Calling footfaults is important

[Bartelby]

If you're not happy with playing by the rules after an argument, I'd ask you to play on as is or forfeit.

[yourmailman]

So, let me get this straight ...

Server double faults and then calls the score 15-love. In essence, you just lost 2 points. You don't correct them?

Man, I wanna play a match with you!

[Bartelby]

The receiver gets to call lines on his side of the court so a fault on that side is a fault, as you well know as this has been gone through so repetition is not necessary?

[Bartelby]

I don't know why you've chosen to change the topic when its quite specifically about foot faults and not faults.

I suppose that's a part of your gamesmanship as well?

[yourmailman]

You obviously don't understand that a foot fault is a fault. Not a technical mishap, not a lack of training. It is a fault. If you step inside the court before striking the ball on your serve, it is a fault, whether it lands in the service box or not.

I can't see how some people refuse to grasp this simple concept.

If you choose to ignore it, fine. But the rules state it is a fault (hence the name foot fault). Just the same as a serve landing outside the service box.

[Bartelby]

You've neither read the rules nor the thread.

You don't have an entitlement to call foot faults as a receiver.

It's a simple concept I can't see how you can't grasp it.

So I'd tell you to either play by the rules or forfeit.

[Bartelby]

I'd love to have an official present to call foot faults and officials and video review to check all the dubious line calls, but guess what

- this costs money and hence is only available at the pro level.

[yourmailman]

Bartleby,

Thanx for helping us get over 300 posts!

[Bartelby]

Not at all, but the sureshs didn't stay for the party.

[yourmailman]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Is is it cheating, yes.

So you admit that someone who consistently foot faults is cheating. Why play with them?

[tennis tom]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Only the server calls the score, so after the server puts you in your place he can call the correct score.

I play on occasion with some old club coots (defined as four old farts trying to one-up each other), who have learned through ages of tennis experience to call the score for each other.

p.s. Sorry I missed being post #300, but I had to go to the bathroom, maybe 400.

[Bartelby]

You can do what you like among consenting adults, but its not the rule.

I think you can wait till post 1000, as that would be a milestone.

Originally Posted by tennis tom

I play on occasion with some old club coots (defined as four old farts trying to one-up each other), who have learned through ages of tennis experience to call the score for each other.

p.s. Sorry I missed being post #300, but I had to go to the bathroom, maybe 400.

[Bartelby]

I get put in a division and have to play all comers and all kinds of cheats - people who want to change the order of games, people who call ines wrong, etc.

I try not to look for foot faults lest that which is not within my control gets to me.

Cheating is quite low and usually inconsequential, but one must pay more attention in finals rounds where the lust for five dollar trophies drives the punters wild.

Originally Posted by yourmailman

So you admit that someone who consistently foot faults is cheating. Why play with them?

[Mauvaise]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

You've neither read the rules nor the thread.

You don't have an entitlement to call foot faults as a receiver.

It's a simple concept I can't see how you can't grasp it.

So I'd tell you to either play by the rules or forfeit.

OMG God!*

Either you never read the rules that were posted at least 300 times this thread or read this thread, but yes, as a receiver in an un-officiated match you absolutely *DO* have the right to call a foot fault. The rules say they have to be flagrant, but they do say that they may be called by the receiver.


"A player may warn his opponent that the opponent has committed a flagrant foot fault. If the foot faulting continues, the play may attempt to locate an official. If no official is available, the player may call flagrant foot faults."


It's such a simple concept that I don't understand why you can't grasp it. At this point, I think you don't even believe what you're typing but merely pounding the keyboard in the hopes you'll eventually start writing Shakespeare.





*I know - it's a long story

[Bartelby]

You don't read.

This was a response to an attempt to claim an unqualified right for the receiver to call foot faults.

I was the first one to cite the rule you now cite and it is clear from its wording that it is trying to leave foot faults to officials to call.

Moreover, the meaning of flagrant is anything but clear, but all this has already been discussed, but you chose to comment without reading anything.

The foot fault rule involves the monitoring of real and imagined lines and it is best left to officials, which in competitive situations are available.

Originally Posted by Mauvaise

OMG God!*

Either you never read the rules that were posted at least 300 times this thread or read this thread, but yes, as a receiver in an un-officiated match you absolutely *DO* have the right to call a foot fault. The rules say they have to be flagrant, but they do say that they may be called by the receiver.


"A player may warn his opponent that the opponent has committed a flagrant foot fault. If the foot faulting continues, the play may attempt to locate an official. If no official is available, the player may call flagrant foot faults."


It's such a simple concept that I don't understand why you can't grasp it. At this point, I think you don't even believe what you're typing but merely pounding the keyboard in the hopes you'll eventually start writing Shakespeare.





*I know - it's a long story

[woodrow1029]

I don't know why everyone is beating up on Bartelby. I don't see anywhere that he said a receiver CANNOT call a foot fault. All I see is that Bartelby is saying that the rules are very vague as to when it can be called by a receiver based on the wording. He is right. What is flagrant? Is it covering 1/4" of the line, half the line, one foot touching the inside of the court, both feet touching inside the court?

I've been an official for almost 17 years, and I have never seen a definition of what "flagrant" is for foot faults in an unofficiated match.

Bartelby is right when he says the rules are written in a way that makes it seem that they want to discourage foot faults being called in unofficiated matches.

I haven't read the entire thread, but unless someone can point out to me where he said that "a player cannot call a foot fault in an unofficiated match", I agree with most of what he says.

[Oski10s]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I haven't read the entire thread, but unless someone can point out to me where he said that "a player cannot call a foot fault in an unofficiated match", I agree with most of what he says.

To make it simpler for you...these are his quotes going back through 200 posts in this thread:

Originally Posted by Bartelby

You don't have an entitlement to call foot faults as a receiver.

Originally Posted by Bartelby

You are entitled to warn people in any event under any circumstance all anyone is arguing is that you can't as a receiver go around issuing penalties.

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Sorry, you can't read. i have never once said ff was in the rules. My argument is that receivers cannot think they are permitted to call ff like they call lines.

Originally Posted by Bartelby

What you can't do as a receiver is think that you can officiate foot faults as if they were line calls, which is an all too widespread view.

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Yes, you can point out that the opponent is foot faulting in America, but unless you can get an official on court that's about it.

Originally Posted by Bartelby

Foot faults may only be called by an official standing on court or by a chair umpire. Players may be requested to correct their foot faulting problem by a Referee or Court Supervisor, who will require the player to make an effort during the match to rectify the problem. The receiver may not call a foot fault against the server.

Do you still agree with Bartelby? At this point I think we are all being trolled by him. He goes from feigning understanding, to virtuous righteousness, to defending cheating, and back to his original assertion that a player simply cannot call a foot fault....leading people in circles. Slow clap, nicely done Bartelby. Now please go play in the sandbox by yourself again.

[dcdoorknob]

Originally Posted by woodrow1029

I haven't read the entire thread, but unless someone can point out to me where he said that "a player cannot call a foot fault in an unofficiated match", I agree with most of what he says.

When he says things like "you don't have entitlement to call foot faults as a receiver" and leaves it at that in some posts, people (understandably imo) take this to mean the receiver cannot call a foot fault in an unofficiated match. It may not be what he means, but it's not hard to see why people would think that, and also why people may not have enough free time to have read the whole thread.

Of course, the question is still there as to whether or not Bartleby thinks it is permissible for a receiver to call foot faults on a guy who is serving from 2 feet inside the baseline in an unofficiated match. Some of his statements sure make it seem like he doesn't, and he would be wrong about that.

[Oski10s]

You don't have to go very far back where he makes it quite clear in post# 306:

Originally Posted by Bartelby

You've neither read the rules nor the thread.

You don't have an entitlement to call foot faults as a receiver.

It's a simple concept I can't see how you can't grasp it.

So I'd tell you to either play by the rules or forfeit.

[tennis tom]

The point the rest of us are making is that foot-faults are NOT called enough which is pretty much--NEVER! This is, to put it mildly, and in one word, due to COLLECTIVE COWARDICE, (sorry that's two words, but too late to go back now).

"Flagrant" is in the eye of the beholder, the better one's vision, the better one's ability to perceive the flagrancy. If you can't see very well, how can you "visualize" what someone with very good eyesight (like me for instance and proud of it) has the ability to see?

Since this is such a hot-topic issue, why don't the world's collective governing tennis bodies, assemble a blue ribbon commission and settle it once and for all. They need to devise some precise definitions for what constitutes "flagrant" and then we can go from there.

The way it is now, FF'ing perps get away with it and nothing is being done about it, it's about time there is. This is about as bad a crisis as the economy, the worst since the great depression, and I'm sure we all remember that.