Mid-Atlantic players...Verbal hinderance rule will cost you the point

ksteph

New User
First, don't shot the messenger.

While playing blocktime (social tennis) last night, I yelled to my partner to watch out for an overhead. She (who attended the captains meeting) proceeded to tell me that we can't yell out anything while the ball is on the opponents side, due to the fact that the verbal hinderance rule will be enforced this spring/summer season, which could result in a loss of point.

(i.e. the Serena Williams USO incident last year)

I'm not sure if it will be enforced throughout the entire Mid-Atlantic section. But I do know it will be used in Howard County.

Can you imagine the gamesmanship that will take place this season????

All I can say is....this will be one very, very, drama filled season. Ugh!

Again, don't shot the messenger.

Hi Cindy! *waves* :)
 

pennc94

Professional
Thanks for the notice, but who do you think will actually use that rule? Foot faulting is a rule that most people break, but nobody calls. What kind of diva league do you play where people will call out hindrances (doubles teams communicating with each other)?
 

AtomicForehand

Hall of Fame
I've been hindered a couple of times by opponents shouting, and seen my mixed dubs partner muff putaways due to being startled by the opponents' shouting as he's mid-swing.

I played an ALTA match last week where *I* was the one going for the putaway. One of the opponents shouted to her partner "Watch out!" (duh) as I was about to smash. (Like her partner is too slow to process what's going on herself?) Luckily I completed the putaway successfully, but I did mention to the opponent in a friendly manner that she was not allowed to do this. She retorted that she was indeed allowed to warn her partner, and I had to explain that she could not talk when the ball was on our side, citing the Serena/Sam incident. As it happened she had seen the US Open and subsided, but sulkily. I really don't know why she took such a 'tude. We won the point anyway and I was just informing her for *next time* that a hindrance could be cited and the point claimed. You would think people would be glad to learn the rules without actually being penalized for not knowing them.

At least I would.

But then I try to know the rules in the first place. It's amazing how many people are ignorant of them.

This same woman, when we won the racquet spin and chose to receive, told us we couldn't--we could only choose the side we wanted or choose to serve. And how long have you been playing tennis???? [boggle]
 

ksteph

New User
Thanks for the notice, but who do you think will actually use that rule? Foot faulting is a rule that most people break, but nobody calls. What kind of diva league do you play where people will call out hindrances (doubles teams communicating with each other)?

I play all over and Howard County is planning on using the rule. Not everyone knows about this, but if you play in Maryland, don't be surprised if your opponent tries to take the point due to you communicating with your partner (if the ball is on your opponents side).
 

NoQuarter

Rookie
Did you yell to your partner because you were behind her on the baseline and put up a weak lob? If you let your partner know right away then the ball was more likely to be on your side during the warning and no rule violation.
 

kevten

New User
I play all over and Howard County is planning on using the rule. Not everyone knows about this, but if you play in Maryland, don't be surprised if your opponent tries to take the point due to you communicating with your partner (if the ball is on your opponents side).
Is the rule you cannot speak "if the ball is on your opponents side" or "after you hit the ball and before your opponent hits the ball"?
 

JLyon

Hall of Fame
the intent of the rule is more geared towards a player who celebrates (bullies) an opponent on a perceived winning shot, where the player still has a play on the ball.
Communication by a doubles team gets a little dicey but if it is not intentional distraction, would have a hard time accepting someone being hindered by doubles partner trying to save partner from getting creamed.
 

gmatheis

Hall of Fame
Hasn't this always been the rule ??

Most pros are just smart enough not to break it .... Serena is a big baby.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
Rule should be enforced. There was a guy I played doubles with who used to shout "short" to me if one of the opponents was approaching the net and it looked like he might try a drop shot. It was clearly a hindrance and I didn't like it either.
 

spot

Hall of Fame
ksteph- that has always been the rule and people have always been allowed to call it. Its always been against the rules to yell "SHORT!" after hitting a weak lob but people still do it all the time and hindrance doesn't get called except in exceptional circumstances.

One thing to note is if they were to put the overhead into the net they could not then call hindrance. This takes the major part of the sting out of the rule because in my experience the only time someone wants to call it is after they miss an easy shot and want to deflect blame.

Personally I couldn't ever see myself calling hindrance as long as the opponents were legitimately trying to communicate with each other and not just yelling to distract me.
 

ksteph

New User
ksteph- that has always been the rule and people have always been allowed to call it. Its always been against the rules to yell "SHORT!" after hitting a weak lob but people still do it all the time and hindrance doesn't get called except in exceptional circumstances.

One thing to note is if they were to put the overhead into the net they could not then call hindrance. This takes the major part of the sting out of the rule because in my experience the only time someone wants to call it is after they miss an easy shot and want to deflect blame.

Personally I couldn't ever see myself calling hindrance as long as the opponents were legitimately trying to communicate with each other and not just yelling to distract me.

Spot,

You are right. This is not a new rule, but for some reason, USTA has allowed it to be enforced, without giving specifics. So you know whats going to happen.....Some one is going to hit a lob, the opponent gets in position to hit it and misses. If there was a noise of some sort, the person will blame the miss on the so called noise.
 

ksteph

New User
Did you yell to your partner because you were behind her on the baseline and put up a weak lob? If you let your partner know right away then the ball was more likely to be on your side during the warning and no rule violation.

Good point.
 

spot

Hall of Fame
Some one is going to hit a lob, the opponent gets in position to hit it and misses. If there was a noise of some sort, the person will blame the miss on the so called noise.

You cannot call a hindrance in that situation.
 

JLyon

Hall of Fame
you have to call the hindrance prior to playing your shot, if you proceed to play and miss your shot and then plead, it is too late.
 

OrangePower

Legend
I play all over and Howard County is planning on using the rule. Not everyone knows about this, but if you play in Maryland, don't be surprised if your opponent tries to take the point due to you communicating with your partner (if the ball is on your opponents side).

No problem. All you need to do is agree on a communication 'code' with your partner, using grunts. For example, if you want to warn your partner that your lob is short, extend your exhalation into a Sharapova screech. The Azarenka shriek can be used to communicate that you're following your shot into net. And so on.

Since really annoying grunting is unfortunately perfectly legal, you might as well use it to your advantage...
 

dizzlmcwizzl

Hall of Fame
Spot,

You are right. This is not a new rule, but for some reason, USTA has allowed it to be enforced, without giving specifics. So you know whats going to happen.....Some one is going to hit a lob, the opponent gets in position to hit it and misses. If there was a noise of some sort, the person will blame the miss on the so called noise.


The USTA has certainly not ever denied its application either. I called this in a match last year without challenge. It has been a rule for a long, long time ...
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Hi, Ksteph!

Hey, we're gonna be teammates again this spring. Shall we team up;

I'm on my droid, so I can't quote the rule. But I thought the code prevented talking while the ball was on its way to the opponent. I thought there was no requirement that it be on opponent's side.

I would love to be able to tell my partner "Lob!" as soon as our opponent opens her racket face, but it would be a hindrance.
 

NoQuarter

Rookie
I just read the code and it does state that doubles partners are only allowed to talk when the ball is moving toward them. When it is moving away from them they are not allowed to talk.

I guess that I am going to have to anticipate that I am going to put up a weak sitter and tell my partner before I hit it!!!
 

Taxvictim

Semi-Pro
The Code says:

33. Talking during a point. A player shall not talk while the ball is moving toward the opponent’s side of the court. If the player’s talking interferes with an opponent’s ability to play the ball, the player loses the point. Consider the situation where a player hits a weak lob and loudly yells at his or her partner to get back. If the shout is loud enough to distract an opponent, then the opponent may claim the point based on a deliberate hindrance. If the opponent chooses to hit the lob and misses it, the opponent loses the point because the opponent did not make a timely claim of hindrance.


I remember from past Court of Appeals columns that talking will not cost you the point unless it actually hindered the other side. The opponents must stop play before attempting to hit the ball.

One of my old WTT teammates would screech "SWITCH" after returning a lob behind her partner. Her scream echoed all over the indoor court. The other team finally claimed a hindrance and we gave it to them without protest, hoping to teach our teammate a lesson.
 
Last edited:

JLyon

Hall of Fame
Mardy Fish just had this called on him yesterday at BNP Paribas. Hardly playable ball, didn't matter - lost the point.

It was playable Ebden got the ball before it bounced twice, does not matter what happens once he gets it, Fish counted his eggs before they all hatched.
 

ksteph

New User
Hi, Ksteph!

Hey, we're gonna be teammates again this spring. Shall we team up;

I'm on my droid, so I can't quote the rule. But I thought the code prevented talking while the ball was on its way to the opponent. I thought there was no requirement that it be on opponent's side.

I would love to be able to tell my partner "Lob!" as soon as our opponent opens her racket face, but it would be a hindrance.

We are?!?!?!?! Yippee!!
 

ksteph

New User
This is reason why I brought this up.

True, this rule has around a long, long time. But nobody has really made it an issue. It seems that the USTA told the League Coordinator to mention that a point would be lost if someone calls a verbal hinderance.

I can see someone trying to use this to there advantage.
 

ksteph

New User
I just read the code and it does state that doubles partners are only allowed to talk when the ball is moving toward them. When it is moving away from them they are not allowed to talk.

I guess that I am going to have to anticipate that I am going to put up a weak sitter and tell my partner before I hit it!!!

My point exactly!
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
This is reason why I brought this up.

True, this rule has around a long, long time. But nobody has really made it an issue. It seems that the USTA told the League Coordinator to mention that a point would be lost if someone calls a verbal hinderance.

I can see someone trying to use this to there advantage.

Even if the league coordinator is hard over on enforcing this rule, it won't affect league matches because they are unofficiated.

What I wonder about is this.

Our league matches are indoors, and the bubbles are loud. It is common for me to hear a shout or even a line call coming from another court and think it came from my court. This hasn't been a problem because I keep playing until I am sure who made the call.

What if I am lining up an overhead and I hear talking that I believe is coming from my opponents, I catch the ball and claim hindrance, and my opponents then deny that they said anything? The Code doesn't say who gets to decide whether my opponents said anything (as opposed to the Code's clarity on who gets to call things like double bounces).

I think it would be risky to catch a ball and claim hindrance. I've never done it, nor have I ever felt hindered by talking of my opponents'.
 

Angle Queen

Professional
I think it would be risky to catch a ball and claim hindrance. I've never done it, nor have I ever felt hindered by talking of my opponents'.
This. I can't ever remember having my/our opponents say anything during a point that truly hindered me, regardless of whose side of the net the ball was on or which direction it was headed in.

I hope to attend our captain's meeting on Friday. It'll be interesting if this issue is brought up (I'm also in the MAS).

But I find it all a bit hypocritical. You can grunt or shriek all you want...but you can't warn your net partner, that you, the baseline player have put up a weak sitter. :-?
 

ksteph

New User
This. I can't ever remember having my/our opponents say anything during a point that truly hindered me, regardless of whose side of the net the ball was on or which direction it was headed in.

I hope to attend our captain's meeting on Friday. It'll be interesting if this issue is brought up (I'm also in the MAS).

But I find it all a bit hypocritical. You can grunt or shriek all you want...but you can't warn your net partner, that you, the baseline player have put up a weak sitter. :-?

Exactly. The matches won't be officiated but it will be left up to the player to decide. The only time I call hinderance is when I hear someone's cellphone ringing, and then I just warn the person.

I will have to ask the league referee about this issue.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
AQ,

To me, the hindrance rule is like the FF rule. Yeah, go ahead and be a stickler if you want. It might come back to haunt you when you make some grunt or exclamation when you hit the ball. Or it might just sour an otherwise pleasant match.

I think I wouldn't wind up taking a point due to hindrance unless the person said some thing clearly designed to make me miss, like "DON'T MISS!!!"
 

jaybear1909

Rookie
Eh, I seldom play with a guy that will hit a crappy shot and scream "Careful careful". And when the opponents proceed to pound it down my throat he's mad that I wasn't "careful".

It had nothing to do with hindrance, I know, but it almost did :p.
 

Angle Queen

Professional
This very item came up in our match yesterday. I was that baseline player who put up the weak sitting lob and said (because it certainly wasn't yelled)..."short."

Our opponent went to take the overhead and somewhere in her swing, she shrieked "she can't say that." But she attempted the OH and, you guessed it, she missed. Then she wanted to complain that'd I'd said something.

Luckily, her partner, who also happens to be their team captain asked her..."do you really think it made a difference?" And, much to their collective credit, they admitted that it didn't/hadn't.

I probably should have offered them the point anyway. But I didn't. I feel like a heel because I know what the technical rule is and I know I'm not supposed to do it...it's just never, ever enforced or been an issue before and there's always some kind of chatter on the courts. And my personally approach to it --if it's my opponents saying "watch out" or "it's short" -- and their net person turns their back, almost as a concession of the point, I'll not take a good whack at the ball...but rather concentrate on placing it away from either opponent.

I'll, instead, concentrate even harder next match...not to put up such weak lobs in the first place :p and if I do...to keep my mouth shut and hope my partner has figured it out too.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Don't be so hard on yourself!

They weren't hindered. She took the shot. No harm, no foul.

Now, I did claim the point for hindrance once. My opponent threw up a lob over my tall mixed partner at net. I took off for the ball. While I was running, I heard all this whooping and hollering as she celebrated her soon-to-be winner. I caught the ball and claimed hindrance.

My opponent understood the rule and didn't dispute my taking the point.

And she thereafter confined her celebrations until after the point was over.
 

sam_p

Professional
Had a recent twist on this in a 4.5 USTA match. Opponent says to us between points - "If you guys talk during the point again I'm going to call a let..."

We had no idea what he was talking about, because we didn't say anything! It is an indoor facility and there is noise from the viewing balcony, so maybe that was it. OK, whatever, move on.

Then later in the set my partner put up a short lob, said "BACK" and the guy put the overhead away. I jokingly told him I wanted a let because my partner talked.

After the match I got email from the opponent's partner apologizing that his partner was such a dick.
 

Vilgan

New User
I wasn't aware of this rule. Cool to be aware of it :) I can't think of any instance I've encountered thus far that it would be relevant but it could potentially be nice against someone who was intentionally trying to mess up a shot. Calling it because someone yells short to save their partner some potential pain seems like an ****** move tho.
 

OrangePower

Legend
I've never thought of calling a verbal hindrance against opponents, even though there have been situations where I think technically I could have.

Earlier today for example I was playing a match; opponent hit a ball he thought was going to go long, and as the ball was in flight towards me he yelled "gah!" in frustration (or something; at least that's what I heard it as). But the ball landed in, I played it, and the point continued. By the rule I think I could have claimed the point there and then, but that just seems against the spirit of the game to me. Plus I think as a player you have to be able to block out outside noises etc and not use that as an excuse.
 

TimothyO

Hall of Fame
Did you yell to your partner because you were behind her on the baseline and put up a weak lob? If you let your partner know right away then the ball was more likely to be on your side during the warning and no rule violation.

The rule is that you can't speak while the ball is heading towards your opponent whether it's on your side of the court or the opponent's.

So if you put up a weak lob and immediately yell "Short", even if the ball is still on your side of the court the opponent may claim a hindrance prior to striking the ball themselves.

Once they strike the ball and fail they don't get a "second bite at the apple".

I see this constantly in ALTA doubles but have never seen it called.

I've also seen ALTA players reach over the net and make contact with the ball on the opposing side of the net but that wasn't called either.

And yesterday during a men's playoff match I saw the most egregious foot faulting by one fellow that was never called. He literally stepped into the court like a pitcher or QB and made contact with the ball with his left foot squarely planted deep inside the court.
 

Clintspin

Professional
This is a rule that like many tennis rules is left to interpretation. Who decides if the "shout is loud enough to distract the opponent"? Doubles player should communicate quietly and often. I can't say I have ever been distracted by the quiet or less than quiet communication of my opponents. This rule means the second the ball comes off your strings you must be silent until it comes off your opponents strings. The rule is not new to me but it has always seemed like something left over from the very early days of aristocratic tennis.
 

Cindysphinx

G.O.A.T.
Ooooh, I had another hindrance issue yesterday.

We had an early lead but squandered it and lost the first set. Opponent started getting fired up and cheering their winners. This started getting under my partner's skin. Me, I don't care if my opponents light fireworks after their winners, but my partner didn't like the celebrating.

Toward the end of a long point, their net player hit a volley into our alley, and my partner starting running it down. As she was running, I heard the baseliner shout, "YES!" My partner tipped the ball.

I walked to the net and told the baseliner it's not cool to cheer shots mid-point. She understood the rule and apologized, and she toned down her celebrations. I didn't argue that my partner was hindered because I figured it was my partner's call to make, and I guess she didn't feel hindered.

I don't mind people who make sounds because they don't like their shot, or people who communicate with their partners. I don't mind grunts.

Mid-point celebrations are obnoxious in the extreme, so hindrance calls are warranted IMHO.
 

storypeddler

Semi-Pro
the intent of the rule is more geared towards a player who celebrates (bullies) an opponent on a perceived winning shot, where the player still has a play on the ball.
Communication by a doubles team gets a little dicey but if it is not intentional distraction, would have a hard time accepting someone being hindered by doubles partner trying to save partner from getting creamed.

There are lots of things that go on in league play and in club matches that are not according to the rules. By the rule, you can't scream at your opponent to duck just as I'm about to hit my overhead simply because you don't want her to get hit. I don't want to hit her either, but you don't have the right to distract me as I'm swinging to warn her. Geez, if you are on the court playing, you should already know that any live ball could conceivably be hit at or near you. I don't EVER go headhunting either, but the fact remains that if I have to choose between hitting you and missing my shot to avoid you, you have no right to go ballistic if you get hit. If you are on the court, you are in play. I'm not defending the practice of trying to hit players. I'm saying that over the years I have seen a lot of players who want to have it both ways. They want to stand in and be ready to play the ball back, but they want to put the burden on me not to hit them. That's crap. If you turn away or move out of the play, I will simply hit a casual point-ending shot and move on. But if you are potentially in place to return my shot and you refuse to concede the point, I am not going to miss just to avoid hitting you. I've seen players do this very thing just as gamesmanship, and it is tantamount to cheating. If you screamed at your partner just as I am swinging and I missed the shot, I would absolutely claim the point based on the hindrance rule. Fair is fair.
 

storypeddler

Semi-Pro
I just read the code and it does state that doubles partners are only allowed to talk when the ball is moving toward them. When it is moving away from them they are not allowed to talk.

I guess that I am going to have to anticipate that I am going to put up a weak sitter and tell my partner before I hit it!!!

No, it is up to your partner to have his/her head in the game, recognize the lob is short, and step out of play or turn aside. Geez, if you're on the court playing, you kinda need to be aware what is happening during play!
 

storypeddler

Semi-Pro
This very item came up in our match yesterday. I was that baseline player who put up the weak sitting lob and said (because it certainly wasn't yelled)..."short."

Our opponent went to take the overhead and somewhere in her swing, she shrieked "she can't say that." But she attempted the OH and, you guessed it, she missed. Then she wanted to complain that'd I'd said something.

Luckily, her partner, who also happens to be their team captain asked her..."do you really think it made a difference?" And, much to their collective credit, they admitted that it didn't/hadn't.

I probably should have offered them the point anyway. But I didn't. I feel like a heel because I know what the technical rule is and I know I'm not supposed to do it...it's just never, ever enforced or been an issue before and there's always some kind of chatter on the courts. And my personally approach to it --if it's my opponents saying "watch out" or "it's short" -- and their net person turns their back, almost as a concession of the point, I'll not take a good whack at the ball...but rather concentrate on placing it away from either opponent.

I'll, instead, concentrate even harder next match...not to put up such weak lobs in the first place :p and if I do...to keep my mouth shut and hope my partner has figured it out too.

On a couple occasions I have seen players continue a point multiple strokes after a ball has rolled onto their court, and nothing is said. Then one player hits a drop shot the opponent can't get to without stepping on the offending ball, and the opponent wants to call a let. Same principle. Call the let if you want to initiaqlly, but you can't have it both ways. You can't keep playing when you are in control of the point and then use the let as a bail-out once you lose the advantage. If I hit a crappy lob and really fear my partner may get pounded by an overhead, I will yell and warn him, but if my opponent was making a shot and claims a hindrance, I will freely grant it to him as well. The rule is the rule.
 

storypeddler

Semi-Pro
This is a rule that like many tennis rules is left to interpretation. Who decides if the "shout is loud enough to distract the opponent"? Doubles player should communicate quietly and often. I can't say I have ever been distracted by the quiet or less than quiet communication of my opponents. This rule means the second the ball comes off your strings you must be silent until it comes off your opponents strings. The rule is not new to me but it has always seemed like something left over from the very early days of aristocratic tennis.

I think the problem is those players who put up a pitiful duck right at the net and fear their partners are about to eat an overhead, so they let out some awful warning scream. Yell if you need to, but be ready to concede the point on the hindrance rule as well.
 

SB

Rookie
This. I can't ever remember having my/our opponents say anything during a point that truly hindered me, regardless of whose side of the net the ball was on or which direction it was headed in.
...

I had it happen last year, when the opposing returner on the ad side consistently would "warn" her partner when she hit a weak-ish return. (Not a lob, which wouldn't have bothered me: imo, yelling "short" after a bad lob is so common that it is virtually accepted now.)

But the rhythm of this was different, and it bothered me. I serve, approach net; she hits ball as I'm approaching net, and if it wasn't a screamer of a return, she would say something to her partner (who was about to get a volley hit at her b/c the return wasn't low). I can't remember what she said, but the timing was right as I was volleying the ball, and it was definitely annoying.

I finally said something to her, although I never claimed a hindrance. I said I would start it if she didn't stop, though. She replied that it was ok if the ball was on her side of the court, etc, and I had to explain that no, that's not right, and I really didn't want to have that discussion in the middle of a match ...

Anyway, once she realized what she was doing, it had been such a habit that it messed up her return game as well. I felt kind of bad, but it really WAS hindering me.
 

Jack the Hack

Hall of Fame
The Code says:

33. Talking during a point. A player shall not talk while the ball is moving toward the opponent’s side of the court. If the player’s talking interferes with an opponent’s ability to play the ball, the player loses the point. Consider the situation where a player hits a weak lob and loudly yells at his or her partner to get back. If the shout is loud enough to distract an opponent, then the opponent may claim the point based on a deliberate hindrance. If the opponent chooses to hit the lob and misses it, the opponent loses the point because the opponent did not make a timely claim of hindrance.


I remember from past Court of Appeals columns that talking will not cost you the point unless it actually hindered the other side. The opponents must stop play before attempting to hit the ball.

Unless the Mid Atlantic league has spelled out a rule that is contrary to what the Code says, the text and spirit of the infraction is listed in the quote above. Unfortunately, even the roving, certified USTA officials don't always know how this is supposed to be enforced.

In our local league final last month (in the Pacific Northwest section), the teams were tied up at 2-2, and my partner and I were serving a set up, 5-5 in the second, and 15-all. Our opponents hit a good return, and my partner threw up a weaker lob. At that point, he apparently yelled to me "get back" (which I didn't even hear because I was moving to the spot where I thought our opponent would hit the overhead in order to have a chance of blocking it back). Our opponent moved forward and tried to crush the ball at me, but he ended up hitting it wide by about 5 feet. At that point, he claimed a hinderance saying that he thought my partner had called the return out ("back"), causing him to hesitate. I certainly didn't see any hesitation or hinderance, rather just overhitting on the overhead right in my direction. Unfortunately, the roving umpire who was stationed at the net on our court because we were the final match, agreed with the opponents and said it was their call as to whether they felt hindered. Furthermore, the official claimed that I was the one who had said "get back" which wasn't true. I was pretty incensed and walked over to my bag to get a copy of the Code out, because I was sure that the opponents had to call the hinderance before trying to hit the overhead. After all, it made the score 15-30 instead of 30-15. However, my partner just ran over and pulled me back, saying it was OK. He proceeded to hit 3 fantastic 1st serves in a row, and I put away the volleys to close that game out. We then broke their serves to win the match, so everything turned out alright.

I'm very familiar with this rule because in a different league match, with no roving umpires, our opponents claimed a hinderance on a match point when they missed a volley. In that instance, they were serving to us with the score 9-8 in our favor in a 3rd set super-breaker, and their guy hit a huge first serve. I blocked the return back up the middle, and his partner poached across, but missed the volley wide. Right after he saw that he had missed, he claimed a hinderance. I had no idea what he was talking about, but he said he heard my partner say something. My partner admitted that he had grunted when I hit my return, because he had initially thought the serve was going out... and started to call it, but it hit the line. This didn't seem right because I was sure that if our opponent hadn't missed the volley, he wouldn't have been claiming this so called hinderance... it just seemed like an excuse so that they didn't lose the match. Anyway, I didn't have a copy of the Code in my bag that night, and we ended up playing a let... and they ended up coming back and winning. Therefore, after reading the rule and realizing that the hinderance call is BS if the opponent chooses to proceed with hitting the ball, I decided I wouldn't get burned by this again...
 

spot

Hall of Fame
I'm very familiar with this rule because in a different league match, with no roving umpires, our opponents claimed a hinderance on a match point when they missed a volley. In that instance, they were serving to us with the score 9-8 in our favor in a 3rd set super-breaker, and their guy hit a huge first serve. I blocked the return back up the middle, and his partner poached across, but missed the volley wide. Right after he saw that he had missed, he claimed a hinderance. I had no idea what he was talking about, but he said he heard my partner say something. My partner admitted that he had grunted when I hit my return, because he had initially thought the serve was going out... and started to call it, but it hit the line. This didn't seem right because I was sure that if our opponent hadn't missed the volley, he wouldn't have been claiming this so called hinderance... it just seemed like an excuse so that they didn't lose the match. Anyway, I didn't have a copy of the Code in my bag that night, and we ended up playing a let... and they ended up coming back and winning. Therefore, after reading the rule and realizing that the hinderance call is BS if the opponent chooses to proceed with hitting the ball, I decided I wouldn't get burned by this again...

In that situation where your partner admitted that he started to call the ball long then I think playing the point over is certainly warranted. Honestly your opponents would have a very good case to claim the point themselves when your partner said that he made noise thinking the ball was going to be long and then changed his mind.
 

schmke

Legend
In that situation where your partner admitted that he started to call the ball long then I think playing the point over is certainly warranted. Honestly your opponents would have a very good case to claim the point themselves when your partner said that he made noise thinking the ball was going to be long and then changed his mind.

Sure, they have a case to claim a hinderance and the point, but only before they miss the volley. Once they play the next shot, that bite at the apple is gone.
 

spot

Hall of Fame
Sure, they have a case to claim a hinderance and the point, but only before they miss the volley. Once they play the next shot, that bite at the apple is gone.

Once the partner admitted that he made noise to call the ball out I don't think it is a hindrance issue- I think it is an issue over changing the call. Once the person admitted that they did make noise to call the ball out then they are changing their mind and I think that the person who hit the volley is 100% entitled to claim the point even if they didn't do so before they hit the shot. I've given the point to my opponents because I started to call it out but changed my mind- but because I knew I did make noise then the point was theirs. Overall I'd say that replaying the point would be fair.
 
Top