The 2013 Friend at Court states the following regarding a roving umpire’s authority to overrule a line call: "Overrule a player’s line call only when in direct observation of that one court. When a Roving Umpire overrules a player’s out call, that player loses the point. The Roving Umpire may not overrule as a result of a player appeal." This states very clearly that a roving umpire can only overrule a call if he is in direct observation of the point. In other words, if Player A calls a ball out and Player B (the opponent) disagrees with the call, a roving umpire cannot overturn the call if he did not see the play. Does this apply to a case where a player claims a call was made too late and appeals to a roving umpire who did not see the play? Let’s say that Player A makes an out call and Player B claims that the call was made “too late”. There could be a variety of reasons why Player B thought the call was made late. For the sake of argument let’s assume Player A lets a ball bounce a few inches long at the baseline, hits a half volley, then immediately calls the ball out. Maybe Player B either didn’t hear the call and/or didn’t see the out signal. So Player A reiterates the call, but by this time Player A’s half volley has hit the net. Player B only hearing the second (same) call, insists the call was made late. The roving umpire who was on another court and did not see the play is called over to settle the dispute. The umpire states that since he didn’t see the play, he could not determine definitively whether the out call was made in a timely manner or not, thus he calls a let and makes them replay the point. Was this the correct ruling, or should Player A’s original call have stood, based on the fact that the umpire did not see the play?