Calling footfaults is important

[Sumo]

Originally Posted by OrangePower

Amateur. A real litigator would have insisted that the court dimensions were not exactly to standard and that in fact there is a chance that it might not have been a footfault were the court exactly to size. Demand a measurement of all court dimensions to take place there and then, or retract the call!

A line is a line regardless of the courts dimensions, definitely have to go after the official (eye sight, court positioning, experience, sexual history, political beliefs, etc).

[mmk]

Originally Posted by dlam

I really dont think its possible to call a foot fault from the other side of the net unless it was a very obvious foot fault.

In a match where we have to regulate each other without a referee, I have never seen it called.

Anyone have a story of one that was called by the opponent?

No, but I play regularly against a guy who, if he isn't standing well back from the center line, steps across the center line (not the baseline) by a foot or more when serving to the ad court. That is fairly obvious no matter where you are standing. I don't bother calling it since I usually win handily.

[Nostradamus]

I was told it isn't manly to call footfaults. I was told it is a copout since you can't handle the other guy's serve.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I was told it isn't manly to call footfaults. I was told it is a copout since you can't handle the other guy's serve.

What is surprising is how many people with good serves footfault. They are the ones to go after.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by sureshs

And don't even get me started on "handfaults" - standing close to the net and hitting the ball before it has come over.

If this was enforced, it would not result in merely "scaling" down of the net aggressiveness - it will lead to a collapse of the game because many of the guys who do it lack fine control to hit the ball just after it crosses. Under scrutiny, their shot will breakdown, and the "fearsome net guy" will be rendered harmless. This is another situation in which players get away with impunity and even build big reputations in the process.

Unless you are looking down the net or have slow-motion replay at your disposal, you are in no position to be sure the net player made contact on the other side of the net.

Personally, I think "hand faults" should be made legal. If you can make contact with the ball without touching the net, why shouldn't you be allowed to play the ball? People hardly ever call a "hand fault" on themselves because they are in no position to judge the exact point of contact down to the inch, so why do we saddle them with that obligation?

On the subject of calling footfaults, go right ahead. It leads to lots of bad blood and tit-for-tat nonsense, usually. If you think it is worth it, have at it.

I have a teammate who is a huge, huge footfaulter. She is old school when she serves. So rather than lift off the ground to hit the serve, she kind of walks. She doesn't land on the left foot. She steps into the court with the right foot -- way way into the court -- and she S&V.

I have never seen anyone call her on it.

[Joeyg]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I played in a tournament this weekend in NorCal, and there was a guy on the court next to me that would start with his front foot about an inch behind the baseline. He would take one decent sized step with his front foot and slide his back foot in so that before he hit the ball, he was actually foot faulting with BOTH feet (front foot about4-6 inches inside the baseline).

This sounds like an old doubles partner of mine. He was called for multiple footfaults (much to my chagrin) at the grand prix in NorCal circa '99 or '00. I also regularly play rec dubs with a two foot faulter that almost gets a running start into the net.

[OrangePower]

Originally Posted by Sumo

A line is a line regardless of the courts dimensions, definitely have to go after the official (eye sight, court positioning, experience, sexual history, political beliefs, etc).

I like the way you're thinking... let's put the official on trial and drag him/her through the dirt! That will teach him/her to volunteer!!

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Unless you are looking down the net or have slow-motion replay at your disposal, you are in no position to be sure the net player made contact on the other side of the net.

Personally, I think "hand faults" should be made legal. If you can make contact with the ball without touching the net, why shouldn't you be allowed to play the ball? People hardly ever call a "hand fault" on themselves because they are in no position to judge the exact point of contact down to the inch, so why do we saddle them with that obligation?

Exactly. When saddled with that obligation, they might end up losing their game.

Tennis is full of mental issues. Footfaults and handfaults are two of them. I compare them to the requirement of touching the wall in swimming when turning around and the requirement of not starting off before the gun in track. So many Olympic athletes have experienced the disappointment of being disqualified after 4 years of training. Handling the mental pressure is part of the skill.

The handfaults are especially obnoxious. Footfaults barely result in an advantage for the servers at the club level. But impunity from handfaults has given rise to a number of doubles players who take full advantage of it and end up putting away balls in an illegal fashion. They stand at the net and basically you have no recourse when they hit a ball on the other side.

[Joeyg]

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I was told it isn't manly to call footfaults. I was told it is a copout since you can't handle the other guy's serve.

Isn't manly? What, to force your opponent to play by the rules of tennis? Why not eliminate the lines and just guestimate where we should serve from?

[Bedrock]

Originally Posted by sureshs

I noticed that a 4.5-ish guy had a nice serve. Then I noticed he used a pinpoint stance. When I started focusing on that, I noticed that he had a complicated footwork pattern and his right foot was smack on the baseline and even perpendicular to it, as he served. Once when he served into the net, he said that he lost his footwork rhythm. That told me that he would have trouble if asked not to footfault.

Then I had a revelation. It is not about whether a few more inches forward makes any difference on the serve. It is really about whether the server can cope with the additional pressure of having a footfault called on him.

The best analogy I can give is say, you are allowed to serve long, but you will be highly appreciated if you serve within the service line. Most players would be very relaxed and actually get their serves in. Then tell them that the rule is now being enforced, and they will start faulting.

Footfaulting is cheating. I have sometimes watched doubles and jokingly threatened that I would act like an umpire and call footfaults. Usually, the serves went south after that, and I had to move on before my "friends" became hostile.

Please ensure that footfaulters are not allowed to get away with what they are doing. Watch their serves breakdown when the rule is enforced and have a good laugh. Watch 4.5s end up with worse serves than a 3.5, and get mighty angry in the process.

footfault is sign of wrong habbit. In the most of cases asking for not footfaulting leads to increased number double faults.

[Bedrock]

Try to serve a foot or two behind of baseline. It is much easier (it is true)

[tennis tom]

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I was told it isn't manly to call footfaults. I was told it is a copout since you can't handle the other guy's serve.

Who told you that, Gore Vidal?

[Bedrock]

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

I was told it isn't manly to call footfaults. I was told it is a copout since you can't handle the other guy's serve.

I would like to see him playing without this "copout".
Copout or not but it is still an error, let him (the other guy) to pay for it.

[woodrow1029]

I will tell you what irritates me the most about foot faults (from an official's point of view).

It really bothers me when I am officiating at a juniors tournament or at a collegiate match/tournament, and I call a foot fault on a player, and their coach/parents get mad at me for calling a foot fault.

A bit of background, when I am in the chair, and am there for the entire match, I will call foot faults officially from the first one I see. If I am roving, and I get called onto the court because a player says their opponent is foot faulting, I will call the first one that I see. When I am roving, and I walk onto a court on my own, and I see one that is not terribly blatant, I will let the player know on the next changeover that he needs to watch out for his footfaults, because if nobody is complaining, I don't think that it's great just to walk on court (sometimes without knowing the flow of the match), and just get involved by calling them immediately, unless it is very blatant. I will then stay for a couple of games and watch. If it continues, I will call them.

But going back to my original post, it bothers me when the parents/coaches get mad at the officials for correctly calling a foot fault, instead of getting irritated with their player and helping them correct the problem.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by sureshs

The handfaults are especially obnoxious. Footfaults barely result in an advantage for the servers at the club level. But impunity from handfaults has given rise to a number of doubles players who take full advantage of it and end up putting away balls in an illegal fashion. They stand at the net and basically you have no recourse when they hit a ball on the other side.

Handfaults are not "obnoxious." You are assuming that you have a good vantage point to know if the opponent made contact on your side (you don't in close cases) or that your opponent does (he doesn't). Hand faults are currently against the rules, but I think there are good reasons to change the rule.

The Handfaulter cannot know if he does or does not hand fault. This is different from other things the player is supposed to call on herself -- like double-hit, being hit by the ball, not up, touching the net, framing the ball. The player often gets some feedback (you can feel it when the ball ticks your racket) or is presumably looking closely at the ball (not up).

Since no player on the court can see if a player breaks an imaginary plane and hits the ball on the other side of the net, why even have that rule?

As it is a dumb, unenforceable rule, I don't get too worked up about it. If my opponent comes close to making contact on my side . . . well, whose fault was it that I left a ball hanging or failed to lob a player who was draped on the net?

[tennis tom]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

I have a teammate who is a huge, huge footfaulter. She is old school when she serves. So rather than lift off the ground to hit the serve, she kind of walks. She doesn't land on the left foot. She steps into the court with the right foot -- way way into the court -- and she S&V.

I have never seen anyone call her on it.

If you have any ambitions for your team to go to any playoffs someone better start straightening her out now--the roving refs and maybe the other teams certainly will-- and then she'll probably fall apart.

Running or getting a walking start to hit a serve, from your description, is also illegal. In "old school" tennis you were not allowed to break the plane of the service line, while in the air, as is allowed by the present rules.

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by tennis tom

If you have any ambitions for your team to go to any playoffs someone better start straightening her out now--the roving refs and maybe the other teams certainly will-- and then she'll probably fall apart.

Running or getting a walking start to hit a serve, from your description, is also illegal. In "old school" tennis you were not allowed to break the plane of the service line, while in the air, as is allowed by the present rules.

: shrug :

I'm not going to straighten anyone out. She will need to resolve it herself.

Interesting about the prior rule that you couldn't break the plane of the baseline. That rule is about as dumb as telling people they cannot make contact on the other side of an invisible plane, but they can follow through on the other side.

[woodrow1029]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I will tell you what irritates me the most about foot faults (from an official's point of view).

It really bothers me when I am officiating at a juniors tournament or at a collegiate match/tournament, and I call a foot fault on a player, and their coach/parents get mad at me for calling a foot fault.

A bit of background, when I am in the chair, and am there for the entire match, I will call foot faults officially from the first one I see. If I am roving, and I get called onto the court because a player says their opponent is foot faulting, I will call the first one that I see. When I am roving, and I walk onto a court on my own, and I see one that is not terribly blatant, I will let the player know on the next changeover that he needs to watch out for his footfaults, because if nobody is complaining, I don't think that it's great just to walk on court (sometimes without knowing the flow of the match), and just get involved by calling them immediately, unless it is very blatant. I will then stay for a couple of games and watch. If it continues, I will call them.

But going back to my original post, it bothers me when the parents/coaches get mad at the officials for correctly calling a foot fault, instead of getting irritated with their player and helping them correct the problem.

I will also add to my rant (even though this part isn't about foot faults), while I'm in the ranting mood, that I am tired of parents threatening to file lawsuits against officials because an umpire gave their kid a code violation with the reason that the official gave the code violation because their kid is a different race than the official. Or players filing lawsuits because they were defaulted from a tournament based on lateness rules when they showed up an hour after their scheduled time, again with the reason being that they are of a different race than the official. Or, any other stupid lawsuits to try to intimidate the official to not issue a code violation. Or lawsuits when a parent thinks their kid's draw was "politically motivated" or "racially influenced" when their kid has to play the #1 seed in an earlier round. And, yes, this crap happens. Ok. I'm done ranting for now.

[mmk]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I will also add to my rant (even though this part isn't about foot faults), while I'm in the ranting mood, that I am tired of parents threatening to file lawsuits against officials because an umpire gave their kid a code violation with the reason that the official gave the code violation because their kid is a different race than the official. Or players filing lawsuits because they were defaulted from a tournament based on lateness rules when they showed up an hour after their scheduled time, again with the reason being that they are of a different race than the official. Or, any other stupid lawsuits to try to intimidate the official to not issue a code violation. Or lawsuits when a parent thinks their kid's draw was "politically motivated" or "racially influenced" when their kid has to play the #1 seed in an earlier round. And, yes, this crap happens. Ok. I'm done ranting for now.

My dad used to umpire baseball from little league up to legion ball. Legion ballplayers might give him a look, or argue a bit, but he would get death threats from little league parents.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

Handfaults are not "obnoxious." You are assuming that you have a good vantage point to know if the opponent made contact on your side (you don't in close cases) or that your opponent does (he doesn't). Hand faults are currently against the rules, but I think there are good reasons to change the rule.

The Handfaulter cannot know if he does or does not hand fault. This is different from other things the player is supposed to call on herself -- like double-hit, being hit by the ball, not up, touching the net, framing the ball. The player often gets some feedback (you can feel it when the ball ticks your racket) or is presumably looking closely at the ball (not up).

Since no player on the court can see if a player breaks an imaginary plane and hits the ball on the other side of the net, why even have that rule?

As it is a dumb, unenforceable rule, I don't get too worked up about it. If my opponent comes close to making contact on my side . . . well, whose fault was it that I left a ball hanging or failed to lob a player who was draped on the net?

Not correct at all. It can be easily judged by the chair umpire, just like a FF can be judged by the line judges.

I am not sure whether you want the rule repealed in pro tournaments or in club-level play. I would prefer to have the same set of rules. Moreover, the other net player can see the handfault very well, because it is often so blatant. I have seen many myself. Your argument about it being the opponent's problem is totally irrelevant. Even catching an out ball before it drops loses the point, and this is far from anything close to that.

I have seen pro matches where the player has enough fine control to touch the ball and while making sure he hasn't crossed the net. I have even seen them change their racket motion near the net just for this delicate situation. Pros definitely know whether they handfaulted or not. If the same rules apply, club players should also be scrutinized. It will put a large number of the close-to-the-net characters out of business.