was that a correct ruling?

[jmnk]

I've witnessed the following during an officiated match.
The players split sets. they were to play match tiebreaker. Both players took a break leaving the court. One player got back in about 2 minutes. At 2.45 the umpire started calling for the other player, warning that he has just 3 minutes for a break and must be on the court within 3 minutes. the other player showed up at like 3.30 mark, not even in a hurry or anything. He explained he just went to the bathroom and to get some water.

The umpire called a game penalty on him. Since a match tiebreak counts as a single game, that was also a loss of the tiebreak, and loss of the match.

There were some tears, explaining, but all in a very sportsmanlike fashion. the umpire just said these are the rules and that's it. He said if a player needed a bathroom break than he is entitled to it, and would get 'reasonable time allowance' - but the player must inform the umpire beforehand.

the players shook hands and that was the end of it.

Is that really the rule? is the 3 minute break rule written somewhere? how about a game penalty in this case - is that in the rulebook as well?

[woodrow1029]

Was this in 2011 or 2012? If it was in 2011, this was correct.

In 2012, the rule changed. Instead of following the "lateness after 10 minute rest break" rule, which is one game penalty up to 5 minutes late, then default after 5 minutes, they decided (rightfully so) that this was too harsh when you are playing a match tiebreak. When the player wasn't on court at 3:00, the umpire should have issued a time violation warning. At 3:20, he should have issued a "CODE VIOLATION, DELAY OF GAME, POINT PENALTY." At 3:40, he should have issued a "CODE VIOLATION, DELAY OF GAME, GAME PENALTY".

It's in the Friend at Court (page 122).

[gmatheis]

What kind of a match was this? League? Tournament? etc...
I thought you got more than 3 minutes after the 2nd set in USTA but I could be wrong.

At the very least the official could have used his discretion and let them play since he was only 30 seconds late.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by gmatheis

What kind of a match was this? League? Tournament? etc...
I thought you got more than 3 minutes after the 2nd set in USTA but I could be wrong.

At the very least the official could have used his discretion and let them play since he was only 30 seconds late.

It's a 10 minute break if it's a full set, but 3 minutes if there's a match tiebreak.

At the very least, the official could have followed the correct rule.

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

Was this in 2011 or 2012? If it was in 2011, this was correct.

In 2012, the rule changed. Instead of following the "lateness after 10 minute rest break" rule, which is one game penalty up to 5 minutes late, then default after 5 minutes, they decided (rightfully so) that this was too harsh when you are playing a match tiebreak. When the player wasn't on court at 3:00, the umpire should have issued a time violation warning. At 3:20, he should have issued a "CODE VIOLATION, DELAY OF GAME, POINT PENALTY." At 3:40, he should have issued a "CODE VIOLATION, DELAY OF GAME, GAME PENALTY".

It's in the Friend at Court (page 122).

Woodrow, if you were officiating in this situation would you inform the players who were leaving the area that they have to be back in 3 minutes?

[woodrow1029]

Absolutely.

I am guessing that the official did that in this case (obviously don't know for sure, but that's a pretty basic thing for an umpire to know he/she should do), but I would have started calling for him after 2:00 had expired, not 2:45.

[JLyon]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

Absolutely.

I am guessing that the official did that in this case (obviously don't know for sure, but that's a pretty basic thing for an umpire to know he/she should do), but I would have started calling for him after 2:00 had expired, not 2:45.

I would think if the player informed the official he was going to the bathroom it would not have been a big deal, thought at last Class the instructor mentioned this, take 3 minute break and then bathroom break.

[goober]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

It's a 10 minute break if it's a full set, but 3 minutes if there's a match tiebreak.

At the very least, the official could have followed the correct rule.

Well for all we know the OP may not be exact in his times. He said he showed "at like the 3:30 mark" Maybe it was actually 40 seconds late instead of 30 seconds so the game penalty was correct? In that case the official only could be faulted for not issuing a point penalty at 3:20, but the outcome would have been the same.

[jmnk]

@woodrow and all,

many thanks for comments. I've re-read the relevant rules that woodrow highlighted at it does look like the umpire did not follow the correct rule in this case.

few further clarifications.
It was a junior tournament.
While I'm indeed not sure if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late I did ask the umpire what happened (since I only witnessed the incident from far). And the umpire stated that he penalized the player a game for being late after the break. I even asked if it should not be a warning than point penalty first - and he stated no, it's a game penalty. So given that it does not matter if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late - that umpire just used incorrect (and judging from woodrow's comment perhaps the rule that was in effect in 2011) rule.

now, when I read the rules, there's one more twist to this. Per rule, during 3 minute break the players are supposed to stay on the court. in the scenario at hand both players left the court. Which would imply that they informed the umpire that they are leaving. or perhaps it was clear mutual understanding that the players are leaving the court. If so - would it imply that the players do take a bathroom break even if that was not explicitly asked? It is almost as if both players decided NOT to take 3 minute break (since they did not stay on the court) and instead chose the bathroom break (or any other break that allows them to leave the court). Since the umpire apparently allowed for that - shouldn't he now follow the rule applied to bathroom/medical/attire breaks and therefore a 'reasonable time is allowed'?

[JLyon]

Originally Posted by jmnk

@woodrow and all,

many thanks for comments. I've re-read the relevant rules that woodrow highlighted at it does look like the umpire did not follow the correct rule in this case.

few further clarifications.
It was a junior tournament.
While I'm indeed not sure if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late I did ask the umpire what happened (since I only witnessed the incident from far). And the umpire stated that he penalized the player a game for being late after the break. I even asked if it should not be a warning than point penalty first - and he stated no, it's a game penalty. So given that it does not matter if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late - that umpire just used incorrect (and judging from woodrow's comment perhaps the rule that was in effect in 2011) rule.

now, when I read the rules, there's one more twist to this. Per rule, during 3 minute break the players are supposed to stay on the court. in the scenario at hand both players left the court. Which would imply that they informed the umpire that they are leaving. or perhaps it was clear mutual understanding that the players are leaving the court. If so - would it imply that the players do take a bathroom break even if that was not explicitly asked? It is almost as if both players decided NOT to take 3 minute break (since they did not stay on the court) and instead chose the bathroom break (or any other break that allows them to leave the court). Since the umpire apparently allowed for that - shouldn't he now follow the rule applied to bathroom/medical/attire breaks and therefore a 'reasonable time is allowed'?

It is a game because it is lateness on a rest period not a changeover. A changeover would be a time violation, but a rest period lateness is a game penalty up to five minutes late, then default.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by jmnk

@woodrow and all,

many thanks for comments. I've re-read the relevant rules that woodrow highlighted at it does look like the umpire did not follow the correct rule in this case.

few further clarifications.
It was a junior tournament.
While I'm indeed not sure if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late I did ask the umpire what happened (since I only witnessed the incident from far). And the umpire stated that he penalized the player a game for being late after the break. I even asked if it should not be a warning than point penalty first - and he stated no, it's a game penalty. So given that it does not matter if a player was 30 or 40 seconds late - that umpire just used incorrect (and judging from woodrow's comment perhaps the rule that was in effect in 2011) rule.

now, when I read the rules, there's one more twist to this. Per rule, during 3 minute break the players are supposed to stay on the court. in the scenario at hand both players left the court. Which would imply that they informed the umpire that they are leaving. or perhaps it was clear mutual understanding that the players are leaving the court. If so - would it imply that the players do take a bathroom break even if that was not explicitly asked? It is almost as if both players decided NOT to take 3 minute break (since they did not stay on the court) and instead chose the bathroom break (or any other break that allows them to leave the court). Since the umpire apparently allowed for that - shouldn't he now follow the rule applied to bathroom/medical/attire breaks and therefore a 'reasonable time is allowed'?

First of all, in juniors, it is a mandatory 3 minute rest period between 2nd set and MTB (not optional), so they cannot decide to not take the 3 minute break.

The player is not required to stay on the court. It is on the court or in an area nearby the court. I don't know how far the player had to go, but if it was not specified what is considered "nearby the court", the player can go inside for the rest period, if he can make it back and be ready to play in 3 minutes. If the player wants to take a toilet/change of attire break before the match tiebreak. He needs to tell the official ahead of time, and then AFTER the 3 minute rest break is over, he can go to the bathroom. If he does not let the official know that he has to use the bathroom, the official is going to assume that he is just late from the rest period, and the lateness penalty applies.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by JLyon

It is a game because it is lateness on a rest period not a changeover. A changeover would be a time violation, but a rest period lateness is a game penalty up to five minutes late, then default.

THat is only if you play a full third set. If it's a match tiebreak, it's a time violation at 3:00, code violation point penalty at 3:20 and code violation game penalty at 3:40.

[jmnk]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

First of all, in juniors, it is a mandatory 3 minute rest period between 2nd set and MTB (not optional), so they cannot decide to not take the 3 minute break.

The player is not required to stay on the court. It is on the court or in an area nearby the court. I don't know how far the player had to go, but if it was not specified what is considered "nearby the court", the player can go inside for the rest period, if he can make it back and be ready to play in 3 minutes. If the player wants to take a toilet/change of attire break before the match tiebreak. He needs to tell the official ahead of time, and then AFTER the 3 minute rest break is over, he can go to the bathroom. If he does not let the official know that he has to use the bathroom, the official is going to assume that he is just late from the rest period, and the lateness penalty applies.

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

THat is only if you play a full third set. If it's a match tiebreak, it's a time violation at 3:00, code violation point penalty at 3:20 and code violation game penalty at 3:40.

many thanks for the comments. This is fascinating. Now I MUST know.

As far as leaving the court (by 'the court' I also mean 'nearby area'). So during those rest periods the player is allowed to leave the court --without-- explicit permission from the umpire? I thought that per IV)C)5) of the code "Once a match with a Chair Umpire has begun, a player may not leave the court without permission from the Chair Umpire" at no time a player is allowed to leave the court. Are you saying that this section somehow does not apply to rest periods? What else is than also excluded?

As far as penalty. So actually in 2012 rulebook there's Table 15 on Time violations. 3 minute Rest Period is explicitly stated in that table. And the penalty is: first offense:Warning, Each Additional: One point penalty.
So how do I apply it? I suppose since than can be only one 3 minute rest in a match (before match tiebreak) than Each Additional violation would mean not being ready to play at 3:20, 3:40,4:00 and so on mark? I suppose the magical 20 seconds increment comes from Table14 where Code Violations and Penalties are listed? But than in that Table14 the penalties for 'not being ready to play within 20seconds of having been directed to resume play' is point->game->default? So do I apply penalty under Table14 or Table15?

p.s. I have no other agenda here other than a need to know that stuff. i know neither the players in that incident, nor the umpire.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by jmnk

many thanks for the comments. This is fascinating. Now I MUST know.

As far as leaving the court (by 'the court' I also mean 'nearby area'). So during those rest periods the player is allowed to leave the court --without-- explicit permission from the umpire? I thought that per IV)C)5) of the code "Once a match with a Chair Umpire has begun, a player may not leave the court without permission from the Chair Umpire" at no time a player is allowed to leave the court. Are you saying that this section somehow does not apply to rest periods? What else is than also excluded?

As far as penalty. So actually in 2012 rulebook there's Table 15 on Time violations. 3 minute Rest Period is explicitly stated in that table. And the penalty is: first offense:Warning, Each Additional: One point penalty.
So how do I apply it? I suppose since than can be only one 3 minute rest in a match (before match tiebreak) than Each Additional violation would mean not being ready to play at 3:20, 3:40,4:00 and so on mark? I suppose the magical 20 seconds increment comes from Table14 where Code Violations and Penalties are listed? But than in that Table14 the penalties for 'not being ready to play within 20seconds of having been directed to resume play' is point->game->default? So do I apply penalty under Table14 or Table15?

p.s. I have no other agenda here other than a need to know that stuff. i know neither the players in that incident, nor the umpire.

As far as how to read the time violation table, you also have to look back at the code violation table as well. You cannot receive back to back time violations. As stated in the code violation table, it is a code violation for day of game when 20 seconds passes after receiving a time violation.

Time violation, point penalties are assessed for each subsequent time violation after the warning, but only after one point has been played or a changeover has occurred since the previous time violation. So, it is a time violation warning, then code violation for delay of game after 20 seconds point penalty, then code violation for delay of game after 20 seconds, game penalty.

You can always leave the court during an authorized rest break (rest period between 2nd and 3rd set, rain delay, etc.)

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by jmnk

I've witnessed the following during an officiated match.
The players split sets. they were to play match tiebreaker. Both players took a break leaving the court. One player got back in about 2 minutes. At 2.45 the umpire started calling for the other player, warning that he has just 3 minutes for a break and must be on the court within 3 minutes. the other player showed up at like 3.30 mark, not even in a hurry or anything. He explained he just went to the bathroom and to get some water.

The umpire called a game penalty on him. Since a match tiebreak counts as a single game, that was also a loss of the tiebreak, and loss of the match.

There were some tears, explaining, but all in a very sportsmanlike fashion. the umpire just said these are the rules and that's it. He said if a player needed a bathroom break than he is entitled to it, and would get 'reasonable time allowance' - but the player must inform the umpire beforehand.

the players shook hands and that was the end of it.

Is that really the rule? is the 3 minute break rule written somewhere? how about a game penalty in this case - is that in the rulebook as well?

Do you know if the umpire announced this 3 minute time limit to the players before they left the court?

[jmnk]

Originally Posted by beernutz

Do you know if the umpire announced this 3 minute time limit to the players before they left the court?

I do not but I doubt that. the player that lost was clearly pleading that he was not aware about the strict 3 minutes rule. He seemed to think everybody assumes this is a bathroom-like break where reasonable time (but not strict minutes-wise) is in effect.

[jmnk]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

As far as how to read the time violation table, you also have to look back at the code violation table as well. You cannot receive back to back time violations. As stated in the code violation table, it is a code violation for day of game when 20 seconds passes after receiving a time violation.

Time violation, point penalties are assessed for each subsequent time violation after the warning, but only after one point has been played or a changeover has occurred since the previous time violation. So, it is a time violation warning, then code violation for delay of game after 20 seconds point penalty, then code violation for delay of game after 20 seconds, game penalty.

You can always leave the court during an authorized rest break (rest period between 2nd and 3rd set, rain delay, etc.)

Many thanks. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by jmnk

Many thanks. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks!

Anytime!