Originally Posted by schmke
Ok, I said I was done, but you are still missing a key point. The rule you are citing says when a call is corrected from out to good. In this case, the call was never corrected. The receiver insisted the call was out and so the call was never changed and the server in fact was forced to hit a second serve.
The rule you cite could only kick in after the call was corrected and the rule that applies to that correction is the one I cited where if partners disagree, the ball is considered in. So it is this rule that was not followed and the rule that applies here.
I will grant you that if the disagreement rule had been applied correctly, then the call would have been corrected and your rule would then apply. But since the disagreement rule was not applied and the call not corrected, your rule isn't the one that was applied and broken.
That's some bizarre logic! Haha.
I guess where we disagree is when the returner said, "I thought the ball was good." That to me, is a correction. Everything after that was just gamesmanship nonsense, unrelated to the rules of tennis.
Anyway, I think we've both given enough for a random passerbye to come to the right conclusion (mine