Jack Sock foot fault
- Thread starter sureshs
- Start date
Rock Strongo
Legend
If you're bothered by that, watch Edberg. He foot-faulted more than anyone and got away with it.
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
brings back memories....
NonP
Legend
I remember watching that live. Mac was pretty upset about the call and in the heat of the moment I actually agreed with him (it didn't help that I was still something of a Safin fanboy), but it soon became evident that the officials got it right. So Marat was being Marat as usual.
Mainad
Bionic Poster
Ivo Karlovic famously got foot-faulted ELEVEN times in a single match (2nd round against Murray at 2012 Wimbledon). He was not amused!
No. A racket which goes over the net is considered to be a lost point as it crossed the imaginary plane.
The front leg of the server (rightie on ad court) also cannot cross the imaginary plane of the center line (though his body can).
The word "imaginary" appears in the rules. It does not matter if it invisible.
As far as I am concerned, Sock does not play tennis. He plays some other game with a different set of rules.
But what is appalling is how no coach has corrected him, and neither have all the USTA officers who are supposed to be in charge of developing talent.
Mr.Lob
G.O.A.T.
Far center line judge would need to make that call. Difficult to see with net in the way. A player gains an advantage by crossing over the net with their raquet. No advantage by being on the invisible line... more of a disadvantage.
This "foot fault" over the invisible line seems primary for people who like to beeotch about things. A non-issue, and should stay that way... ohhh Grand Poobah.
Far center line judge would need to make that call. Difficult to see with net in the way. A player gains an advantage by crossing over the net with their raquet. No advantage by being on the invisible line... more of a disadvantage.
This "foot fault" over the invisible line seems primary for people who like to beeotch about things. A non-issue, and should stay that way... ohhh Grand Poobah.
The commentator said he has seen it being called. It was obvious on TV. Once he mentioned it, I could not stop noticing it.
If Jack Sock beat me in a match, I would never accept the result and will file a grievance with the ATP.
stringertom
Bionic Poster
We members of IBS (International Brotherhood of Sureshsianism) are confident you'll take him out in two without any foot fault calls.
You don't get to decide if it is pointless or not, or whether it provided any advantage or not. That is how rules work.
And actually it does disadvantage the server because he must satisfy one more rule. So those who foot fault are cheating by not being constrained by it. Tennis is a game of constrained activity and that is why Hawk Eye is used. Otherwise an inch out is pointless to call in the grand scheme of the Universe.
As I said before, it is OK, as long as the feet don't cross over. From the ad court, you can sway to the right (rightie server) into the deuce court and serve with the body at an angle of 45 degrees, if you can, and toss the ball well into the deuce court.
I like Sock's game, but that bothers me-as does the lines judges constantly not calling it. If I were the coach of his next opponent, I would make the ump aware of it before the match started, kinda like the Colts did to the league against the cheating Patriots in the AFC championship game. Didn't do THEM any good in that game, of course, but it led to Deflategate, and doing so here would probably mess with Sock's head.
Exactly, I used to play a tall player who foot faulted by stepping over the line into the court-so much so, I could see it while returning serve, obviously, and he used to complain, "What difference does a few inches make?" Oh, only potentially the difference between an ace, out wide where the net is higher, and hitting the net-and, suggesting that one should be able to simply ignore rules that one doesn't agree with is stupid and self serving(like a certain player who suggested that paying for his coach to come, and attend matches, but say nothing was "stupid.")
RalphJ
Banned
Exactly the point I have always made about FFs. When they think about it, it will mess them up. That is why the rule must be followed. The assumption that Sock will be the same person if he moves over a little is wrong. A lifetime of grooved serves will come undone. And his temper will flare as he will perceive himself as the victim, further causing a downward spiral.
His future opponents should read this thread and plan some action. What will be difficult is to convince the umpire that he can see the FF from the other side. For that, he should plant a friend in the box who audibly tells him about the FF, and then creates a commotion. This will force a showdown. The guy will be evicted, but now the crowd and the umpires will be watching, and Sock will collapse. It will come up in the press conference too. That is how players got Nadal and Djokovic to speed up - by embarrassing them.
You will get it one day. Keep reading. Others have already got it. You need to catch up with them.
EnigmaticPragmatic
Rookie
the cheating Patriots, huh? you must be one of those people that reads ESPN headlines and accepts them for the truth. get your facts straight before you make an analogy. Read: only 1 of the balls was deflated and had nothing to do with the outcome of the game because the Colts got smoked. but no, the Patriots are cheaters even though an actual statistician said the difference between both teams' footballs was insignificant. I get what you are trying to say but you chose a terribly flawed (false) analogy to make your point. sad.
First of all, the following studies show that a) the Patriots avoid fumbling to an unnatural degree, for a long period of time and starting from a very significant period and b) you haven't the faintest idea what you're talking about. Furthermore, what happened in the game between the Patriots and the Colts is absolutely irrelevant, first of all, when one significant detail changes, EVERYTHING can change, and secondly, I can drive home the point with the following example: Alex Rodriguez was suspended all of last season(interestingly, he wasn't actual caught doing PED, but because of a paper trail, and is doing unbelievably well as he approaches 40, but, that's another story for another time). Let's say on opening day this season, he comes up in the 9th inning with the Yanks up 15-0 and gets a hit. As he does so, his bat explodes, the ump examines the shattered bat and informs him that it is filled with cork, which is EXACTLY what happened with another long time cheater who will never get into the Hall of Fame, Sammy Sosa. He, of course, is ejected, but how do you think he would be received if he said the following: "C'mon, ump, you caught me cheating before(like the Patriots), you caught me cheating now(like the Patriots), but this is a different offense(like the Patriots), and besides, we're WAY ahead(like the Patriots), so, lemme slide on this one, ok?" I'll give you a hint: not well.
People who think that rules should be enforced based on how they perceive the affect of the transgression on the game a) don't know much about sports and b) likely don't have much integrity.
http://www.sharpfootballanalysis.co...iots-mysteriously-became-fumble-proof-in-2007
Last edited:
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
The center imaginary line foot fault is nothing like stepping over the line like you just referenced. Stepping over the line actually does give a big advantage to the server and is understandably upsetting if someone did that.
Suresh I can see your point about the rule needing to be followed equally but like I said it gives no advantage to the server to be so close to the notch. If anything it hurts them. I love playing guys that stand a foot or two from the notch on the deuce court because unless they're 7 feet tall they have no angle to work with hitting out wide. It's extremely predictable that they are planning to hit down the T most of the time. I remember when Safin moved so close to the center later in his career and thats what he did, hit down the T almost always on the deuce court.
Murrayjuannow
Banned
Every ATP pro player must sit a tennis rule test and score 100% in order to be eligible to play in the tour.
That is for umpires. Every ATP player need not know what to do in every corner-case situation. But every player must know the rules for regular shots.
RalphJ
Banned
Haha, again Captain Obvious.
Captain Ron
Professional
Great username "Captain Obvious" is it available?
If stepping over imaginary center line does nothing to improve the serve - why wouldn't Sock just start his serve further from the center of the court so he never crosses that imaginary line? I mean - it makes no difference, so why doesn't he do it just so he does break the rules? Seems simple enough. And if stepping over few inches is 'not a big deal' - when would it be a big deal? A yard? two yards? Or perhaps a server could be allowed to serve from anywhere as long as he is behind the baseline?
these arguments always come up in sports. There are many rules that in a any given moment do not seem to benefit the player yet he is penalized for doing it: touching the net in basketball when a shot is not going to get in anyway, holding in football on another side where the ball is - that has no affect on the play, accidentally signing the wrong card in golf - has no affect on the score as it could be easily corrected, crossing the center line after a block in volleyball .
the point is that the line has to be drawn somewhere, and once it is decided in the rules where that line is it needs to be enforced. So there's no 'interpretation' anymore. Because you would always have arguments 'this does not affect the play but that does, but I think otherwise,etc, etc'
Moose Malloy
G.O.A.T.
^maybe cause he's never been called on it? I can only recall it being called a few times - once vs Taylor dent, safin and muller. It seems to be more likely called at majors, dc doesn't have the same amount of linesman
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
I'm sure many/most of the players on tour know it's not being called regularly by the umpires. Does this mean anarchy has broken out because it's not being called? Are players serving from 26' into the stands? Are they riding out on elephants or monster trucks and hitting aces? Are they serving into the deuce court from 10' into the ad court? No they're not, and not calling players on the center notch version foot fault isn't going to matter in any way, ever.
BTW have you ever tried serving from so close to the notch on the deuce side that you might foot fault with your back foot? It's not helpful for anything but going down the T. That's why most players serve from about 3 to 4' from the notch on the deuce side.
Beacon Hill
Hall of Fame
So it's only helpful about half the time for many servers.
So you are arguing that this particular rule is useless and should be removed from the rules of the game? Fine with me. But till that time there's no reason not to follow it, or be surprised when a player is penalized from breaking that rule.
now I'm confused. So you are saying that stepping over the center mark may be beneficial to the player after all?? So the rule does make sense as it prevents some players from taking advantage? If so - why shouldn't a player be penalized from braking that rule.
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
^^To both Beacon Hill & jmnk…I'd argue that foot faulting in this way is not helpful at all to the server. As a returner you can see easily that he/she is standing super close to the notch and therefore will have a greater difficulty serving out wide on the deuce court. A smart returner will be looking for the down the T serve a little more then, thus nullifying any advantage they have serving down the T. That's why you rarely see players stand out by the doubles alley to serve out wide, they telegraph their serve and also make it harder to serve down the T. The only time it might be helpful to the server is if a returner is so dumb that they see someone serving from a foot to the right of the notch on deuce and don't make a note to look for the down the T serve, and in that case they deserve to lose anyway IMO.
simple question - do you think that rule should be removed, period?
Rattler
Hall of Fame
You know, for it to be a foot fault, the part of the foot actually has to touch the court, going over with your heal not touching the court isn't a foot fault....but thanks Jim Courier, for misinterpreting the rule for the tennis nation....bravo.
And the lines people in DC are the very lines people that will be in NYC....plenty of them through the Finals
Where is Woodrow?
And the lines people in DC are the very lines people that will be in NYC....plenty of them through the Finals
Where is Woodrow?
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
ok, so for example, it would be perfectly fine if a left handed player served into the deuce side all the way from the left sideline so he can spin it into the court and therefore wide from right handed receiver's backhand? Or you are saying that maybe they should also remove the rule that states that you need to serve from within imaginary extensions of the sidelines? So one could serve all the way from the side fence for a greater angle?
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
Lol...you are getting way carried away. I'm just saying that someones back foot crossing the imaginary notch line is ok and no big deal. The front foot always needs to stay on the correct side of the notch.
well, I'm not getting carried away. I've asked you if you are fine with removing that rule, you said yes, and you seem to realize that perhaps it is not such a great idea? That's cool. That's how you find out why the rules exist - so folks cannot get carried away with ideas.
Shaolin
G.O.A.T.
Look, I was talking about exactly what Sock and Safin have been doing. ONE foot breaking the imaginary line, not both. You are the one who went all crazy with the interpretation. I've never seen a single player in 25 years of playing tennis try to break the plane with both feet.
Last edited:
