View Single Post
Old 02-02-2008, 02:28 AM   #59
AlpineCadet
Hall Of Fame
 
AlpineCadet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,643
Cool

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supernatural_Serve View Post
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.
Trolling aside, if you and I both (among everyone else on the court) knows that the ball is sailing out by miles (from experience of course) and your opponent stops the "out ball" from landing, then it's generally accepted that it is 100% OKAY to intercept the ball. We all know where that specific ball is going to land, capice? Are you with me so far? Good. (I am talking about an OBVIOUS line-call here, if you are at all confused.)

If you want to strictly talk about the USTA rules, then if the ball is going out, then it should land before a call is made. I agree 100% with that rule. 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. Please stroke your ego somewhere else.

Last edited by AlpineCadet : 02-02-2008 at 02:33 AM.
AlpineCadet is offline   Reply With Quote