LET ball on court question

[wafflestomper]

Hi all,

Yesterday in a match the following occurred and we weren't sure on the correct ruling:

My partner and I were in the middle of a rally when a ball from another court rolled on to our court up near the net (near my partner's feet). He doesn't like to call LETS (I don't either), and he just kicked the ball off the court and continued on with play. Our opponents said LET and then said "that is our point because when you touched the other ball, you forfeit the point". We didn't care and gave them the point (we're out here to get exercise and do our best to win), but it didn't sound right to me. Can anyone quote the rule that would help answer this? I'm pretty sure we can kick a ball off the court without losing the point, but I don't KNOW it. Also, I know how LET is supposed to work, but it is the "touching" of the ball piece that I'm not aware of...

Thanks!

 

[tacou]

I don't think you'll find anything about it in an official rule book because a ball rolling on court is the textbook example of when to call a let, so I don't think any rule book would carry on and describe what happens if a player directly interacts with a hindrance. Any comparable rule would probably lean to your opponent's favor (a ball falling out of your pocket, for example) but that would be more of an interpretation than a hard rule for this situation.

I think it was fine for your opponents to call the LET. You were obviously in the moment so maybe it really was no big deal, but I don't think you should be kicking balls around when there are adjacent courts. A bit of trash or newspaper floating across a public court is one thing, but loose tennis balls can lead to serious injuries.

That said, I don't think they had any claim on the point, and at worst you'd treat it like the ball was yours, which would be a warning.

 

[wafflestomper]

Yup, the ball rolled in from the right and was kicked off to the left (where no one was playing). The main question for me was do I forfeit the point for touching a ball on my court? I'm completely willing to have a LET called (if it bothered them, I get it), but not sure about the loss of point...

 

[tacou]

Yup, the ball rolled in from the right and was kicked off to the left (where no one was playing). The main question for me was do I forfeit the point for touching a ball on my court? I'm completely willing to have a LET called (if it bothered them, I get it), but not sure about the loss of point...

Nope, the loss of point thing is completely made up. In fact, I think this rule is applicable:
"It is not a hindrance if a player stops playing a point because he believed his opponent is being hindered. In this case the player loses the point."

Again, I think a loose ball should be a quick let for safety, but it was on your side and never became a hindrance to them, so they should have lost the point.

 

[Beacon Hill]

Nope, the loss of point thing is completely made up. In fact, I think this rule is applicable:
"It is not a hindrance if a player stops playing a point because he believed his opponent is being hindered. In this case the player loses the point."

Again, I think a loose ball should be a quick let for safety, but it was on your side and never became a hindrance to them, so they should have lost the point.

A ball rolling onto a court is a hindrance for both teams because it's a distraction, not just something that could be hazardous.
I'm assuming this was a professional match because of where it was posted

 

[Deleted member 503267]

They said LET. replay the point. The server gets two serves and your opponents need to study the code.

 

[tacou]

A ball rolling onto a court is a hindrance for both teams because it's a distraction, not just something that could be hazardous.
I'm assuming this was a professional match because of where it was posted

Haha.

As to your point, I agree. I think it's clear what should have happened, a normal Let.
I was just saying the rule I posted seems more applicable than the one the other team completely made up.

 

[wafflestomper]

A ball rolling onto a court is a hindrance for both teams because it's a distraction, not just something that could be hazardous.
I'm assuming this was a professional match because of where it was posted

Ha. Sorry. Not really sure where to put it, but thanks for the responses. Moderators feel free to move it to a more appropriate forum...

 

[TagUrIt]

Hi all,

Yesterday in a match the following occurred and we weren't sure on the correct ruling:

My partner and I were in the middle of a rally when a ball from another court rolled on to our court up near the net (near my partner's feet). He doesn't like to call LETS (I don't either), and he just kicked the ball off the court and continued on with play. Our opponents said LET and then said "that is our point because when you touched the other ball, you forfeit the point". We didn't care and gave them the point (we're out here to get exercise and do our best to win), but it didn't sound right to me. Can anyone quote the rule that would help answer this? I'm pretty sure we can kick a ball off the court without losing the point, but I don't KNOW it. Also, I know how LET is supposed to work, but it is the "touching" of the ball piece that I'm not aware of...

Thanks!

The let should have been called as soon as the ball rolled on to the court. Your partner kicking the ball off the court during play could be considered a hindrance. In that regard, I understand what your opponents were saying. They just misquoted the rules.

In the future, regardless if your team can play through a ball rolling in the court, the best option for ALL players on the court is to call the let and replay the point. Server gets first serve.

 

[Beacon Hill]

The let should have been called as soon as the ball rolled on to the court. Your partner kicking the ball off the court during play could be considered a hindrance. In that regard, I understand what your opponents were saying. They just misquoted the rules.

In the future, regardless if your team can play through a ball rolling in the court, the best option for ALL players on the court is to call the let and replay the point. Server gets first serve.

I don't think a player trying to avoid a let needing to be called warrants that player being called for hindering his opponents. It is ridiculous the opponents would try to win a point that way. I don't know what you mean by misquoting a rule, or what rule that would be. They don't deserve the point, and have no reasonable grounds to claim it.

 

[BlueB]

It they called LET, then it should be just that - replay the point, 2 serves to the server.
If they called HINDRANCE, then you should lose the point, as you didn't call the let but produced a hindrance by kicking the ball.
However, they can not call a LET, and then change it to HINDRANCE.

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk

 

[Mr.Lob]

They said LET. replay the point. The server gets two serves and your opponents need to study the code.

Cant call "let" and then say it's your point. Point should have been played over.

I wouldn't have called a hindrance. I've kicked balls, that rolled on court, out of play before. Not like I'm playing at Wimbledon.

 

[TenS_Ace]

Hi all,

Yesterday in a match the following occurred and we weren't sure on the correct ruling:

My partner and I were in the middle of a rally when a ball from another court rolled on to our court up near the net (near my partner's feet). He doesn't like to call LETS (I don't either), and he just kicked the ball off the court and continued on with play. Our opponents said LET and then said "that is our point because when you touched the other ball, you forfeit the point". We didn't care and gave them the point (we're out here to get exercise and do our best to win), but it didn't sound right to me. Can anyone quote the rule that would help answer this? I'm pretty sure we can kick a ball off the court without losing the point, but I don't KNOW it. Also, I know how LET is supposed to work, but it is the "touching" of the ball piece that I'm not aware of...

Thanks!

Since this is the General PRO player discussion forum...why would you bother to ask this question in here? The Chair Umpire would have clarified the call or you could have questioned the Chair Umpire

 

[TagUrIt]

I don't think a player trying to avoid a let needing to be called warrants that player being called for hindering his opponents. It is ridiculous the opponents would try to win a point that way. I don't know what you mean by misquoting a rule, or what rule that would be. They don't deserve the point, and have no reasonable grounds to claim it.

They misquoted the “Hindrance” rule. They tried say it was a Let, it wasn’t. What his partner did by kicking the ball off the court could be construed as a hindrance. As I said before, from the moment the ball initially rolled on to the court a let should have been called, therefore restarting the point and awarding first serve.

Now do I agree with what the OP opponents did? Absolutely not, the fair thing to do would have been to start the point over. But everyone’s intensity level is different.

 

[Beacon Hill]

If a ball falls out of a player's pocket, and he kicks it away, I agree that is a hindrance. But if a player is trying to mitigate a distraction he did not cause, I see no way that could be construed a hindrance in this instance. Maybe if the ball rolled on the court and stopped, and all players played on for a few shots, and then he kicked it, that could be considered a hindrance, but not when he's trying to immediately get rid of a distraction. It's a good idea to call a let when a ball rolls onto the court. Personally I won't do it if it's not in a danger of causing an injury, and my opponent is just about to hit a winner.

 

[tacou]

If a ball falls out of a player's pocket, and he kicks it away, I agree that is a hindrance. But if a player is trying to mitigate a distraction he did not cause, I see no way that could be construed a hindrance in this instance. Maybe if the ball rolled on the court and stopped, and all players played on for a few shots, and then he kicked it, that could be considered a hindrance, but not when he's trying to immediately get rid of a distraction. It's a good idea to call a let when a ball rolls onto the court. Personally I won't do it if it's not in a danger of causing an injury, and my opponent is just about to hit a winner.

Yeah I mean I doubt many TT posters are playing for $$ and ranking points, so if you feel a point is about to end and no one is in danger, all good.
Maybe it's just because I've seen TWO players in person (and didn't it happen to Tommy Haas before a Wimbledon match with Fed?) break their ankles stepping on loose balls, but it's needlessly risky and easier to simply call a let in my eyes.

But as I've said in this thread, OP's opponents were flat out wrong.

 

[Max G.]

It’s definitely a let. It’s definitely not a hindrance.

 

[R1FF]

They said LET. replay the point. The server gets two serves and your opponents need to study the code.

My understanding is a LET means the point is always played over?

What a joke they are for taking the point. They literally just made that up. Not to mention the fact that the act of kicking the ball off was way more a distraction to the OP than his opponent. I've done this MANY times and my opponents (as weird as they've been) have never taken issue with it.

This sport sometimes man. smh

 

[McLovin]

Technically speaking, depending on the time between it rolling onto your court and your partner kicking it out of the way, your opponents may not have even been allowed to call a let since they have to do so within a 'reasonable amount of time'.
From The Code:

18. Let called when ball rolls on court. When a ball from another court enters the playing area, any player on the court affected may call a let as soon as the player becomes aware of the ball. The player loses the right to call a let if the player unreasonably delays in making the call.

Our opponents said LET and then said "that is our point because when you touched the other ball, you forfeit the point".

Somewhat related, although not widely known, is that if the ball in play had landed on the ball that had rolled into your court, play would continue provided it was clear you were still playing the correct ball. If it was not clear, you would play a let:

http://itf.uberflip.com/i/623773-rules-of-tennis/13? (See '25: A Good Return -> Case 2')​

​

Obviously, this is assuming no one called a let the moment the ball rolled onto the court.