Canas foot fault call. Anybody disagree?

[Taxvictim]

Just curious if anyone disagreed with the foot fault called on Canas for having one foot across the center line when he started his service motion. He was so ticked off, demanding that the judge be removed from the Court.

 

[Nuke]

It was a fair call. Chronic foot-faulters are always surprised when someone calls them on it.

 

[Tchocky]

I didn't see Willy's foot cross the line. I think the foot fault rule is BS and should only be called when it's really egregious. The call definitely effected his service game and probably cost him the set but he would lost anyway the way Djokovic was playing.

 

[fbone]

I recall it did not look flagrant enough to warrent a call. If anything his back foot looked even w/the center line...not over. But, wait, if it was even...then I guess it's the same as touching the back line? So, is that why the call was made? Is that what the rule says?

Either way, for being the final match, for a line judge to make such an obscure judgement call like that did not seem right to me.

 

[Nuke]

Either way, for being the final match, for a line judge to make such an obscure judgement call like that did not seem right to me.

A foot fault is hardly an "obscure" call. So many recreational players do it so often that they lose sight of the fact that it's a clear infraction.

 

[cghipp]

I don't mind it being called, but on the replay I couldn't see it. I thought his foot (actually his right foot, crossed behind his left) looked even with the center line AT MOST and moved away from it as he started the service motion.

 

[MordredSJT]

I recall it did not look flagrant enough to warrent a call.

I recall looking at it and thinking it was obviously a foot fault. I'm sorry, but there is no such thing as breaking the rules a little bit...and the line judges are THERE to make judgement calls. To me, his foot looked to clearly be at least on if not over the extension of the center mark when he began his service motion. That is a foot fault.

I can understand why Canas was upset, but he really had no argument.

 

[Nuke]

It was actually very professional to call the foot fault early in the match. When players are allowed to get away with foot faults for a couple of sets and then finally get called on it late in the match, I can understand getting upset.

 

[kingdaddy41788]

I didn't see the call, but foot faults should always be called, if they occur. The foot has to be touching the line, it can be above it in the air.I remember at the australian open one year when a foot fault was called on Hewitt. His heel and ankle were in the air over the line, but the toe of his foot (which was touching the ground) was behind the line (albeit by 1 or 2 millimeters).

 

[drakulie]

A foot fault is hardly an "obscure" call. So many recreational players do it so often that they lose sight of the fact that it's a clear infraction.

I agree. And his foot did touch the imaginary line. It does not need to cross, rather just touch that imaginary line. It was a good call.

 

[Hal]

It looked like a clear foot fault to me. His foot was almost on the outside edge of the center service line. Here is the rule and commentary from the USTA website:

FOOT FAULT
During the service motion, the server shall not:
a. Change position by walking or running, although slight movements of the feet are permitted; or
b. Touch the baseline or the court with either foot; or
c. Touch the area outside the imaginary extension of the sideline with either foot; or
d. Touch the imaginary extension of the centre mark with either foot.

If the server breaks this rule it is a “Foot Fault”.

USTA Comment 18.1: Where may the server stand? In singles, the server may stand anywhere behind the baseline between the imaginary extensions of the inside edge of the center mark and the outside edge of the singles sideline. In doubles, the server may stand anywhere behind the baseline between the imaginary extensions of the inside edge of the center mark and the outside edge of the doubles sideline.
​

 

[Taxvictim]

And the rules also require the feet to be at rest at the start of the service motion, and Canas foot was over the center line extension when he started his service motion, so that was the start of the serve. I think that's what the main referee was trying to explain to Canas.

 

[tennis_hand]

It was actually very professional to call the foot fault early in the match. When players are allowed to get away with foot faults for a couple of sets and then finally get called on it late in the match, I can understand getting upset.

Yes. it is very common.

also the funny thing to watch is how the feet of some players will move when they serve, even if they don't foot fault.

 

[Ripper]

That was a stupid call and it may have cost Cañas the match.

 

[Hal]

And the rules also require the feet to be at rest at the start of the service motion, and Canas foot was over the center line extension when he started his service motion, so that was the start of the serve. I think that's what the main referee was trying to explain to Canas.

What the ref was trying to tell Canas is that it's the complete service motion, not just where you strike the ball. Even though his foot was in a legal position when he hit the ball, it was still a foot fault because he started his motion with his right foot in foot fault position.

 

[kingdaddy41788]

That was a stupid call and it may have cost Cañas the match.

Bull ****...

 

[serve/and/volley]

If it was Federer or Nadal serving, the linesmen wouldn't have dared called it. Moreover it wasn't a run-of-the-mill foot fault. Canas even asked the chair ump if he's seen a call like that before and the chair ump says no. Canas says he hasn't seen it either. And guess what the chair ump says further? "Guillermo, there is a first time for everything." Well, it's bad luck his back foot nicked the center mark (which is not that easy to see), and it's bad luck that he got called on it on a second serve, and more bad luck that it gave Djokovic triple break point. Djokovic would have won the match anyways, however the chair ump's snide remark was uncalled for. Canas just has a streak of bad luck with the ATP, especially when the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that it was a mistake on the part of an ATP trainer who administered the tainted medicine to Canas that got him in trouble. Here is the article from ESPN:

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/tennis/news/story?id=2819004

It doesn't matter in the end. Djokovic played great, Canas had a great run, and they're both gracious in their respective win and loss. What is sad is the behavior of the rules fascists and the nerds who worship rules. Tennis is a simple game with simple rules. It is not anywhere close to American Football, no matter how hard the USTA tries with its encyclopedia of rules. If there is anything unusual, it's simple: replay the point. Otherwise the integrity of the gameplay is compromised. But no, rule worshippers (who by the way would make great bureaucrats and traffic cops) have to fiind some way to muck things up. In every month Tennis magazine even has a section called "Court of Appeals" that deals with all kinds of inane situations in tennis. Check out this question from the April 2007 issue:

"Waiting for my opponent's second serve, I felt I had to sneeze. Since I can't keep my eyes open while sneezing, I lost the point because I didn't see the ball. Could I have called a let and offered my opponent another first serve?" -- Heinz Briegel, Richmond, Va.

I even remember in past issues of questions regarding a bat that swooped down and hit the ball in mid play. Why even waste space on such trivialities? But no, rec players, especially in the US, care more about winning than about gameplay. Hence the trivial column "Court of Appeals". Instead of instilling honor and good sportsmanship into the game of tennis, the USTA instead prefers to go the route of the lawyers: amassing huge amounts of rules to deal with all kinds of trivial cases that would be taken care of by a simple "REPLAY THE POINT!"

It is sad when the phrase "Winning isn't everything; it's the only thing" is lionized in the US. It obscures the actual technique, mechanics, dynamics, and the art of tennis (and in sports in general). Instead of tennis players making smart judgements on the court, they prefer to let a lawyer do it for them. That's America for you.

In the case of Canas, sure it is a BS call, but at the same time, what do you expect from the ATP as well as professional sports in general? There are even greater wrongdoings in other sports as well:

- the clueless ref who gave out a record number of red cards during the 2006 World Cup match between Portugal and the Netherlands that basically ruined the quality of the match

- the overall officiating in general of the NFL

- the great Michael Jordan, who does not need any help from refs, unwittingly got some since he rarely gets called for traveling even though he likes to palm the ball and "carry over" when he blows past defenders

- plus a lot more that I'm sure you guys can provide as well. (Didn't Serena play a tie-break where the chair ump lost track of the score, and basically mucking up the tie-break?)

In any case, there is always a mixture of human error plus poor judgement, plus rules fascism involved. But what can you do. It's life. At least the foot-fault didn't cost Canas the match. It was a combination of excellent tennis from Djokovic with Canas' tired 29-yr-old body catching up to him that had something to do with it.

What is unnecessary is the chair ump's remark: "Guillermo, there is a first time for everything."

 

[iamke55]

rofl @ dumb anarchist getting worked up and writing a whole page on a correct ruling and good judgement by one of the few decent linespeople left

 

[Ripper]

rofl @ dumb anarchist getting worked up and writing a whole page on a correct ruling and good judgement by one of the few decent linespeople left

It was a stupid call and it helped the Djoke man (not that he needed the help).

 

[Nuke]

I have no sympathy for people who footfault. It is NOT a BS call, but a valid one, whether it's Federer playing or anyone else. I have played often enough with jerks who footfault practically on every serve, but I don't usually call them on it because, being the jerks they are, I know I'm going to get a big argument about my "unfair" call. Canas may be a great guy in all other respects, but in this one, he is no different from the jerks I play who just don't get the idea that starting your serve with your foot on the line is really no different from serving it into the net. It's a service fault.

 

[Taxvictim]

That's a good point. You folks who think foot faults are no big thing should realize a lot of people who play with you might think otherwise, though they don't say anything. Why risk being the butt of ugly club talk because of your excessive foot faulting? Just follow the rules.

Read a great novel called "The Tutor" by Peter Abrahams. In one scene, someone mentions the name of a businessman, and the other guy says, "Is he that jerk at the club who always foot faults?"

 

[Gugafan_Redux]

I didn't think the heel of his right foot broke the extension of the center line in the replay. I thought the call was BS. I'm gonna talk to my lawyer and sue the ATP's ***, and the line judge, and the chair ump, and the tournament director, and the shoe manufacturer, cause I'm American! Yee haw!

 

[Sakumo]

rofl @ dumb anarchist getting worked up and writing a whole page on a correct ruling and good judgement by one of the few decent linespeople left

Lol I have to agree with you. Who writes that much when 1. No one will read it, and 2. It was a point that was done a week ago.

I'm surprised at you ripper! You think it changed the match? No way, one point when he was already up 0-30. I'm sorry but I expect better from you.

 

[jmsx521]

They showed it in slow motion after the point and I thought his heel was within the center-line's trajectory by about an inch. I don't think the call was wrong. I DO think that that incident disrupted his composure somewhat which effected the match's result.