Originally Posted by IA-SteveB
I was playing in a mixed 7.0 USTA match over the weekend that had a funny little incident.
... The female player introduced herself and happily stated that she is blind as a bat...
...She was a pretty darn good little player and it was a fun match.
...She called it out and saw I was a little put off,
...but I never argue calls..
...She thought I was agitated and commented that she clearly saw it out
...and her partner had no opinion.
...I just said it wasn't a big deal at all and smiled.
...She stated she thought it was out but was giving it to us to make up for her bad call.
Sounds like typical 3.5 tennis. At least she gave you fair warning that she would be making some bad calls and she fulfilled her promise--what's so unusual about that?
Her eyesight was good enough to see "the look" you gave her.
I think you do "argue" calls, but you do it passive-aggressively. "The Look" is a form of arguing without words. If you disagree with a call it's not arguing to state your disagreement. You are allowed by the rules to say "Are you sure?" That's not arguing, that's questioning. At 3.5, nine out of ten times they will say yes they are sure, rather than use the opportunity to do the right thing and fess up and say, "You know what, I think I blew the call, your point, sorry, I apologize, the peepers aren't what they used to be".
Her partner is a chicken **** if he saw the bad call and didn't fix it. I just played with a couple of a-holes like that and have no respect for them, don't care if I ever play with them ever again and didn't bother to remember their names.
I don't know where this notion comes from to stay silent and not incur the wrath of one's partner by overruling their egregiously bad calls--fear that they may never play with you again?--I don't want to play ever again with a partner who doesn't want to get the calls right. The code says it's all players responsibility to help to make the right call.