Ball On Court During Service Motion

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
I had a rules question come up today, and none of us was certain of the correct resolution.

My partner served. Receiver let the ball go behind her. As my partner prepared to hit the second serve, I noticed the ball slowly rolling toward the receiver's feet. I said, "Hold up, hold up," but my partner served the ball. Receiver cleared it.

I said to my partner, "I think that's a first serve for you." She said she wasn't sure.

I asked the opponents was it first or second serve, and they said second. I said that I thought the rule was that when a second serve motion was interrupted by a ball rolling onto court it was a first serve. They said that rule doesn't apply when the ball belongs to our court; it only applies to balls from neighboring courts.

I wasn't sure, so I didn't push it (or look it up) and said we could do whatever they wanted. They said they didn't know either, so first serve.

Anyway, I checked the Code, and it says this:

29. Delays during service. When the server’s second service motion is interrupted by a ball coming onto the court, the server is entitled to two serves.

Does the ball have to be from a neighboring court? Can our ball logically be said to be "coming onto the court?"
 
W

woodrow1029

Guest
It doesn't necessarily have to come from a neighboring court. Like if it had stopped, and the wind blew it making it come back to the receiver's feet, or something. But since this was a first serve that the receiver let go by her, if it simply was rolling back off of the fence. It should be a second serve.

I look at this also from the point of view in a match with a roving umpire or chair umpire.

If the receiver lets it go, and the server starts the motion for the second serve, and the ball should be cleared because it is coming back into play and could cause a safety hazard, the official should say wait to clear it, and then it would be a second serve.

The second serve needs to be hit without delay, and the receiver needs to be ready for it. The server, however, has the responsibility to make sure the receiver is ready before hitting the second server, and a ball coming back that could easily be a dangerous hazard, in my opinion, should be treated as the server not making sure the receiver was ready, especially since it was the server's partner that stopped the motion.

With the server's partner stopping the serve to have the receiver clear the ball, that is something that could easily be abused for a serving team to get a first serve (not at all implying that this was your intent, Cindy), but it could be. The ball could come back just a foot or two, clearly not interfering, and the partner could say STOP as soon as the partner starts the service motion. It wouldn't be right to give a first serve.

Sorry for the rambling in this post. Thinking as I am typing.
 

blakesq

Hall of Fame
You only get a 2nd serve because you didn't ask for the ball to be cleared prior to your partner serving. By going ahead and serving, your partner assumed the risk of having the ball rolling around the court, hence no let (first serve).

I had a rules question come up today, and none of us was certain of the correct resolution.

My partner served. Receiver let the ball go behind her. As my partner prepared to hit the second serve, I noticed the ball slowly rolling toward the receiver's feet. I said, "Hold up, hold up," but my partner served the ball. Receiver cleared it.

I said to my partner, "I think that's a first serve for you." She said she wasn't sure.

I asked the opponents was it first or second serve, and they said second. I said that I thought the rule was that when a second serve motion was interrupted by a ball rolling onto court it was a first serve. They said that rule doesn't apply when the ball belongs to our court; it only applies to balls from neighboring courts.

I wasn't sure, so I didn't push it (or look it up) and said we could do whatever they wanted. They said they didn't know either, so first serve.

Anyway, I checked the Code, and it says this:



Does the ball have to be from a neighboring court? Can our ball logically be said to be "coming onto the court?"
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
It doesn't necessarily have to come from a neighboring court. Like if it had stopped, and the wind blew it making it come back to the receiver's feet, or something. But since this was a first serve that the receiver let go by her, if it simply was rolling back off of the fence. It should be a second serve.

I look at this also from the point of view in a match with a roving umpire or chair umpire.

If the receiver lets it go, and the server starts the motion for the second serve, and the ball should be cleared because it is coming back into play and could cause a safety hazard, the official should say wait to clear it, and then it would be a second serve.

The second serve needs to be hit without delay, and the receiver needs to be ready for it. The server, however, has the responsibility to make sure the receiver is ready before hitting the second server, and a ball coming back that could easily be a dangerous hazard, in my opinion, should be treated as the server not making sure the receiver was ready, especially since it was the server's partner that stopped the motion.

With the server's partner stopping the serve to have the receiver clear the ball, that is something that could easily be abused for a serving team to get a first serve (not at all implying that this was your intent, Cindy), but it could be. The ball could come back just a foot or two, clearly not interfering, and the partner could say STOP as soon as the partner starts the service motion. It wouldn't be right to give a first serve.

Sorry for the rambling in this post. Thinking as I am typing.

Dang. I had no idea it was this complicated! No wonder no one knew the rule on the fly.

OK. To review . . . it doesn't have to be from a neighboring court. Good to know, good to know.

Different result if receiver's partner stops play?

Different result if ball falls from receiver's pocket?

As I mull this . . . what if I had said, "Let!", which is what I say when I see a ball on court? Why wouldn't that be a let, with two serves?

Do we really want to introduce the idea of receiver readiness into this? Then we could have a problem if the receiver makes a play on the serve.

Thanks, Woodrow!
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
You only get a 2nd serve because you didn't ask for the ball to be cleared prior to your partner serving. By going ahead and serving, your partner assumed the risk of having the ball rolling around the court, hence no let (first serve).

If you go this route, my team loses the point for hindrance or calling an incorrect let.
 
W

woodrow1029

Guest
Dang. I had no idea it was this complicated! No wonder no one knew the rule on the fly.

OK. To review . . . it doesn't have to be from a neighboring court. Good to know, good to know.

Different result if receiver's partner stops play?

Different result if ball falls from receiver's pocket?

As I mull this . . . what if I had said, "Let!", which is what I say when I see a ball on court? Why wouldn't that be a let, with two serves?

Do we really want to introduce the idea of receiver readiness into this? Then we could have a problem if the receiver makes a play on the serve.

Thanks, Woodrow!

If the receiver's partner stops play, it depends on when and what the time was in between the first and second serve. The key here is that a ball coming back from the fence off a serve could be a serious danger. If the receiver's partner is looking back at the ball, and says wait without realizing the server started the motion, then I still say second serve. The server needs to make sure the receiver is ready, and that could definitely constitute only a second serve.

If a ball falls from a receiver's pocket, it's a let the first time, and loss of point as a hindrance each time after.
 
W

woodrow1029

Guest
My point is that if we start giving first serves when a server's partner says "wait" or "let" for something like this, it would get abused all the time.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
If the receiver's partner stops play, it depends on when and what the time was in between the first and second serve. The key here is that a ball coming back from the fence off a serve could be a serious danger. If the receiver's partner is looking back at the ball, and says wait without realizing the server started the motion, then I still say second serve. The server needs to make sure the receiver is ready, and that could definitely constitute only a second serve.

If a ball falls from a receiver's pocket, it's a let the first time, and loss of point as a hindrance each time after.

OK, got it. FWIW, the bold part is what happened. It sounds weird that I wouldn't notice the ball, but sometimes my line of sight gets screened by the receiver or the net strap. And if I couldn't see the ball, I'm not surprised that my partner couldn't see it. I said something as soon as I saw it, but since I was looking forward I didn't know where my partner was in her service routine.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
My point is that if we start giving first serves when a server's partner says "wait" or "let" for something like this, it would get abused all the time.

Ya think? I dunno. Aside from the fact that having a ball slowly roll back onto the court unbeknownst to all four players is not all that common, it is difficult for server's partner to time the "wait", given that she has her back to the server.
 

kylebarendrick

Professional
Server hit a serve that was a fault. Receiver never touched it. Any delays due to that ball moving around are therefore the server's fault - they don't get a free first serve because of it. I can't see any other reasonable way to spin this. Here's a more egregious example:

Server totally shanks the serve and it bounces onto a neighboring court. Server waits for their point to finish and requests the ball back. Due to the long delay they request a first serve. There's not a chance I'd grant them one - they hit it there!
 

Darkhors

Rookie
Aside from the fact that having a ball slowly roll back onto the court unbeknownst to all four players is not all that common,

Cindy, this should not be a common thing at all. At least where I'm from, if the serve goes by (and is a fault) and isn't touched by the receiver, it's common practice that the receiver looks back to make sure the ball isn't going to roll back towards the court. This procedure pretty much negates any possibility of having to call a let during the second serve, aside from balls from a neighboring court.

I have never seen anyone get upset about a returner clearing a ball or making sure that it's not rolling back towards the court. If they did, I would probably not have nice things to say to them. This is pretty much what happens in the pros, except they have a ball boy doing the chasing.

This is just my .02 so take it FWIW.

DH
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Cindy, this should not be a common thing at all. At least where I'm from, if the serve goes by (and is a fault) and isn't touched by the receiver, it's common practice that the receiver looks back to make sure the ball isn't going to roll back towards the court. This procedure pretty much negates any possibility of having to call a let during the second serve, aside from balls from a neighboring court.

I have never seen anyone get upset about a returner clearing a ball or making sure that it's not rolling back towards the court. If they did, I would probably not have nice things to say to them. This is pretty much what happens in the pros, except they have a ball boy doing the chasing.

This is just my .02 so take it FWIW.

DH

Well, yeah. Agreed. The receiver in this case should have checked where the ball went. When she turns around and looks ready, I think it is quite reasonable for the server to assume she is ready. So who's fault is it that all of this happened? The receiver, I think.

Still, the most important thing is that no one be allowed to get hurt. When I see that ball too close to her feet, I'm going to stop play and worry about the rules later. We came to a reasonable resolution, no hard feelings, good match all around.
 

blakesq

Hall of Fame
Really? So you believe that if one becomes aware of a ball on the court, the rules of tennis requires you to keep quite about it, even though someone might step on it and break an ankle? The rules of tennis does not require one to give up common sense.

You can't ask for a ball to be cleared in the middle of a point. Once my partner serves, the point has begun, so I cannot stop the point. I think. . . .
 
Your partner should NOT have served until she saw the ball had stopped rolling. If your opponents don't care if they crack a femur that's their business. Rec players play too fast, not waiting for balls to stop rolling tracking where they wind-up then, three games later, when they notice they are missing a ball, asking everyone within earshot, if they have taken their ball, giving them the "Why did you steal our ball 'look'?"--What is your ball doing on my court?--but I digress.

If players would track their loose balls being aware of where they land settle in, many of these "let/no let" situations would be moot.

While I'm digressing, it amazes me before a warm-up is over, balls are already lost. When a ball goes onto another court during the warm-up, track it so it doesn't get lost. Invariably, it's the "player" who hasn't opened a can of balls since the last millenium, who could care less about losing someone else's ball, if they hit it over the fence, they never go get it.

Tom, who digresses all over Cindy's thread du jour, but gives her credit for wanting to learn.
 
Last edited:
W

woodrow1029

Guest
Cindy, this should not be a common thing at all. At least where I'm from, if the serve goes by (and is a fault) and isn't touched by the receiver, it's common practice that the receiver looks back to make sure the ball isn't going to roll back towards the court. This procedure pretty much negates any possibility of having to call a let during the second serve, aside from balls from a neighboring court.

I have never seen anyone get upset about a returner clearing a ball or making sure that it's not rolling back towards the court. If they did, I would probably not have nice things to say to them. This is pretty much what happens in the pros, except they have a ball boy doing the chasing.

This is just my .02 so take it FWIW.

DH

In theory that's correct, but if the server is serving too quickly between first and second serve, the receiver sometimes worries more about not making the server wait and less about the ball coming back.
 

LuckyR

Legend
Logic would say that once you said "hold it", play is suspended. The fact that your partner served (or didn't), in or out or whatever and that the receiver hit it or was aced or whatever, is all a smoke screen. The second serve never happened, so it can't be "interupted". Play resumes with the second serve. There is a specific rule that states that you do not get a first serve for however long it takes to clear the first serve ball.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Your partner should NOT have served until she saw the ball had stopped rolling. If your opponents don't care if they crack a femur that's their business. Rec players play too fast, not waiting for balls to stop rolling tracking where they wind-up then, three games later, when they notice they are missing a ball, asking everyone within earshot, if they have taken their ball, giving them the "Why did you steal our ball 'look'?"--What is your ball doing on my court?--but I digress.

If players would track their loose balls being aware of where they land settle in, many of these "let/no let" situations would be moot.

While I'm digressing, it amazes me before a warm-up is over, balls are already lost. When a ball goes onto another court during the warm-up, track it so it doesn't get lost. Invariably, it's the "player" who hasn't opened a can of balls since the last millenium, who could care less about losing someone else's ball, if they hit it over the fence, they never go get it.

Tom, who digresses all over Cindy's thread du jour, but gives her credit for wanting to learn.

Clearly, you do not play in facilities that have a Bermuda Triangle.

I swear, there are some facilities around here that make balls vanish. The ball will go into a corner or over some draping, and you go over there five minutes later and it is gone. It is really quite remarkable at some of these places.

Cindy -- who doesn't mind Tom's digression because the best threads have the best digressions
 
Clearly, you do not play in facilities that have a Bermuda Triangle.

I swear, there are some facilities around here that make balls vanish. The ball will go into a corner or over some draping, and you go over there five minutes later and it is gone. It is really quite remarkable at some of these places.

Yes I have--and I take the time to track the final disposition of the ball to make it easier to find after the point is over. I don't let my opponents or partner rush me from tracking it, making it safe to play or prevent losing a ball-- especially when it's usually MY ball!
 
Top