously be out, and stopping them shouldn't be penalized. Period.wrong (you are a dense one). by stopping a ball before it lands out you are volleying the ball, therefore playing it. by catching or stopping it you are missing a shot.
You have to agree that its not your decision to violate the rule and expect someone to go along with it. You can request, hope, and ask someone to go along with it. But, they aren't obligated. This is where you are wrong: the expecting others to go along with your rule violation as if their opinion is meaningless is how the game gets cheapened. You also disrespect your opponent by thinking this way and bringing this attitude to the court.Use your imagination, certain shots will obviously be out, and stopping them shouldn't be penalized.
You have to agree that its not your decision to violate the rule and expect someone to go along with it. You can request, hope, and ask someone to go along with it. But, they aren't obligated. This is where you are wrong: the expecting others to go along with your rule violation as if their opinion is meaningless is how the game gets cheapened. You also disrespect your opponent by thinking this way and bringing this attitude to the court.
You may not see it this way, but people who thrive on gamesmanship generally probe their opponent in various ways to see what they can get away with, people who like to do irritating things, disrespect their opponent and the game, etc.
Its your opponents decision not yours to overlook you catching the ball. And like most of the people have said, they WILL overlook it the first time but ask that you not do it again.
Last season in USTA, I watched a guy throw a mild fit when I said we weren't going to play a match on hard courts with balls made for clay courts. He thought I was being ridiculous. No, I had a can of balls for hard courts and said we will play with these instead. After some absurd banter, I simply asked, "why would you not want to play with balls made for hard courts? what's so special about those clay court balls?"
Let's say someone hits some incredibly offensive shot, you barely get your racquet on it, send the weakest floater imaginable back and the guy in perfect position, you are way out of position, he trips and falls and can't make a play on the ball.
Is it cheating, gamesmanship, or being a poor sport to claim the point? No. Would it be absurd for the guy who tripped to make a scene? Yes. Would it be absurd for him to ask for a let? Not really, but its not his decision to expect and demand a let. Its his opponent's decision.
Then, imagine that scenario at a tournament at set or match point in a close tie breaker.
The question is not bending the rule when it seems reasonable to you but when it seems logical and the advantage lies with your opponent (e.g. when the opponent is standing 4 feet behind the baseline, reaches above his head and catches the ball.)
At that point, do you say "I am going to give you a point this time but this is not allowed." or do you say "(ha-ha) My point."
In this scenario, by definition, the point isn't over until you catch it and doing so means you never let it bounce. You lose the point unless your opponent lets you get away with a rule violation. Which is his choice, not yours.I am talking about out-balls. If you played enough, then you'd surely agree with me.
In this scenario, by definition, the point isn't over until you catch it and doing so means you never let it bounce. You lose the point unless your opponent lets you get away with a rule violation. Which is his choice, not yours.
Why the hell would anyone "do it again" when asked not to? (Are you deluded?) Stop posting situations which allow you to pat yourself on the back.In this scenario, by definition, the point isn't over until you catch it and doing so means you never let it bounce. You lose the point unless your opponent lets you get away with a rule violation. Which is his choice, not yours.
Get into an argument? Call a tournament official over? Tell him your tale. Everyone agrees it was sailing out 10 feet. Guess what? The tournament official will rule against you and tell you not to do it again. I have been playing a long time. I know exactly how that scenario ends.
If you and I were playing, I would give you the point and ask you not to do it again, and if you did it again, I would consider it disrespectful and gamesmanship and not give you the point even if it was sailing out 20 feet. Why should any opponent put up with it?
The illogical and irrational part of your post is that you expect opponents to simply allow you to violate the rules. Nobody is obligated to do so.
Get into an argument? Call a tournament official over? Tell him your tale. Everyone agrees it was sailing out 10 feet. Guess what? The tournament official will rule against you and tell you not to do it again. I have been playing a long time. I know exactly how that scenario ends.
out of curiosity, do you rule sticklers always obey the speed limit no matter what? I'm guessing no, and it seems a little crazy that people are more anal about following the rules of a GAME than they are about following laws
Well said! I think the basic issue here is that there are rules to every sport that need to be followed to define and allow competition for a fair game. That said, most sports have umpires, referees, and officials to call the game for them - unlike tennis which relys on the players to make the calls (at least at the amateur level). You do run into some more unusual situations in tennis than other sports - at least in my opinion.
A couple of examples of this that are on the unusual side:
- I can call a foot fault on my opponent
- I can penalize the opponent for catching the ball
- I can give my opponent a LET pretty much anytime I want to
These require ME to call the infraction or offer the play over
- I CAN'T call a double bounce on my opponent (even if it is clear)
- I CAN'T call them for crossing over the net (even if it is clear)
- I'm pretty sure (please correct me if I'm wrong) that I can't even call them for HITTING the net
These require them to acknowledge the infraction occurred.
Line calls are called by the person receiving the shot - but can be deferred to the opponent, however the opponent may call his OWN shot OUT - except on first serves.
While all these rules are important to fair play and probably should be enforced strictly in tourneys, especially at the highest levels of play - there are a lot of new players trying to get their heads around the game and a good sportsman offers at least a little latitude (perhaps a warning on the first offense or misunderstanding).
My opinion anyway.
LOL! (10 Char.)out of curiosity, do you rule sticklers always obey the speed limit no matter what? I'm guessing no, and it seems a little crazy that people are more anal about following the rules of a GAME than they are about following laws
No. There are rules governing when a third party makes contact with a ball. The point is over. Its just as if the ball hit a fence or any other permanent fixture. The person who hit the ball loses the point. Furthermore, it would be difficult for my opponent to offer me a let since in the scenario you described it would be absurd to claim that either of us was hindered.Would you claim that point, or call a let, if your ball went 2 courts down and someone caught it mid-air? I mean, it was never allowed to bounce even though it had no chance in hell of boomeranging itself back onto your court. Somehow, judging by your posts, I'm sure you would. :lol:
you cannot call footfaults on an opponent, and the player who stops the ball before it bounces has to admit doing so (not necessarily agree with the rule)
you cannot call footfaults on an opponent, and the player who stops the ball before it bounces has to admit doing so (not necessarily agree with the rule)
Yes you can. You must warn on the first, search for an official on the second, but on and after the third, you may call footfaults when they occur.
then it's generally accepted that it is 100% OKAY to intercept the ball.
If you want to strictly talk about the USTA rules,
But that specific rule was invented to prevent players from obstructing the ball from bouncing--cheating your opponents out of a decent/fair call.
But if everyone knows that the LONG-SAILING NO-CHANCE-IN-H*LL ball is going to land outside the lines, then it is logically/rationally accepted that it is fine to stop a sailing "out" ball.
If you want to argue against this, then there is obviously a hitch in your logic. I am talking about out-balls. If you played enough, then you'd surely agree with me. Other than that, and politics aside, I don't see how you can argue against this point and get away with it.
It is accepted at the Saturday morning social, sometimes.
Nope, I think we are talking about the Rules of Tennis, to which USTA adheres.
Please provide us a source of why the rule was "invented".
Everyone I know is under the correct impression that the ball is in play until it lands out, then it is called out.
I believe I have played more tennis than you and I am sure that I have officiated many more matches than you and I can emphatically say that your argument is immature, disrespectful foolishness.
I would obviously call those balls "out" before I would stop them, but when you are well beyond the baseline, some of those balls are just BLATANTLY OUT. It's just common sense to not take that point away from your opponent if they stop the ball. For this specific situation, I will honestly say that if you claim that point, you are using that rule the wrong way, and need some common sense.
watch any football today? was that 12 man on the field penalty "oppressive" because the guy was running off the field? no, it's a rule damnit. if any sport wants respect, it's rules need to be respected. maybe you like tennis players perceived as pansies... if not, don't question tennis
Wow, I guess you're right. Don't know what I'll do now that I've read your opinion on the matter. Think I'll go eat some ice cream with the girls and try to be happy again.
you can afford to, you play 5 times per week! are you a 2.5 yet?
watch any football today? was that 12 man on the field penalty "oppressive" because the guy was running off the field? no, it's a rule damnit. if any sport wants respect, it's rules need to be respected. maybe you like tennis players perceived as pansies... if not, don't question tennis
I would obviously call those balls "out" before I would stop them,
Another rule violation. The ball is in play until it hits out.
but when you are well beyond the baseline, some of those balls are just BLATANTLY OUT.
There is no such thing as barely out or blantantly out. It's just out after it hits out. Perhaps a diagram is in order.
It's just common sense to not take that point away from your opponent if they stop the ball. For this specific situation, I will honestly say that if you claim that point, you are using that rule the wrong way, and need some common sense.
Actually, any game with rules has them in place toremove the varying degrees of imagined common sense that may be perpetrated on the participants by those that claim all the common sense and know more than the rules. In other words, they call the game tennis but play it by only those rules that make sense to them.
your argument makes no sense, of course they will call anything, they are professional sports umpires, if you break any rule they will call it (there is some leniency in sports like basketball, but not much) all your doing is pointing out that there are rules and umpires call them. we arnt talking about what umpires should or should not do, we are talking about what we, as players who make our own calls and have the benefit of BEING ABLE TO USE COMMON SENSE WHERE IT APPLIES should do
So what makes a person, approaching the net, NOT hit a fly ball that is sailing out of the court? Common sense? We all have common sense to judge the situation and depth of an incoming ball. Some are more obvious than the others. Your point is still subjective, so please don't think otherwise. You are a stickler, I get that.Actually, any game with rules has them in place toremove the varying degrees of imagined common sense that may be perpetrated on the participants by those that claim all the common sense and know more than the rules. In other words, they call the game tennis but play it by only those rules that make sense to them.
So what makes a person, approaching the net, NOT hit a fly ball that is sailing out of the court? Common sense? We all have common sense to judge the situation and depth of an incoming ball. Some are more obvious than the others. Your point is still subjective, so please don't think otherwise. You are a stickler, I get that.
Like I said, I understand that you are a stickler when it comes to the rules of tennis since you strictly enforce them without any gray areas at all. We'll just leave it at that, and accept things the way they are. Happy-tennis with everyone!Your analogy is BS. I'm not a stickler, I just play the game according to the rules. You, on the other hand, are play a game with tennis balls and rackets but it isn't tennis. Not sure what it is. Perhaps you common sense will allow you to give it a name and you can then write your own rules. The Rules of Tennis have already been written.
I know a losing argument when I see one. :lol:you can afford to, you play 5 times per week! are you a 2.5 yet?
Great - we are back to name calling again. NEXT!!!!
Thanks guys.your argument makes no sense, of course they will call anything, they are professional sports umpires, if you break any rule they will call it (there is some leniency in sports like basketball, but not much) all your doing is pointing out that there are rules and umpires call them. we arnt talking about what umpires should or should not do, we are talking about what we, as players who make our own calls and have the benefit of BEING ABLE TO USE COMMON SENSE WHERE IT APPLIES should do
I know a losing argument when I see one. :lol:
Thanks guys.
Somehow this thread has turned into a feud over whether or not someone should obey the rules. As the OP, it wasn't my intent to question the rules but rather to find out how people dealt with cases where they could choose to be a sportsman and give an opponent some slack. It was never my intent that someone would bend the rules to give themselves an advantage. Perhaps the difference lies in the level and type of tennis people are playing, but in my case at the 3.5/4.0 levels, I try to be a gentleman within reason and will cut someone some slack out there from time to time. I don't think that is bending the rules to suit my purposes, but allowing for the fact that I'm playing amateur tennis against other community members and recognizing that we are all still learning some of the rules.
Another rule violation. The ball is in play until it hits out.
There is no such thing as barely out or blantantly out. It's just out after it hits out. Perhaps a diagram is in order.
Actually, any game with rules has them in place toremove the varying degrees of imagined common sense that may be perpetrated on the participants by those that claim all the common sense and know more than the rules. In other words, they call the game tennis but play it by only those rules that make sense to them.
If both opponents can see that the ball is clearly going to go out and both are confident that catching the ball is not going to change the outcome of the point, then I don't see what the big deal is.
Obviously if one person goes to catch a ball and his opponent thinks he shouldn't have done it because it was too close, then the guy who catches it should give him the point. Any reasonable players would handle it like this.
But if I'm standing near the fence and I catch a ball right before it hits the fence and my opponent tries to take the point, I'm going to think he's an ass.
If both opponents can see that the ball is clearly going to go out and both are confident that catching the ball is not going to change the outcome of the point, then I don't see what the big deal is.
Obviously if one person goes to catch a ball and his opponent thinks he shouldn't have done it because it was too close, then the guy who catches it should give him the point. Any reasonable players would handle it like this.
But if I'm standing near the fence and I catch a ball right before it hits the fence and my opponent tries to take the point, I'm going to think he's an ass.
I would never do that or encourage it. Tennis is not a sport in which you catch the ball. Just let it bounce. What is the big hurry? Catching the ball can become a bad habit, like not putting on the turn signal because there is nobody on the road near you.
I haven't read all the pages, but it is interesting that this turned into a discussion on catching the ball. I was wondering if the opinions have anything to do when you started playing and what level you achieved. I have only witnessed someone catch the ball a few times and neither time was it somebody that played competively as a kid. Most people cringed when they saw it happen as if it was a pet peeve for them.
I think most players that played competitively as a kid can't imagine catching the ball in an official match. The rules are so ingrained and you are taught to not bend the rules that I have a hard time actually catching it even in a practice match. I can tell you that in all matches I have played, if a serve is shanked and hits the opponent or if the opponent can't get out of the way of the ball, the point is always taken. You may feel bad about taking a point on a bad shot, but that is what we were taught to do.
Somehow this thread has turned into a feud over whether or not someone should obey the rules. As the OP, it wasn't my intent to question the rules but rather to find out how people dealt with cases where they could choose to be a sportsman and give an opponent some slack. It was never my intent that someone would bend the rules to give themselves an advantage. Perhaps the difference lies in the level and type of tennis people are playing, but in my case at the 3.5/4.0 levels, I try to be a gentleman within reason and will cut someone some slack out there from time to time. I don't think that is bending the rules to suit my purposes, but allowing for the fact that I'm playing amateur tennis against other community members and recognizing that we are all still learning some of the rules.
I am not even bothered by the ongoing debates and I don't think anything is going to come out of these discussions. People who claim that "we will be playing some other game if we don't follow the rules exactly" clearly have missed the essence of this poll.
I am very happy that people who said that they will use their common sense outnumber the sticklers 37 to 13. The % of players who prefer their common sense has always stayed close to 75% and that is what makes social and USTA league tennis without umpires such a fulfilling experience for me. When I play against the 25% sticklers, I will not argue with them to use their common sense(that never was intended) but I will not have any small-talk with them after the handshake either.
1. There was a large water puddle on the court alongside one of the back fences. So we were all catching / blocking balls going clearly long on that side of the court to prevent them from getting wet. This was just the practical thing to do. Had we decided to follow the rules exactly, we would eventually have ended up with just a bunch of really wet balls and nothing to play with.