Originally Posted by Govnor
unless it is absolutely ridiculous, I'm not calling it. Just not a big deal to me.
I'm with you, and many readers of this forum probably agree too.
Nevertheless, the rule does provide for following a process where the receiver may ultimately call a foot fault if it is flagrant, or "absolutely ridiculous" as you put it.
FWIW, I don't think anyone has posted a definition of flagrant, so here goes:
1. shockingly noticeable or evident; obvious; glaring: a flagrant error.
While this is not an explicit definition for our purposes, "shockingly noticeable" and "obvious" give an idea and in my book, if it is obvious from the other end of the court, that constitutes flagrant.
Now, I personally have never called a foot fault and only once even went so far as to mention it to an opponent, this being in a doubles match where both feet moved inside the baseline before striking the ball and it was obvious, particularly when my partner was receiving and I was closer to the server.
So yes, the rule allows calling a foot fault, but only after following the outlined process or steps, and if an official isn't available, and if it is flagrant (obvious, glaring, shockingly noticeable or evident).