courtesy vs rules

[jc4.0]

It happened again - I hit a great out-wide serve which just kissed the line. The returner tried to hit it, but missed. Her partner, who prefers to stay on top of the net, and therefore didn't have a good view of the serve, calls the serve "out". He is looking backwards and completely across the court to make the call - while the returner, who had the down-the-line view, and clearly tried to make the return, remains silent.

I ask the returner if she concurs with the out call - she says she's "not sure". Then her partner who made the out call says maybe he's not sure. I ask if I can take two serves then - based on all this uncertainty - but they say no, the out call was made. Luckily we won the point anyway - but wasn't that a bit of bad sportsmanship?

Later in the same set, I was "on the fence" about a call at the baseline, which my partner wanted to call out - but I wouldn't allow it. It was game point, and I gave up the game because I was "99% sure it was out". I said, "okay, we're giving you the point because I'm not sure".

I heard my opponent say to her partner "she's not giving us anything..."

I said "yeah, I'm giving you something - the benefit of the doubt. And I always will..."

Why do some people like to follow the rules when I'm making the call, but not when they're making the call?

 

[bcart1991]

Ego, plain and simple.

 

[Taxvictim]

On the first point (your serve), if you asked if they were sure about their call (which is all you can do under the Code), and they said "not sure", then it should have been your point right then.

 

[shazbot]

What a do*che bag that guy was. He really shouldn't be calling the far side line to begin with. IMO that's the returners call 100% of the time. He can be calling the service line, but even that is suspect because you said he was standing on top of the net, so he wouldn't even have a good angle to call serves long.

The woman returning should have over ruled her partner, at worst give you two serves.

It always seems the people making suspect/bad calls are also really competitive people, which doesn't make sense to me. If you are competitive you wanna beat your opponent fairly right? So why be an a*shole when making calls.

 

[tennis tom]

Why do some people like to follow the rules when I'm making the call, but not when they're making the call?

Because they're CHEATERS !

 

[PimpMyGame]

Why do some people like to follow the rules when I'm making the call, but not when they're making the call?

Because they do not have the intelligence to understand that it's one stupid point of one stupid game from one stupid set of one stupid match.

 

[jswinf]

Bad luck in choice of opponents. Still, you don't really want to be a "line-kisser," do you? Land it 3 inches inside. 8)

 

[jc4.0]

Bad luck in choice of opponents. Still, you don't really want to be a "line-kisser," do you? Land it 3 inches inside. 8)

Hey, If I could hit the outside edge of the line on every serve, I'd do it - unfortunately I don't have the luxury of choosing to hit within 2-3 inches, I'm not that good bro! yet when I do hit a great serve or other shot that just touches the line, I'd appreciate credit. So often, don't get it on the serve. We just don't have "hawk-eye" on our courts!

 

[Cindysphinx]

Blame the recent Code changes.

Code now makes clearer that anyone can call any line.

Code punishes players who 'fess up to a bad call with loss of point, further encouraging cheating.

With all of that, it's any wonder that anyone calls a fair line anymore.

 

[woodrow1029]

On the first point (your serve), if you asked if they were sure about their call (which is all you can do under the Code), and they said "not sure", then it should have been your point right then.

In doubles, if one is not sure, and the one who calls it out is sure, it's ok. That is different than partners disagreeing on a call.

 

[woodrow1029]

Blame the recent Code changes.

Code now makes clearer that anyone can call any line.

Code punishes players who 'fess up to a bad call with loss of point, further encouraging cheating.

With all of that, it's any wonder that anyone calls a fair line anymore.

There was never a rule that said certain players could only call certain lines.

 

[woodrow1029]

Because they're CHEATERS !

Or because the OP doesn't give us the full story. Additionally, if the shot according to the OP just kissed the line, how can the OP be sure that it WAS actually in.

I also don't see how you can even ask for two serves. That's not even anywhere in the rules or code.

 

[Cindysphinx]

There was never a rule that said certain players could only call certain lines.

True. That's why I said the Code now makes it clearer that any player can call any line. Wasn't that idea beefed up in the Code for 2011?

I dunno. Maybe the folks where I play are just big fat cheaters or something. Or maybe it is my imagination.

But it seems to me that everyone has gotten the word that changing an incorrect line call is now loss of point, and folks are not correcting their calls and partners like they used to. I'm seeing more wishy washy line calls than I used to, and a raised eyebrow isn't getting the same response ("Yeah, I think that caught, take two") that it used to.

 

[jc4.0]

Or because the OP doesn't give us the full story. Additionally, if the shot according to the OP just kissed the line, how can the OP be sure that it WAS actually in.

I also don't see how you can even ask for two serves. That's not even anywhere in the rules or code.

Hence, the title of my post "courtesy vs. rules". I did believe my serve was in, although I guess we'll never know; the returner said she wasn't sure, even though she took a swing at it - then relied on the poor sight-line of her partner to make an iffy call at best (then he admitted that he wasn't all that sure, either). No, there's no rule about this - most of us just prefer to "play nice" and give benefit of the doubt, which is called "sportsmanship".

 

[woodrow1029]

Hence, the title of my post "courtesy vs. rules". I did believe my serve was in, although I guess we'll never know; the returner said she wasn't sure, even though she took a swing at it - then relied on the poor sight-line of her partner to make an iffy call at best (then he admitted that he wasn't all that sure, either). No, there's no rule about this - most of us just prefer to "play nice" and give benefit of the doubt, which is called "sportsmanship".

If I called a ball out and was positive it was out and my partner wasn't sure, I certainly wouldn't give you two serves and I don't know why anyone who was certain of their call would. If neither partner was sure, then it should be your point. I don't see how you could possibly feel that you should get a first serve if the opponent is sure of the call.

As far as courtesy goes, that is partly what the "Code" is there for. To tell how to handle certain situations that aren't directly cleared up by the rules of tennis.

 

[li0scc0]

If I called a ball out and was positive it was out and my partner wasn't sure, I certainly wouldn't give you two serves and I don't know why anyone who was certain of their call would. If neither partner was sure, then it should be your point. I don't see how you could possibly feel that you should get a first serve if the opponent is sure of the call.

I do agree with this. Often, in doubles, the partner who is NOT preparing to hit the ball can see if a ball was in or out. The partner hitting the ball is so focused on hitting, they sometimes don't see if the ball was in or out. If one player is certain a ball caught/did not catch, then that is all that matters. Both players don't have to 'know'.
Recently, I was at the net, and my partner went to retrieve a deep lob. She were so focused on getting there, she did not call the out ball. I did...there was space between the line and the ball, and I was 100% sure and made a prompt call. Had our opponents asked us both if we were 'sure', I would be 100% sure, but my partner, she would not have been sure.

 

[jc4.0]

If I called a ball out and was positive it was out and my partner wasn't sure, I certainly wouldn't give you two serves and I don't know why anyone who was certain of their call would. If neither partner was sure, then it should be your point. I don't see how you could possibly feel that you should get a first serve if the opponent is sure of the call.

As far as courtesy goes, that is partly what the "Code" is there for. To tell how to handle certain situations that aren't directly cleared up by the rules of tennis.

Since as I stated - neither opponent was sure of the call - I wanted to take two serves instead of insisting upon being awarded the point. Sometimes we do that in a friendly match - maybe you guys don't, where you play. It's better than arguing about "rules" - We just want to have fun. In this case however, I got no joy - a bad call, followed by taking a second serve. I do think it's best to err on the side of courtesy, but that's just me.

 

[JavierLW]

In doubles, if one is not sure, and the one who calls it out is sure, it's ok. That is different than partners disagreeing on a call.

Right but if I am reading this story right, both partners later said they were "unsure".

That should be point for the opposing team (the OP's team).

I would just claim the point right there.

 

[JRstriker12]

Right but if I am reading this story right, both partners later said they were "unsure".

That should be point for the opposing team (the OP's team).

I would just claim the point right there.

I think that's what Woodrow said in his first response:

If I called a ball out and was positive it was out and my partner wasn't sure, I certainly wouldn't give you two serves and I don't know why anyone who was certain of their call would. If neither partner was sure, then it should be your point. I don't see how you could possibly feel that you should get a first serve if the opponent is sure of the call.

As far as courtesy goes, that is partly what the "Code" is there for. To tell how to handle certain situations that aren't directly cleared up by the rules of tennis.

 

[JRstriker12]

Since as I stated - neither opponent was sure of the call - I wanted to take two serves instead of insisting upon being awarded the point. Sometimes we do that in a friendly match - maybe you guys don't, where you play. It's better than arguing about "rules" - We just want to have fun. In this case however, I got no joy - a bad call, followed by taking a second serve. I do think it's best to err on the side of courtesy, but that's just me.

From both your reaction and your opponent's reaction - it didn't sound very "friendly."

This: (I heard my opponent say to her partner "she's not giving us anything...") sounds like some snarky comment you hear in a USTA match, not a friendly competition. If they are going to be that way, for get un-written rules of courtesy, play by the rules and they have no more complaints.

If it really was a friendly and fun match where you were not really too worried about the results, then they wouldn't have hesitated to give you the point as required by the rules and the tennis guide for etiquette (the code).

Also, if it was a friendly match, they probably wouldn't have hesitated to let you replay the point - even though that's not the rule.

For example, I played a match last week and I hit a clear winning passing shot as my opponent came to the net. He asked to replay the point only after I hit the winner and claimed he slipped on a ball that he left on the court when the point began and said that was the reason why he couldn't make a play in my shot.

I wasn't happy about his request, but since we were only having fun, I reminded him that by the rules that point was mine and he needed to remove any balls from his side of the court before the point started. But since we were playing for fun and the result didn't matter, I replayed the point anyway. But I made sure he knew that in a real match he would have lost that point.

 

[jc4.0]

half a prozac?

Yes you've understood the essence of the moment, JR Striker - these are my friends and good tennis buddies, so I didn't understand why they were going all "USTA" on me. If the returner couldn't even make a call, and her partner "wasn't sure" after the initial out call, then it should be my point. But even when I asked for two serves as a friendly gesture, that was declined as well - the excuse being "the out call was made". Maybe Marilyn should break the Prozac in half next Sunday morning, before coming to court...

Well, if the shoe was on the other foot, I would have let her have the point, because I have to live with myself.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Still . . .

If it was a friendly, social match, folks shouldn't be questioning line calls.

That's the only thing that troubles me in OP's account. If this were a competitive match, of course OP should get the point.

However . . .

I play with a particular woman, and she doesn't seem to understand that it is best not to question line calls in social matches.

If her serve "just kisses the line," she'll ask me whether it was in. I give the same reply every time: "It's not my call." She will then ask our opponents, who say the same thing every time: "I saw it out" "or "we're calling it out" or "it was out." So why bother?

 

[jc4.0]

Still . . .

If it was a friendly, social match, folks shouldn't be questioning line calls.

That's the only thing that troubles me in OP's account. If this were a competitive match, of course OP should get the point.

However . . .

I play with a particular woman, and she doesn't seem to understand that it is best not to question line calls in social matches.

If her serve "just kisses the line," she'll ask me whether it was in. I give the same reply every time: "It's not my call." She will then ask our opponents, who say the same thing every time: "I saw it out" "or "we're calling it out" or "it was out." So why bother?

Actually I didn't question the call, I just asked for a definitive call, and didn't get one. Neither opponent could call the ball in or out, yet they insisted that I didn't deserve the point, nor at least a first serve out of the deal.

You're right, it's a friendly match so why not just say "do over", that would have been okay with me - even though I thought my first serve was an ace. Sometimes egos just get in the way yknow? I think that's ridiculous.

 

[Angle Queen]

This scenario and those similar to it highlight why I've stopped "questioning" line calls at all, either in my mind or aloud. Either they're gonna change their mind (which occasionally and understandably happens) or they're not. And no amount of inquiry on my/our part is gonna change the call or result.

One of the best lessons I've learned this "off-season" is the concept of "Let It Go" (cowboy hat off to Mr Faith Hill). I see too many players dwell on what could or should have happened -- either a call or shot selection/execution -- that they're still rethinking/replaying it in their mind...when the next point and the next point and the next point rolls around. I will, however, sometimes ask my partner what they thought of a particular call, mostly for my own edification, but it generally brings about the closure necessary...to move on.

 

[Cindysphinx]

Actually I didn't question the call, I just asked for a definitive call, and didn't get one. Neither opponent could call the ball in or out, yet they insisted that I didn't deserve the point, nor at least a first serve out of the deal.

You're right, it's a friendly match so why not just say "do over", that would have been okay with me - even though I thought my first serve was an ace. Sometimes egos just get in the way yknow? I think that's ridiculous.

Well . . .

Let's not change the story. All I have to go on is the OP, in which you said:

It happened again - I hit a great out-wide serve which just kissed the line. The returner tried to hit it, but missed. Her partner, who prefers to stay on top of the net, and therefore didn't have a good view of the serve, calls the serve "out". He is looking backwards and completely across the court to make the call - while the returner, who had the down-the-line view, and clearly tried to make the return, remains silent.

I ask the returner if she concurs with the out call - she says she's "not sure".

So yeah, you questioned their line call, clearly.

 

[Cindysphinx]

This scenario and those similar to it highlight why I've stopped "questioning" line calls at all, either in my mind or aloud. Either they're gonna change their mind (which occasionally and understandably happens) or they're not. And no amount of inquiry on my/our part is gonna change the call or result.

One of the best lessons I've learned this "off-season" is the concept of "Let It Go" (cowboy hat off to Mr Faith Hill). I see too many players dwell on what could or should have happened -- either a call or shot selection/execution -- that they're still rethinking/replaying it in their mind...when the next point and the next point and the next point rolls around. I will, however, sometimes ask my partner what they thought of a particular call, mostly for my own edification, but it generally brings about the closure necessary...to move on.

Yeah, I'm kind of moving in that direction too.

At the higher levels, people give benefit of the doubt, so it's not much of an issue.

At the lower levels, people hook or have poor line-calling skills. If you ask whether they are sure, it gets you nowhere. So why bother?

 

[jc4.0]

Well . . .

Let's not change the story. All I have to go on is the OP, in which you said:



So yeah, you questioned their line call, clearly.

I simply asked if the returner concurred with her partner's call - I didn't question whether the call was correct. So let's not change the story.... This is exactly the kind of conversation I try to avoid on court. I asked if they were both sure, and neither was sure about the call. Normally I'd say in that case they should actually award the point to my team. But instead, I simply asked for a do-over. Denied that as well, I played a second serve and never said another word.

What's your point?

 

[Cindysphinx]

If my opponents in doubles call a ball out, and I communicate with them about their call and whether they are standing by it, I have questioned their call.

My point? My point is that I personally think it is poor form to question calls (in this case, in the form of goading one partner into overruling her partner's clear call) *in a social match.* People do it. You did it. You can keep on doing it. Some folks (like me) will not appreciate it, especially when the ball at best "kissed the line."

I think it is just best for all concerned not to do it in friendly, social matches, which is what you said this was. That's my opinion and my point.

 

[jc4.0]

If my opponents in doubles call a ball out, and I communicate with them about their call and whether they are standing by it, I have questioned their call.

My point? My point is that I personally think it is poor form to question calls (in this case, in the form of goading one partner into overruling her partner's clear call) *in a social match.* People do it. You did it. You can keep on doing it. Some folks (like me) will not appreciate it, especially when the ball at best "kissed the line."

I think it is just best for all concerned not to do it in friendly, social matches, which is what you said this was. That's my opinion and my point.

I'm really done with this, but you are twisting my words around. I didn't goad anybody into anything, the returner wouldn't make a call and the returner's partner, without any encouragement or questioning from anyone, admitted he wasn't sure either. So at this point I have both opponents saying they're "not sure" whether the call is in or out. There was no "clear call" from either!

I also didn't "question" the call, although I think that on clay it's okay to ask to check a mark - but in this case, I didn't even do that. I only asked that since neither one was sure about the call, maybe they'd let me take two serves. They said no, so I took my second serve and that was it. You're making it out like I was arguing about the call, I didn't. I might have "argued" that the point should be mine, but I didn't - I was trying to be a nice person.

 

[Cindysphinx]

OK, fair enough. I don't mean to misconstrue what happened.

It sounds like the guy made a clear out call. Then both opponents said they were not sure of their call, but they chose to call the ball out anyway.

If that is really what happened -- and assuming your opponents did not pick up a racket for the first time yesterday -- it is quite bizarre.

I mean, I cannot even imagine that dialogue:

Receiver's partner: "OUT!"

Server (to Receiver): "Excuse me, do you concur in your partner's call?"

Receiver: "I'm not sure."

Receiver's Partner: "Now that you mention it, I'm not sure either. Oh well. Second serve."

That's just weird. But if that's the whole story, OK . . .

 

[Sakkijarvi]

Sometimes your partner blows a call and if it isn't addressed at the moment, you just give one back the next time you are in a position to do so. Usually, these matches are not life or death.

 

[jc4.0]

lessons learned

OK, fair enough. I don't mean to misconstrue what happened.

It sounds like the guy made a clear out call. Then both opponents said they were not sure of their call, but they chose to call the ball out anyway.

If that is really what happened -- and assuming your opponents did not pick up a racket for the first time yesterday -- it is quite bizarre.

I mean, I cannot even imagine that dialogue:

Receiver's partner: "OUT!"

Server (to Receiver): "Excuse me, do you concur in your partner's call?"

Receiver: "I'm not sure."

Receiver's Partner: "Now that you mention it, I'm not sure either. Oh well. Second serve."

That's just weird. But if that's the whole story, OK . . .

Thanks Cindy - yes it was a weird story, that's why I wanted to tell it. My point here is, sometimes "courtesy" is missing from even a friendly game, and I think that's too bad. We should always treat others as we want to be treated - on the court and in life. It's one of those nice little lessons tennis can teach us, if we're paying attention!

 

[FedererBestTennis]

It happened again - I hit a great out-wide serve which just kissed the line. The returner tried to hit it, but missed. Her partner, who prefers to stay on top of the net, and therefore didn't have a good view of the serve, calls the serve "out". He is looking backwards and completely across the court to make the call - while the returner, who had the down-the-line view, and clearly tried to make the return, remains silent.

I ask the returner if she concurs with the out call - she says she's "not sure". Then her partner who made the out call says maybe he's not sure. I ask if I can take two serves then - based on all this uncertainty - but they say no, the out call was made. Luckily we won the point anyway - but wasn't that a bit of bad sportsmanship?

Later in the same set, I was "on the fence" about a call at the baseline, which my partner wanted to call out - but I wouldn't allow it. It was game point, and I gave up the game because I was "99% sure it was out". I said, "okay, we're giving you the point because I'm not sure".

I heard my opponent say to her partner "she's not giving us anything..."

I said "yeah, I'm giving you something - the benefit of the doubt. And I always will..."

Why do some people like to follow the rules when I'm making the call, but not when they're making the call?

The rule is that if your opponent doesn't say that they're sure, it is your point. In other words, if they say, "I'm pretty sure," your point.

 

[timeisonmyside]

Yeah, I'm kind of moving in that direction too.

At the higher levels, people give benefit of the doubt, so it's not much of an issue.

At the lower levels, people hook or have poor line-calling skills. If you ask whether they are sure, it gets you nowhere. So why bother?

Really? I would have thought it would be the other way around. It should be easier to call lines at the lower levels because of slower moving balls. Well, I guess if they are outright cheating....

 

[LuckyR]

Or because the OP doesn't give us the full story. Additionally, if the shot according to the OP just kissed the line, how can the OP be sure that it WAS actually in.

I also don't see how you can even ask for two serves. That's not even anywhere in the rules or code.

It doesn't matter that it may have been "out", both opponents said they weren't sure at one point (one later recanted). It is "in".

 

[JRstriker12]

Really? I would have thought it would be the other way around. It should be easier to call lines at the lower levels because of slower moving balls. Well, I guess if they are outright cheating....

IMHO - some lower level players are more likely not to give a "benefit of a doubt" on close calls because they may not be aware of that guideline or consider a ball that just nicks the line to be out due to inexperience. Or for example, they many not recognize the behavior of a ball that obviously skids off a line and call it out and not in.

I think most players who have more experience have realized that it's often better to give a benefit of a doubt as I think it makes things go much more smoothly on the court and shows some respect for your opponent.

*NOTE - I said "some" not "all" - every level has a few cheats here and there.

 

[beernutz]

On the first point (your serve), if you asked if they were sure about their call (which is all you can do under the Code), and they said "not sure", then it should have been your point right then.

</end of thread imo> I would clarify that if the opponent who made the out call when asked said that they weren't sure , then it should have been your point immediately.