Serving Team Calling A Let Serve

[Raul_SJ]

I believe the rules allow the serving team to call a let when the serve clips the net (usually called by the server's partner at net).

But how often does this happen?

I hardly ever call a let serve when my partner serves because I figure the receiver's partner can see and call the let serve.

But sometimes the serve will barely skim the net and nobody hears it except me (since I am the player closest to the net).

At that point I have to decide whether I am 100% sure. If not, I say nothing.

[Cindysphinx]

If you hear it, call it.

If you don't hear it, say nothing.

You cannot know if your opponents are a tad hard of hearing or not paying attention. You also cannot know if they were planning on seeing how good their return was before calling it.

So just call it if you hear it.

[Raul_SJ]

Originally Posted by Cindysphinx

If you hear it, call it.

If you don't hear it, say nothing.

You cannot know if your opponents are a tad hard of hearing or not paying attention. You also cannot know if they were planning on seeing how good their return was before calling it.

So just call it if you hear it.

That makes sense...

But I would also have no problem with changing the rule so that it's solely the receiving team's call.

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by Raul_SJ

That makes sense...

But I would also have no problem with changing the rule so that it's solely the receiving team's call.

Why? It is pretty hard for the serving team to use a bogus service let call to their advantage. I've been playing 40 years and I can't ever remember a serving team calling a let for any reason other than they thought they heard a let.

[Raul_SJ]

Originally Posted by beernutz

Why? It is pretty hard for the serving team to use a bogus service let call to their advantage. I've been playing 40 years and I can't ever remember a serving team calling a let for any reason other than they thought they heard a let.

In your 40 years of experience, how often does it happen? i.e., the serving team hears a let that the receiving didn't?

I think it's incumbent on the receiving team to hear the let. If they don't call it, play out the point. It keeps thing simpler and more in the spirit of "Each team calls shots on their side of the net...".

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ I've seen/heard it happen quite a few times. As the server's partner, I will sometimes hear the ball nick the net tape, but the receiving team does not acknowledge it. It has happened a number of times that both the server and partner has heard the net contact, the returner's partner did not say anything and, subsequently, the returner (who possibly did not hear the contact), hits the ball back for a winner -- because the serving team did not react since they relaxed after hearing the "net".

The best way for the serving team to protect themselves in this scenario is to call the "let" on themselves. Cindy's take on this is spot on. OTOH, the returning player or team can "steal an ace" by claiming that the ball clipped the net. For this reason, Div 1 men's tennis no longer has a '"let" for balls the hit the net and land fair.

[spot]

Raul- both teams call things that happen on their own side of the net because they are in better position to see that.

On a let call there is no "side of the net" and instead of relying on visual evidence it is relying on audio evidence. Better to let anyone call it to have a better chance of it being called correctly. I simply can't see how the serving team would ever gain an advantage by calling a false let (as long is it is called in a timely manner).

So lets say that you remove the ability for the serving team to call a let. There is a serve that basically just slows the serve down but the receiving team wasn't sure and gave the benefit of the doubt and let the play proceed. The receiver cracks a winner. Do you really think that wouldn't cause a huge argument?

[Cindysphinx]

Originally Posted by Raul_SJ

In your 40 years of experience, how often does it happen? i.e., the serving team hears a let that the receiving didn't?

I think it's incumbent on the receiving team to hear the let. If they don't call it, play out the point. It keeps thing simpler and more in the spirit of "Each team calls shots on their side of the net...".

The person closest to the net is almost always the server's partner.

If the receivers are playing two back, then they are even less likely to hear a let.

There are times when players are supposed to make a call for something that did not happen on their side of the net. Calling your own second serve out. Calling a through. Calling a ball that opponent hit into a permanent fixture before it landed in your court.

[muddlehead]

As you all probably know, in college, service net cords are played. Good rule. If ever a rule change is in order for adult leagues, this is the one. Anyone have a thought why the college no net/let has never been adopted for us elders?

[tennis tom]

Originally Posted by muddlehead

As you all probably know, in college, service net cords are played. Good rule. If ever a rule change is in order for adult leagues, this is the one. Anyone have a thought why the college no net/let has never been adopted for us elders?

Because "us elders" know when to leave well enough alone. If they ever change that rule, I'm switching to pickle ball--what ever that is?

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by muddlehead

As you all probably know, in college, service net cords are played. Good rule. If ever a rule change is in order for adult leagues, this is the one. Anyone have a thought why the college no net/let has never been adopted for us elders?

My guess would be that for rec league players there aren't enough aces being hit, which were in turn being invalidated by bogus let calls, to make it an issue. Also the jobs of college tennis coaches to some extent depend on the outcomes of their player's matches which is potentially a source of motivation to have their players cheat by using bogus let calls.

I would like to see service lets played at the rec level if only to speed up the game.

[blakesq]

If I am serving, I will call a let if I hear it. If I don't call it, then I will be thinking about the fact that I should have called it, and end up screwing the point because I was thinking about the let serve!!!!

Originally Posted by Raul_SJ

I believe the rules allow the serving team to call a let when the serve clips the net (usually called by the server's partner at net).

But how often does this happen?

I hardly ever call a let serve when my partner serves because I figure the receiver's partner can see and call the let serve.

But sometimes the serve will barely skim the net and nobody hears it except me (since I am the player closest to the net).

At that point I have to decide whether I am 100% sure. If not, I say nothing.

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ I'm often inclined to ignore a barely perceptible "net" serve if no one else says anything. I've actually been conditioned to play serves that hit the net from playing a whole lot of badminton. Serves that hit the net and land in the proper service area are considered to be a point for the serving team in badminton (since a point is over when the shuttle hits the ground).

Originally Posted by beernutz

My guess would be that for rec league players there aren't enough aces being hit, which were in turn being invalidated by bogus let calls, to make it an issue. Also the jobs of college tennis coaches to some extent depend on the outcomes of their player's matches which is potentially a source of motivation to have their players cheat by using bogus let calls.

I would like to see service lets played at the rec level if only to speed up the game.

I'm also inclined to play "net" serves to maintain the flow of the game. However, the problem with serves that hit the net is that they will trickle over the net much more often in rec play than in Div 1 men's tennis. It seems fundamentally wrong for a server to be rewarded for hitting the net in such a manner.

Badminton has a short service line. If the shuttle hits the net and lands short of that line, the server loses the serve. If the shuttle hits the line or land in the box (past the short serve line), it is a point for the server.

One possibility for tennis is to include short service lines on tennis courts and not play lets for balls that hit the net. Doubt that this idea will ever be implemented tho'.

[NLBwell]

Originally Posted by Raul_SJ

I think it's incumbent on the receiving team to hear the let. If they don't call it, play out the point. It keeps thing simpler and more in the spirit of "Each team calls shots on their side of the net...".

That's not the rule. If you hear it and you don't call it, you are a cheater.
I wouldn't have a problem if they got rid of net calls (my dad has finally convinced me on that one) but you shouldn't cheat just because, in your personal view, you feel the rules should be different.

[SystemicAnomaly]

^ You can call it cheating if you want but if it is done to keep the game moving along then what is the harm? If it is done to gain an unfair advantage for one player/team, then I'd agree wholeheartedly with you. If not, why make a big fuss of it? It is a victimless "crime". PEDs and intentional erroneus line calls are blatant cheating. This type of "cheating" is not really worth losing sleep over.

[ollinger]

Raul's comment about being in the spirit of calling what's on "your side of the net" was especially entertaining. If you think about it, assuming the ball does not contact the net absolutely tangentially (i.e. at one single point, in which case it would likely be inaudible), then a let in fact strikes the net first on the server's side, so they are not relieved of the responsibilty of the call.

[Raul_SJ]

I realize the service let is often on the server's side of the court, which is why I qualified the statement with "in the spirit of..."

[Raul_SJ]

Originally Posted by NLBwell

That's not the rule. If you hear it and you don't call it, you are a cheater.
I wouldn't have a problem if they got rid of net calls (my dad has finally convinced me on that one) but you shouldn't cheat just because, in your personal view, you feel the rules should be different.

You did not read what I wrote.

As I already said, if I am 100% sure I hear the sound I will call the service let. If not, I don't.

In the same spirit, I will call a ball out on my side only if I am 100% it is out. If I'm 99% sure it is out, I call it in.

My other comments was strictly speculation on rule changes... It doesn't mean I am not following the rules as they stand now.