Is Blowing On The Ball Legal?

[Ucantplay2much]

Yes, I know it's a weird question and would be a pretty unlikely occurrence :P

The other day, I had a ball practically sit up on the net and eat lunch before deciding to fall on my opponent's side. Occasionally you get a ball that runs along the net for two feet or so before dropping on one side or the other. Theoretically, a doubles player right at the net would be able to huff and puff and blow the ball down... into the opponent's court.

In the unlikely event that you could react fast enough and actually affect the ball, is it legal to blow on the ball? You wouldn't be touching it

[bcart1991]

Not sure, but a MLB player blew a dribbler foul in stead of fair in a game once. Back in the '80s IIRC.

[LeeD]

For you or your team to win the point, you have to hit it with one stroke from your racket.
For the opposition to lose the point, you don't have to hit the ball.
You will NEVER see an opportunity to blow the ball back to his court.

[Jennifer]

Never heard of blowing a ball back for a point. I doubt the occasion would arrive but as long as you don't touch the ball I suppose you could. Yet, wouldn't it be easier just to hit it...

[Ucantplay2much]

Originally Posted by LeeD

For you or your team to win the point, you have to hit it with one stroke from your racket.
For the opposition to lose the point, you don't have to hit the ball.
You will NEVER see an opportunity to blow the ball back to his court.

I realize it's an extremely long shot, but I swear I could have gotten to that ball that was just "sitting" on top of the net the other day. Both my opponent and I were standing there just looking at it, waiting for it to fall. He had tried to hit a drop shot and it landed squarely on top of the tape.

It reminded me of the scene in Caddyshack where the ball is sitting on the lip of the cup, teetering on the precipice and falls in when Bill Murray's gopher explosives go off and the ball falls in from the earth shaking.

Maybe it's just the nets on the courts where we play most of the time. I've seen the ball hit the net and then just roll across the top of the net for a foot or two at least half a dozen times.

[r2473]

The ultimate "blow job"?

[Ucantplay2much]

Actually, now that I think about it, I think I hit the shot, not him. Other wise I would have somehow tried to very carefully tip it over the net.

Or, maybe I just didn't think that fast...

[Ucantplay2much]

Originally Posted by r2473

The ultimate "blow job"?

You had to go there didn't you

[ollinger]

You would lose the point. Rule 21 specifies that after the ball has been hit by you or your partner, you may not do anything that might hinder your opponent from hitting the ball. Attempting to change its direction of travel by blowing on it after it had been hit would surely come under this hindrance rule. Also, deliberate noises or behavior that are distractions to your opponent come under this rule, and blowing on a ball that he still has an opportunity to hit would likely be a distraction hindrance. Merely your getting that close to the ball when he could still hit it would be perceived as distraction hindrance.

[Gemini]

Also, the chances of you being able to accurately direct a gust of "air" onto the ball so much as move it are highly unlikely.

[spot]

Put it this way- if someone did that to you the only way that you could claim the point would be is if you were right there to hit it yourself and your opponent's face was in a dangerous spot where you dind't think you could swing and therefore would be allowed to call hindrance. But otherwise its no different than waving your raquet near a ball to try and have the wind push it wide- there isn't anything illegal about it. All that said there just isn't time and it will never happen.

[ollinger]

Waving your racquet at the ball after you've hit it is a distraction if your opponent hasn't hit it yet -- what other purpose could it serve? -- and you should lose the point. We know that throwing your racquet causes forteiture of the point for the same reason -- it is a deliberate distraction.

[Ucantplay2much]

Originally Posted by ollinger

You would lose the point. Rule 21 specifies that after the ball has been hit by you or your partner, you may not do anything that might hinder your opponent from hitting the ball. Attempting to change its direction of travel by blowing on it after it had been hit would surely come under this hindrance rule. Also, deliberate noises or behavior that are distractions to your opponent come under this rule, and blowing on a ball that he still has an opportunity to hit would likely be a distraction hindrance. Merely your getting that close to the ball when he could still hit it would be perceived as distraction hindrance.

Gotcha. Thanks!!!

[Ucantplay2much]

Originally Posted by Gemini

Also, the chances of you being able to accurately direct a gust of "air" onto the ball so much as move it are highly unlikely.

I wasn't thinking of trying to direct it in the air, just knock it off the net and on to his side without touching it. The ball would have way too much going for it as far as momentum goes.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by r2473

The ultimate "blow job"?

Someone had to say it I suppose

[West Coast Ace]

Originally Posted by r2473

The ultimate "blow job"?

Not to mention the loose nets and looser women...

[FirstServeThenVolleyAway]

Originally Posted by Ucantplay2much

Yes, I know it's a weird question and would be a pretty unlikely occurrence :P

The other day, I had a ball practically sit up on the net and eat lunch before deciding to fall on my opponent's side. Occasionally you get a ball that runs along the net for two feet or so before dropping on one side or the other. Theoretically, a doubles player right at the net would be able to huff and puff and blow the ball down... into the opponent's court.

In the unlikely event that you could react fast enough and actually affect the ball, is it legal to blow on the ball? You wouldn't be touching it

Would you REALLY be willing to go this far to win a single tennis point?

[Ucantplay2much]

Originally Posted by FirstServeThenVolleyAway

Would you REALLY be willing to go this far to win a single tennis point?

Yeah, I am ashamed to admit it, but I probably would!

[Leoboomanu]

that's really a legit argument...hehehe but it's hindrance up until their racquet hits your face...

[spot]

I think that you guys are confusing the hindrance issue with the legality of the move. So take that part out- what if your opponent hits a volley and it sits right on the netcord, would you be allowed to blow on the ball to prevent it from coming onto your side? Clearly its not hindrance for you to do so. I can't see anything in the rules that would prevent you from doing so anymore than the rules would prevent you from waving your racquet near the ball to get it to sail wide.

So unless you think that its legal for one side to do it but not for the other side to do it, I think the correct answer is that it would be legal unless the person on the other side is in position to hit the ball and doesn't do so because you are hindering their ability to swing through it.