Does calling "out" and changing call to "in" create a hindrance in doubles

Robzilla

Robzilla

New User
While playing doubles, my partner hits a ball near the baseline. Right before the ball strikes the ground, one of our opponents calls "out" to his partner at the baseline. The ball lands square on the baseline and the same opponent changes his call to "in". His partner was able to make the shot over the net and continue the point. My partner and I stopped play, because of the "out" call. Do we lose the point because we stopped play? I think the initial "out" call was a hindrance.
 
The team that made the errant out call loses the point. In friendly play, the other team can keep going if they choose. But in USTA play, they can stop the rally and claim the point.
 
MathGeek said:
The team that made the errant out call loses the point. In friendly play, the other team can keep going if they choose. But in USTA play, they can stop the rally and claim the point.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but they didn't stop play so it's a little more gray than that. I'd say if you were a stickler you could maybe say the opponents lose the point for a hindrance, but practically speaking we just replay the point.
 
Well... we were not given the point. Our opponents said that they were communicating to each other and that there is no rule that states this is a hindrance. Unfortunately, we let our guard down when the "out" call was made.
 
Robzilla said:
While playing doubles, my partner hits a ball near the baseline. Right before the ball strikes the ground, one of our opponents calls "out" to his partner at the baseline. The ball lands square on the baseline and the same opponent changes his call to "in". His partner was able to make the shot over the net and continue the point. My partner and I stopped play, because of the "out" call. Do we lose the point because we stopped play? I think the initial "out" call was a hindrance.
Click to expand...

No, you won the point. If you change calls from out to in, you lose the point.
 
Willeric, I agree with you. Their response was... since the ball was still in the air (it was inches from the baseline) - they were just communicating to each other and not making an official call. Their "official" call was IN after the ball hit the court.
 
ask them to say bounce instead of out if they think a ball in flight may go out. this eliminates confusion. also, ask them to say it once at a reasonable volume level and not scream it 8 times loudly. my pet peeve is there is too much talking at too high a volume during the point in doubles. just say these magic words - yours, mine, bounce, switch, stay and short - during the point and say out when the point ends on your side of the net. say these magic words one time at reasonable volume and the game will be more enjoyable for all of us.
 
kevrol said:
Opponents point. The out was before the ball hit so it couldn't have been a call and you can't call it a hindrance because the opponent can't hinder you if the ball isn't already travelling back to you.
Click to expand...

I believe this to be correct. I personally will always continue to play points out if they are close to the line until the opponents look like they have CLEARLY stopped playing or letting me know they called it out. This is the easiest way. Otherwise you lose the point regardless.
 
kevrol said:
Opponents point. The out was before the ball hit so it couldn't have been a call and you can't call it a hindrance because the opponent can't hinder you if the ball isn't already travelling back to you.
Click to expand...

I think this is correct too. Since the ball was in the air, it couldn't have been a line call over which the partners were disagreeing. If the ball had already bounced, and one thought it was out while the other said it was in, the point would have gone to the OP.

Verbal hindrance can happen only when the ball is on its way to you. Otherwise the opposing team would have no way of communicating during the point.
 
similarly, i've called serves "out" (ie. as receiver's partner), the retracted my call as "in",... even if my partner returns the serve, i concede the point.
 
kevrol said:
That's different, you were making a call.
Click to expand...
it's the same scenario.
the takeaway is, once someone calls it out, then changes it to in, the caller needs to concede the point because you have to give your opponent the benefit of the doubt that you interrupted their flow (split step, extra step, concentration, etc...) because they thought the point was already over.
 
All great points and info. It appears that we lose the point because there was no actual hindrance. Just distracting when they call "out", but continue to play the point. Lesson learned - Thx!
 
nytennisaddict said:
it's the same scenario.
the takeaway is, once someone calls it out, then changes it to in, the caller needs to concede the point because you have to give your opponent the benefit of the doubt that you interrupted their flow (split step, extra step, concentration, etc...) because they thought the point was already over.
Click to expand...
I agree !!! If they would have said "bounce it" - no problem.
 
I have to be honest, if my partner is at net and the opponent is at the baseline and rips it, I will say OUT! a lot more than BOUNCE IT! Merely because of the pace of the ball and lack of time available. Sometimes, I say NO! or LONG!

Maybe I should just "shriek" instead, lol. :)
 
This doesn't even make sense. Normally the player at the baseline yells 'out' so the NET player doesn't play it out of the air.

If the ball is inches from the baseline about to land why would you call for your partner to let it go? Was he going to volley it out of the air one inch above the baseline?

Sounds like a premature out call that was properly overruled by his partner.

So it is OP's point.
 
nytennisaddict said:
it's the same scenario.
the takeaway is, once someone calls it out, then changes it to in, the caller needs to concede the point because you have to give your opponent the benefit of the doubt that you interrupted their flow (split step, extra step, concentration, etc...) because they thought the point was already over.
Click to expand...

It isn’t the same scenario because you surely don’t call out before your opponent’s serve lands do you?
 
norcal said:
This doesn't even make sense. Normally the player at the baseline yells 'out' so the NET player doesn't play it out of the air.

If the ball is inches from the baseline about to land why would you call for your partner to let it go? Was he going to volley it out of the air one inch above the baseline?

Sounds like a premature out call that was properly overruled by his partner.

So it is OP's point.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately I've played with a couple of partners that would continually volley the ball when they are standing on or past the baseline that would be several feet out if they let them bounce. One of the partners had a decent excuse as she had been coaching kids for the past several weeks and was used to keeping the points going. The other had no excuse other than poor court judgement.
 
I love threads like this. It just shows you how many cheaters there are on this forum. It's really sad how little etiquette there is in tennis, a game which espouses principles of fair play and honor more so than any other.

Like you, the "advice" I've been given on this forum is a series of rationalizations to allow your opponent to cheat. The "advice" I was given was: "if your opponent is likely to lose, let them cheat."

https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...nice-people-who-are-hardcore-cheaters.604361/

Some gems from the thread:

"She's 60, just let her cheat."

"Her eyesight is real bad, let her cheat."

"It's just social tennis, let your opponent cheat."

"It's just social tennis, cheating isn't a big deal. Just let them cheat."

"Why are you such a meanie?"

"What's so important about making the correct call? It's just a game!"

"Old people don't have to follow the rules!"

"Women don't have to follow the rules!"

"Yes, maybe it was out, but it was in, in her imagination."
 
Last edited:
12. Out calls reversed. A player who calls a ball out shall reverse the call if the player becomes uncertain or realizes that the ball was good. The point goes to the opponent and is not replayed.

As someone already stated, it doesn't make sense that they are telling their partner to "bounce it" and not play it out of the air. It was an incorrect line call regardless of whether it was made early.
 
Startzel said:
It isn’t the same scenario because you surely don’t call out before your opponent’s serve lands do you?
Click to expand...
true, i don't.
i was ignoring the obvious faux pas of calling a ball before it's landed, because that's the OP was more interested in the "changing the call" scenario.
 
This is hard to judge without being there.

Even though they called "out" before the ball bounced, if it was only just slightly before it could still be considered a line call. However if the call was made early enough so as to be obvious communication it does not affect the point.

If your opponent said "out" then his partner hits the ball and then he says "it was in" well now he is doing two things, #1 he is indicating that his "out" was indeed a call because he is now changing it, and if he denies that then #2 he is talking while the ball is headed towards you which is a hindrance.

Like I said though ... sometimes this is very hard to give a correct ruling without being there.
 
willeric said:
12. Out calls reversed. A player who calls a ball out shall reverse the call if the player becomes uncertain or realizes that the ball was good. The point goes to the opponent and is not replayed.

As someone already stated, it doesn't make sense that they are telling their partner to "bounce it" and not play it out of the air. It was an incorrect line call regardless of whether it was made early.
Click to expand...

/thread.
 
norcal said:
This doesn't even make sense. Normally the player at the baseline yells 'out' so the NET player doesn't play it out of the air.

If the ball is inches from the baseline about to land why would you call for your partner to let it go? Was he going to volley it out of the air one inch above the baseline?

Sounds like a premature out call that was properly overruled by his partner.

So it is OP's point.
Click to expand...

One of the opponents was mid court - his partner was just beyond the baseline. My partner hit the ball toward the opponent at the baseline. His partner didn't want him to hit the ball if it was going out, so he called "out", just before the ball hit the court ( probably 12in before the baseline). The opponent midcourt immediately changed his call to IN. His partner successfully hit the ball IN on our side. We had stopped play because of the OUT call. It was our mistake, that we stopped play, and no hindrance because the OUT/IN call occurred before the ball was returned in our direction. Our opponents insisted that they were communicating - this is true. The OUT call was a distraction to us - but we should have continued play. It is clear to me now - no issues.
 
It is always a tricky scenario, and I think you are the best judge since you were in the scene. Anyway couple of points:
1. Even though it is usually recommended to say bounce etc... there is no real ruling prohibiting "out" word in communicating with partner, and that by itself is not a hindrance.

2. The timing of the call is imporant. And if it is around the time of an actual timing of a line call (if it is just around or after the bounce for example), then yes, it can be a hindrance. The point may need to be re-played or the team which caused hindrance may loose the point, based on the exact scenario.

See the official USTA answer on this topic from the webarchieve, and decide yourself.

https://web.archive.org/web/2015091...Your-Game/Rules/Rulings/Calling_the_ball_out/




Robzilla said:
The OUT call was a distraction to us - but we should have continued play
Click to expand...
 
Robzilla said:
One of the opponents was mid court - his partner was just beyond the baseline. My partner hit the ball toward the opponent at the baseline. His partner didn't want him to hit the ball if it was going out, so he called "out", just before the ball hit the court ( probably 12in before the baseline). The opponent midcourt immediately changed his call to IN. His partner successfully hit the ball IN on our side. We had stopped play because of the OUT call. It was our mistake, that we stopped play, and no hindrance because the OUT/IN call occurred before the ball was returned in our direction. Our opponents insisted that they were communicating - this is true. The OUT call was a distraction to us - but we should have continued play. It is clear to me now - no issues.
Click to expand...

That is the quintessence of the term "hindrance."

I play tennis with junk ballers in the 3.0 to occasional low 4 range. They are constantly cheating in this way. The reason it's difficult to call my opponents out about a single hindrance is because they are doing this endlessly, every single game, so I become the "bad guy" for insisting on fair play on any particular call.

Morch Us said:
It is always a tricky scenario, and I think you are the best judge since you were in the scene. Anyway couple of points:
1. Even though it is usually recommended to say bounce etc... there is no real ruling prohibiting "out" word in communicating with partner, and that by itself is not a hindrance.

2. The timing of the call is imporant. And if it is around the time of an actual timing of a line call (if it is just around or after the bounce for example), then yes, it can be a hindrance. The point may need to be re-played or the team which caused hindrance may loose the point, based on the exact scenario.

See the official USTA answer on this topic from the webarchieve, and decide yourself.

https://web.archive.org/web/2015091...Your-Game/Rules/Rulings/Calling_the_ball_out/
Click to expand...

A "communication" and "hindrance" are not mutually exclusive. Even if the "intent" is "communication" the tangible, consistent effect is to hinder the opponent. How could it not hinder your opponent? You are calling it out, i.e., the end of play.


Great job giving us newbies crappy advice. The heart of tennis is gone, replaced by cheaters who rationalize stealing matches.
 
Last edited:
As others have said I've always played it that if they split on the call it's our point no do overs our let's. It's why I am clear in saying "bounce" if it'll be close or I feel it's long. That way it cannot be used against us.
 
Pasting the official USTA Answer from the link I posted above. So that some "newbies" can read it.

====================

Q. Does play stop in all cases of an "Out Call"? There are situations where a partner will tell his/her partner "Out" instead of "Bounce It" or "Let It Bounce" cautioning that the ball may be going out. If however, the partner plays the ball, instead of letting it drop, and makes a good return and their opponents don't play the return, is a let played?

A: First, despite what some people think, there is no rule that says you cannot say out' or other words of communication to your partner, especially when you're at the net and the ball is coming in your direction. And because such communication would invariably occur well before the ball has bounced, the claim that this could be mistaken for a line call is not legitimate.

The time confusion could occur is in your case when a player said 'out' or another form of communication to his/her partner standing at the baseline at the time when the ball bounced or was about to bounce. You were in the position to make a return of the ball and did so. In that case, saying "leave it" or "NO" would be preferable to saying 'out'. However, any word used when the ball lands on the ground or close to the ground when you or your partner hit the ball could be construed as a call. If a player yells "out” or some other form of communication at the moment or close to the moment the ball was played, it could very well hinder the opponents. If the opponents both thought that a call was made and both stopped, honestly thinking a call was made, then a let should be played since they did stop and honestly thought a call was made.

====================
 
Indeed. If everyone other than you are cheaters there, especially in a social group, then it is obvious who should be out of that group. I don't even believe your interpretation, since you called @kevrol a cheater above as well. But the point is none of that matters, you just dont fit in that group. So your choice is get out of that group.

city_player said:
I play tennis with junk ballers in the 3.0 to occasional low 4 range. They are constantly cheating in this way. The reason it's difficult to call my opponents out about a single hindrance is because they are doing this endlessly, every single game, so I become the "bad guy" for insisting on fair play on any particular call.
Click to expand...
 
Robzilla said:
While playing doubles, my partner hits a ball near the baseline. Right before the ball strikes the ground, one of our opponents calls "out" to his partner at the baseline. The ball lands square on the baseline and the same opponent changes his call to "in". His partner was able to make the shot over the net and continue the point. My partner and I stopped play, because of the "out" call. Do we lose the point because we stopped play? I think the initial "out" call was a hindrance.
Click to expand...


No, they lost the point when they yelled out. They essentially stopped the point at that point. I got called out for doing something similiar...yelling back to my partner after I'd hit a short lob. That's a hindrance. The way I understand it once you hit the ball and it is on the way back to the other side...you can't really say anything. You saying "back" or "watch your alley" anything can be considered a hindrance. I also think scrubbing your feet in place and not making an effort to get to a different location in the court is the same thing.
 
Morch Us said:
Indeed. If everyone other than you are cheaters there, especially in a social group, then it is obvious who should be out of that group. I don't even believe your interpretation, since you called @kevrol a cheater above as well. But the point is none of that matters, you just dont fit in that group. So your choice is get out of that group.
Click to expand...

Since you don't understand the rules of tennis your opinion doesn't matter.
 
What you still not getting is that those QAs posted by USTA official is as a clarification to the Code.

Essentially you are still not getting the differece between communication and linecall. The word "out" does not matter, what really matters is the "timing" of the call. Only someone who was present on court at the time can really tell whether it was a "communication" or a "line call".

By the way, a "cheater" can also be someone who stopped playing the point, trying to claim the point, by piggy back on an obvious communication between opponents. And the fairplay can also be "continue playing the point" if you were not really distracted.

city_player said:
Did you read "THE CODE The Players’ Guide to Fair Play and the Unwritten Rules of Tennis?"

Read Rule 12 before you throw another tantrum. :)

https://www.usta.com/content/dam/usta/pdfs/2015_Code.pdf
Click to expand...
 
Morch Us said:
What you still not getting is that those QAs posted by USTA official is as a clarification to the Code.

Essentially you are still not getting the differece between communication and linecall. The word "out" does not matter, what really matters is the "timing" of the call. Only someone who was present on court at the time can tell you whether it was a "communication" or a "line call".

By the way, a "cheater" can also be someone who stopped playing the point, trying to claim the point, by piggy back on an obvious communication between opponents.
Click to expand...

The Q and A is irrelevant. They cite no rules or code of conduct as support of their alleged "answers." Neither do you. It's hindrance.
 
The quoted wording from OP is the key point here. OP should analyze the timing of the call, and make a true judgement. If the below statement is true to its full, then yea, I agree this was a "line call". But many times towards the end of a match tired players may stop putting 100% effort to run down all the balls, and may stop playing the point when they "think" it is over (for example...even when no calls are made). That is exactly why I am reluctant to judge this one way or other, and only OP can judge what really was the case.

Robzilla said:
Right before the ball strikes the ground
Click to expand...
 
city_player said:
That's because you're a cheater. That's the only way you can win points.
Click to expand...

Well actually I’m not because I’ve never claimed a point in a scenario such as the OP posed. I’m merely applying the rules as clarified by USTA Q&As I’ve read to the situation. But thanks for the personal attack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Morch Us said:
It is always a tricky scenario, and I think you are the best judge since you were in the scene. Anyway couple of points:
1. Even though it is usually recommended to say bounce etc... there is no real ruling prohibiting "out" word in communicating with partner, and that by itself is not a hindrance.

2. The timing of the call is imporant. And if it is around the time of an actual timing of a line call (if it is just around or after the bounce for example), then yes, it can be a hindrance. The point may need to be re-played or the team which caused hindrance may loose the point, based on the exact scenario.

See the official USTA answer on this topic from the webarchieve, and decide yourself.

https://web.archive.org/web/2015091...Your-Game/Rules/Rulings/Calling_the_ball_out/
Click to expand...
This is good! Great link for everyone to read. Thx!
Hey... for the record - I didn't want to start any fights here. Just wanted some friendly input. Rules are rules and in a competitive tournament match, friendly etiquette will not always be a priority. I try to play "nice" and if I change the call mid-point, I always stop play and give the point to my opponent. This allows me to move on to the next point with a clear conscious. It's clear to me now, that communicating "out" calls between doubles partners is NOT against the rules - even it is a distraction to there opponents. Like a few of you had said - a call is not legitimate until the ball hits the court. Any calls "IN or "Out" before the ball hits the court must be interpreted as communication between partners. And, for a hindrance to occur the ball must be travelling toward you. I'm good with the ruling - our opponents were correct - we lose the point. We won the match, so the sting of losing the point is less : ) Aces and victories to all of you !!!
 
It's NOT Hindrance because it's their team's turn to hit the ball. You can make any sound or noise or communication you want when it's your teams turn to hit the ball...

The question would be whether telling your partner that the ball is going to be "Out" is the same as calling it "Out". You are not really supposed to call the ball Out before it lands anyway...

If it does count as "calling it Out", and then suddenly you change your mind, then YOU LOSE THE POINT, because nowday's if you make a bad call you lose the point...

It's probably best not to use the word "Out" when you are communicating to your partner that you think the ball is going out. Even if it doesnt count as "calling it", I have seen it cause a few disagreements.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

OnTheLine
Calling a hindrance for something other team said
Replies
39
Views
2K
edathompson2
E
M
You Make The Call:
Replies
38
Views
2K
Matthew ATX
M
G
Line calls in a doubles match
Replies
19
Views
3K
SwankPeRFection
SwankPeRFection
g4driver
Woodrow Ruling ?? - Partners disagree on call, with a ball mark clearly out.
Replies
6
Views
3K
g4driver
g4driver
Cindysphinx
Can a "thwack" create doubt?
Replies
20
Views
2K
beernutz
beernutz
Back
Top