Question about a call I made...

[darkhorse]

I was playing a mtach for my high school today, and I hit the ball low towards one of my opponents. He went for it but missed, and it appeared to me that the ball hit his racquet. I thought this happened because his racquet turned at the exact moment the ball was closest to his racquet. However, his partner got to the ball and got a fairly weak shot back, but I had already said that the ball was touched before the shot came over the net. They claimed that the ball did not touch his racquet and he was turning his racquet to bring the shot up and simply missed. My partner couldn't say either way, so after a brief argument the point ended up on my side.

Now I'm all for fair play and I never intentionally make a bad call, but I admit I wasn't as certain about this as I let on. So my question is was I right making this call and sticking with it? I was serving so I pretty much gave to point to me and my partner kind of by default since I thought I was right.

 

[Lakoste]

how did the arguement end, did the other team admit to hitting it or what?

I wouldn't sweat it to much, worst case scenerio, you're wrong. It's not like it decided the game or it happened again. Next time, if you're challenging the call and you're not positive, let them have it.

 

[theJuniorACE]

well as far as if your call was well mannered,
i dont no

but the fact is if you make a call, you have to stick with it, That was a good call to stick w/ your decision b/c if you start to make bad calls, ppl will think your just looking for some cheap points and are just trying to break your opponents concentraion w/ bad calls
thats what the commentators are always saying that if you think the ball is out, or in your case he touched it already, you can stop the point but remember that you chose to do so, whether the results are in your favor or not

 

[slewisoh]

What made you think the ball hit his racquet? Did the trajectory change? I would think the person actually involved (your opponent) would have the best take on whether he made contact with the ball.

I've called touches on myself that no one else heard and I guess I would be offended if someone tried to force a call on me based on what they THINK they saw from the other side of the net.

I would have definitely made the call if I thought I saw a touch. But unless it was a blatantly obvious touch, if the opponent denies a touch occurred I would acknowledge to myself that it's possible I saw things incorrectly. It sounds like you already did this.

I would have suggested that the point be replayed just to keep things civil.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

It was your opponent's call. It was on his side of the net. You should have played the point out and then questioned the "touch". If the other team never admitted to touching the ball, you lose the point.

 

[AndyP]

It was your opponent's call, end of story.

 

[kevhen]

At best you could request a let if your opponent says it didn't hit his racquet since you thought it did and stopped playing. Otherwise it's their point if they won't admit it and won't allow a let, especially since your partner didn't see it as well.

If you thought it hit their racquet, your opponents might allow a let if they are good sports. Not sure if this one is covered in the rule books.

 

[oldguysrule]

It is covered in the rule books...(99% sure anyway). Each player makes the calls on his/her side of the net. So, your opponent was responsible for making that call. You should play out the point and it is reasonable to question the call, but it is his call to make. Same goes for double hits and double bounces. If you had continued to play the point you would have (probably) hit a winner on their weak return and it never would have been an issue.

 

[Kaptain Karl]

Wrong call ...

The following is the key to your OP's story....

... I admit I wasn't as certain about this as I let on. So my question is was I right making this call and sticking with it?

First ... No. You were not right. "Wasn't as certain" means you had doubt.

Second ... It was not your call to make in the first place. We call "touches" on ourselves. (Or, in officiated matches, the Referee or Umpire can also call touches.)

Each player makes the calls on his/her side of the net.

I am 99.5% sure I can call "Not up" on my opponent's shot. That would obviate your claim. [KK goes off to check the Rules....]

- KK

 

[Willy H.]

If you make a call you have to be absolutely sure of it...then stick by it to the death. If you're not sure, you're most likely wrong. Once you make a call, don't show doubt or back down, or else it really will look like you tried to cheat your opponent, or, you'll lose the argument.

 

[slewisoh]

KK I'm wondering what the "not up" call is. I just keep thinking, "wassup...."

 

[papa]

I don't think you'll find anything in the rule book concerning this - at least the USTA book.

I agree with those that said it was your opponents call - not yours.

About the only thing you can do is "ask" if the ball touched the racquet and let it go at that. Will happen like someone hitting the net - all you can do is ask and then let it go. If they ask for your opinion because they aren't sure, then they (the opponents) have to accept your call - however, thats not going to happen very often.

 

[10ispro]

Page 54 of Friend at Court

20. Touches, hitting balls before it crosses net, invasion of opponents court, double hits and double bounces (not ups). A Player shal promptly acknowledge if

-A ball touches the player
-player touches the net
-the player touches the players opponents court
-a plyer hits the ball before it crosses the net
-a player deliberately carriers or double hits the ball; or
-the ball bounces more than once in the players court

Basically to summarize, as already posted above-the player who committed the touch must call it on himself. You can ask if a touch occured, but the fact that you stopped the point or attempted to, means you forfeited the point.
The other team could also claim hinderance b/c you started talking during the point. SO they would essentially win the point twice.

 

[papa]

The other team could also claim hinderance b/c you started talking during the point. SO they would essentially win the point twice.

Some players just don't get this which is too bad. An excellent point that if called more often would keep the talking down. With many, its just a bad habit but a pain nevertheless.

 

[10ispro]

Some players just don't get this which is too bad. An excellent point that if called more often would keep the talking down. With many, its just a bad habit but a pain nevertheless.

While I do agree, majority of players quite simply donot know the rules and even those that do,may not fully understand how to interpret the rules.
The biggest issue with many in interpreting rules are that so many rules are based on " in good faith". Tennis, being a gentleman's sport, has many rules all based on the idea that everyone wants to play as fairly as possible and will acknowledge their own mistakes or errors.

Reality in this day in age is, that many people will not acknowledge an error which would cuase them to automatcially lose a point.

Plus there is the key word in many rule interpretations--the word " Intent".
Double hits must have intent or be considered deliberate to be ruled a double hit.
So talking during a point like to tell your partner" let it bounce", "move back" etc...technically are not grounds to call hinderance unless your INTENT is to distract your opponent.

THIS IS SUCH A FUN GAME SOMETIMES :mrgreen:

 

[Kaptain Karl]

KK I'm wondering what the "not up" call is. I just keep thinking, "wassup...."

When your opponent did not get to the ball before it bounced a second time the ball was "not up."

I've been too busy to study the Rules, but I'm still 99% sure *I* have the authority to call "Not up" on you. (When your running for all you're worth, you may not know you didn't make it in time.)

- KK

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I was playing a mtach for my high school today, and I hit the ball low towards one of my opponents. He went for it but missed, and it appeared to me that the ball hit his racquet. I thought this happened because his racquet turned at the exact moment the ball was closest to his racquet. However, his partner got to the ball and got a fairly weak shot back, but I had already said that the ball was touched before the shot came over the net. They claimed that the ball did not touch his racquet and he was turning his racquet to bring the shot up and simply missed. My partner couldn't say either way, so after a brief argument the point ended up on my side.

Now I'm all for fair play and I never intentionally make a bad call, but I admit I wasn't as certain about this as I let on. So my question is was I right making this call and sticking with it? I was serving so I pretty much gave to point to me and my partner kind of by default since I thought I was right.

You were right in making the call and arguing it. Obviously, you saying this becomes more of a challenge than an actual ruling. You have as much right to call this as you would holding up your hand to ensure you are ready to receive serve.

For the most part, players usually do not call several major areas unless they are very honest. So you must make the call if you felt your opponent did not fess up. They are:

1. Barely touching the net (especially with their toes)

2. A slightly touching of the ball with their racquet, shirt, etc...

3. Calling a two bounce shot especially if it is quickly half-volleyed and is questionable.

You must challenge the other players if you felt you won the point based on a rule.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

You were right in making the call and arguing it. Obviously, you saying this becomes more of a challenge than an actual ruling. You have as much right to call this as you would holding up your hand to ensure you are ready to receive serve.

For the most part, players usually do not call several major areas unless they are very honest. So you must make the call if you felt your opponent did not fess up. They are:

1. Barely touching the net (especially with their toes)

2. A slightly touching of the ball with their racquet, shirt, etc...

3. Calling a two bounce shot especially if it is quickly half-volleyed and is questionable.

Don't play much tennis in Idaho, I guess.

You must challenge the other players if you felt you won the point based on a rule.

 

[10ispro]

You were right in making the call and arguing it. Obviously, you saying this becomes more of a challenge than an actual ruling. You have as much right to call this as you would holding up your hand to ensure you are ready to receive serve.

For the most part, players usually do not call several major areas unless they are very honest. So you must make the call if you felt your opponent did not fess up. They are:

1. Barely touching the net (especially with their toes)

2. A slightly touching of the ball with their racquet, shirt, etc...

3. Calling a two bounce shot especially if it is quickly half-volleyed and is questionable.

You must challenge the other players if you felt you won the point based on a rule.

He has the right to challenge but ultimately it is up to the opponent to admit that the infraction occured and reliquish the point. In an unofficiated match or even an officiated match if the referee/lines person claims they were unsighted, once the person denies any wrong doing, there is no more recourse for the accusing player.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

You were right in making the call and arguing it. Obviously, you saying this becomes more of a challenge than an actual ruling. You have as much right to call this as you would holding up your hand to ensure you are ready to receive serve.

For the most part, players usually do not call several major areas unless they are very honest. So you must make the call if you felt your opponent did not fess up. They are:

1. Barely touching the net (especially with their toes)

2. A slightly touching of the ball with their racquet, shirt, etc...

3. Calling a two bounce shot especially if it is quickly half-volleyed and is questionable.

You must challenge the other players if you felt you won the point based on a rule.

Forget the previous post. I don't understand this response, BB. Makes no sense and every poster in this thread disagrees with you.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Forget the previous post. I don't understand this response, BB. Makes no sense and every poster in this thread disagrees with you.

Good! I love a good disagreement. I also wasn't responding to "anyone"!

I was responding to the posters orginal question.

"However, his partner got to the ball and got a fairly weak shot back, but I had already said that the ball was touched before the shot came over the net. They claimed that the ball did not touch his racquet and he was turning his racquet to bring the shot up and simply missed."

You cant hit the ball twice. If he thought the ball touched the other players racquet he has a right to speak up. It is a lot like making let call. My response above was simply stating that a lot of players (even honest ones) under pressure may "look the other way" or try to see if they can get away with one. In this case, the ball was close enough to the racquet that he saw something. In his situation, I would have done the same thing. At the very least the point should have been replayed.

If he felt the ball hit the opponents racquet - to him it did. Unless there is an umpire, the players call the game as they see it.

I hope I made that simply to understand.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

He has the right to challenge but ultimately it is up to the opponent to admit that the infraction occured and reliquish the point. In an unofficiated match or even an officiated match if the referee/lines person claims they were unsighted, once the person denies any wrong doing, there is no more recourse for the accusing player.

True, the outcome can go either way. That is not what I am suggesting that the point should automatically be awarded to the person who called it.

I am only stating that all the players have a right to call something and halt play if they see it. If it is in question and if I was in his situation, I would not give up on what I saw irregardless if the other team felt the other way. Too many players do not like admitting they were wrong in their judgement in the heat of competition - hence the reason an umpire is a good thing.

At the very least, and because he said something BEFORE the other player hit his ball, the point should have been replayed - period.

 

[10ispro]

True, the outcome can go either way. That is not what I am suggesting that the point should automatically be awarded to the person who called it.

I am only stating that all the players have a right to call something and halt play if they see it. If it is in question and if I was in his situation, I would not give up on what I saw irregardless if the other team felt the other way. Too many players do not like admitting they were wrong in their judgement in the heat of competition - hence the reason an umpire is a good thing.

At the very least, and because he said something BEFORE the other player hit his ball, the point should have been replayed - period.

I dont completely disagree with you. But the rules clearly state that the offending person in question "in good faith" make the call against himself. So even if questioned " Did that ball hit you" --once the person denies contact or touch-there is no recourse. and According to the rules, there is no reason to play a let. You see it even in professional matches every so often, usually 1st rounds and for some reason at the US Open alot, where a player will stop play and claim the ball was out and look at the linesman and chair umpire for a call and wont get it. And inevitably we hear Mary Carillo talk about how important it is to continue playing until a call is made.

In this situation, I know I wouldnt grant a let b/c a person had a judgement lapse and saw something that may or may not have occured. B/c also in the heat of competition, sometimes we (people) can believe and hope so much that something happened or will happen, that it causes a lapse in judgement. Like being in a tight match in a very long rally and just hoping and hoping that big groundstroke that just got hit behind you is going out-I know and have seen alot of people make the call as the ball lands in and not reverse the call b/c they truely belive that it is out and barred instant replay that is the truth to them.

Also, calling a Let is somewhat of a seperate issue. Anyone on the court can call a service let, not just the reciever-the server can call a let and partners can call lets. and yes there is leeway to halt play if a player is not ready--but all of these instances are covered pretty clearly in Friend at Court--as well as the specific situation posted about. And given reasons for a hinderance or disruption of play, a player may call a let--but this instance is clearly and all or nothing situation and by asking for a let, not only are you accusing your opponent of lying, but now you are forcing him to win the point twice, which clearly goes against the Code and etiquette of the game.
It becomes gamesmanship.
its like D1 College Tennis before the let rule. Anytime someone got Aced they called a let.So now they play lets, which I must say is really fun, except when you play on a loose net on a very wet har tru court.

just for further clarification, I will ask Jim Cumming when i see him at the club this weekend. For those that dont know, Jim is one of the editors of Friend at Court and is actually responsible for many of the current rule revsions over the past 20 years or so.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

10ispro, let us know Jim's input. I keep a current issue of Friend at Court in my bag and actually take it out and read it regularly.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

Good! I love a good disagreement. I also wasn't responding to "anyone"!

I was responding to the posters orginal question.

"However, his partner got to the ball and got a fairly weak shot back, but I had already said that the ball was touched before the shot came over the net. They claimed that the ball did not touch his racquet and he was turning his racquet to bring the shot up and simply missed."

You cant hit the ball twice. If he thought the ball touched the other players racquet he has a right to speak up. It is a lot like making let call. My response above was simply stating that a lot of players (even honest ones) under pressure may "look the other way" or try to see if they can get away with one. In this case, the ball was close enough to the racquet that he saw something. In his situation, I would have done the same thing. At the very least the point should have been replayed.

If he felt the ball hit the opponents racquet - to him it did. Unless there is an umpire, the players call the game as they see it.

I hope I made that simply to understand.

BB, at the risk of getting into melee here, let me say that "the players call the game as they see it" is true as long they are calling their end of the court. The only players I see stop play in the middle of point to dispute a shot that wasn't their call to begin with are juniors and gals. A challenge is made following completion of the point, as I understand it. The reasons are well pointed out by 10spro in his last post.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I dont completely disagree with you. But the rules clearly state that the offending person in question "in good faith" make the call against himself. So even if questioned " Did that ball hit you" --once the person denies contact or touch-there is no recourse. and According to the rules, there is no reason to play a let. You see it even in professional matches every so often, usually 1st rounds and for some reason at the US Open alot, where a player will stop play and claim the ball was out and look at the linesman and chair umpire for a call and wont get it. And inevitably we hear Mary Carillo talk about how important it is to continue playing until a call is made.

In this situation, I know I wouldnt grant a let b/c a person had a judgement lapse and saw something that may or may not have occured. B/c also in the heat of competition, sometimes we (people) can believe and hope so much that something happened or will happen, that it causes a lapse in judgement. Like being in a tight match in a very long rally and just hoping and hoping that big groundstroke that just got hit behind you is going out-I know and have seen alot of people make the call as the ball lands in and not reverse the call b/c they truely belive that it is out and barred instant replay that is the truth to them.

Also, calling a Let is somewhat of a seperate issue. Anyone on the court can call a service let, not just the reciever-the server can call a let and partners can call lets. and yes there is leeway to halt play if a player is not ready--but all of these instances are covered pretty clearly in Friend at Court--as well as the specific situation posted about. And given reasons for a hinderance or disruption of play, a player may call a let--but this instance is clearly and all or nothing situation and by asking for a let, not only are you accusing your opponent of lying, but now you are forcing him to win the point twice, which clearly goes against the Code and etiquette of the game.
It becomes gamesmanship.
its like D1 College Tennis before the let rule. Anytime someone got Aced they called a let.So now they play lets, which I must say is really fun, except when you play on a loose net on a very wet har tru court.

just for further clarification, I will ask Jim Cumming when i see him at the club this weekend. For those that dont know, Jim is one of the editors of Friend at Court and is actually responsible for many of the current rule revsions over the past 20 years or so.

Again, I am not talking about the outcome. Whether in the end he was right or wrong.

I am talking about each player has a right to make a call on what he thinks happened. In this case, the player made the call BEFORE the point ended which should have halted play. This isn't a professional match.

Each player on the court is a player, a linesman, and an umpire when there are no officials calling play. If this player heard and saw something, he has absolute right to make a call - period. And he did so during the point because he saw something. This is perfectly legitimate.

Once he makes a call judgement begins. If the opposing player denies it, that is another story. The person who made the call can still challenge the ruling for an overrule. Because the opposing player is also a player, linesman, and umpire himself.

Sorry for the confusion but the poster had every right to call that point as he saw it. In this situation, etiquette should dictate the point be replayed.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

BB, at the risk of getting into melee here, let me say that "the players call the game as they see it" is true as long they are calling their end of the court. The only players I see stop play in the middle of point to dispute a shot that wasn't their call to begin with are juniors and gals. A challenge is made following completion of the point, as I understand it. The reasons are well pointed out by 10spro in his last post.

I love talking about rules dont you? It is much open to debate, judegement, circumstance, and intpretation.

From my position, the player saw something that wasn't called and challenged it right away. He saw the ball hit the racquet of the opposing player without the ball crossing the net. The opponent did not make the call (and rarely do they). He has a right to protest whether or not he is right. I would have done the same thing.

Whether or not the opponent did hit the ball twice or who should get the point, the player had a right to make the call. This is because each player also plays as an umpire in an unofficiated match, that point should have been replayed or the player should have come clean (which rarely happens), or the poster should have realized he jumped the gun and made a mistake.

Let me ask you a question, if there was an umpire officiating the game and he saw the ball tip the first players racquet and his partner still able to hit the ball, hit it back over the net, what would the umpire do? What would the players receiving the double hit ball do???

 

[kevhen]

I agree with Bill on this one. If I saw my opponent strike the ball but still land on his side, and see them still playing the point, I would raise my hand to say that I believe the point is over. If my opponent insisted he didn't hit the ball and he wasn't willing to play a let, the point would be his and I wouldn't argue it. But the proper play would be to replay the point if they aren't sure if they struck the ball or not. If he admits to striking the ball, then it would be your point. That is what I said in my first post on this. In the case you described, the best outcome you could get would be a let (if they allow it) since they don't believe it hit his racquet.

 

[beernutz]

This is simply not true. Item 1 under the Making Calls section of the Code is
Player makes calls on own side of the net.
Italics added for emphasis. You don't stop play and question a call that an opponent has the obligation to make. If you do, you have forfeited the point--simple as that.

There are many examples where a player does not get to stop play and act as if they were a linesman or chair umpire. First serve calls are one example. ONLY the receiver can call a first serve out.

Again, I am not talking about the outcome. Whether in the end he was right or wrong.

I am talking about each player has a right to make a call on what he thinks happened. In this case, the player made the call BEFORE the point ended which should have halted play. This isn't a professional match.

Each player on the court is a player, a linesman, and an umpire when there are no officials calling play. If this player heard and saw something, he has absolute right to make a call - period. And he did so during the point because he saw something. This is perfectly legitimate.

Once he makes a call judgement begins. If the opposing player denies it, that is another story. The person who made the call can still challenge the ruling for an overrule. Because the opposing player is also a player, linesman, and umpire himself.

Sorry for the confusion but the poster had every right to call that point as he saw it. In this situation, etiquette should dictate the point be replayed.

 

[oldguysrule]

I think the rules are pretty clear that you make the calls on your side of the net and your opponent makes the calls on his side of the net. You may question a call, but your opponent has the final say. In this case, if you stop a point to questioin a non-call, and your opponent says he didn't touch the ball, you lose the point. I said earlier, finish the point, then question.

Also, questioning a call should never result in a let. When you question a call and your opponent is not sure, then it is your point. If your opponent is sure of the call, then the call stands.

This is all covered in the rules and the Friend at Court as mentioned earlier.

btw, if it is a friendly game, you can do whatever you want.

For, you guys who think that you have a right to make calls on the other side of the net, it would be nice to see that in the rule book or the Friend at Court. I will be the first to say I am not an expert, so if I am wrong, let me know.

 

[oldguysrule]

Sorry for the confusion but the poster had every right to call that point as he saw it. In this situation, etiquette should dictate the point be replayed.

For me, etiquette dictates that you give your opponent the benefit of the doubt. He makes his calls. I make my calls. We all follow the rules and then there is no reason for dissension.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

I love talking about rules dont you? It is much open to debate, judegement, circumstance, and intpretation.

From my position, the player saw something that wasn't called and challenged it right away. He saw the ball hit the racquet of the opposing player without the ball crossing the net. The opponent did not make the call (and rarely do they). He has a right to protest whether or not he is right. I would have done the same thing.

Whether or not the opponent did hit the ball twice or who should get the point, the player had a right to make the call. This is because each player also plays as an umpire in an unofficiated match, that point should have been replayed or the player should have come clean (which rarely happens), or the poster should have realized he jumped the gun and made a mistake.

Let me ask you a question, if there was an umpire officiating the game and he saw the ball tip the first players racquet and his partner still able to hit the ball, hit it back over the net, what would the umpire do? What would the players receiving the double hit ball do???

I do love talking about rules and used to have a decent working knowledge of their application. I love talking them more if I'm right. Certainly a player can stop playing in the middle of a point to question a call or lack of a call. However, if it was not his call to make and his opponent did not concur, he loses the point. Seems like a heck of a chance to take since the whole game of tennis depends on our opponents honesty.

In an unofficiated match, play is governed by the Code and the Rules of Tennis. These are farily explicit as to how the match will be played. As with all rules, there is actually little room for interpretation and application.

Regarding your part (B), if there was being officiated, neither player makes a call. The official does it. With all the protests made by Mr. McEnroe during his career, I never saw an official over turn a call.

But at our level, we just keep on playing and trust our opponent or opponents to be as honest as we are.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

However, if it was not his call to make and his opponent did not concur, he loses the point.

So if in the same situation it is obvious they had a double hit and the opponents do not call it still, he still loses the point? Are you out of your mind?

This means that the other team has to WAIT for their opponents to MAKE THE CALL! ITS AN UNOFFICATED MATCH!

Seems like a heck of a chance to take since the whole game of tennis depends on our opponents honesty.

Honesty? Are you kidding me? A player needs to stand passively hoping their opponents are honest? How many times is a let called without other players knowing it? How many times HAVE YOU BEEN DISHONEST WITH SOMETHING THAT HAS HAPPENED? Give me a break.

There our countless times players "think" something happened on BOTH sides. This was a questioned call. The opponents said they didnt, he said they did, POINT IS PLAYED OVER SINCE THE PLAYER DOES HAVE A RIGHT TO CALL A MISSED CALL. Too bad.

In an unofficiated match, play is governed by the Code and the Rules of Tennis. These are farily explicit as to how the match will be played. As with all rules, there is actually little room for interpretation and application.

Exactly, and just as my partner can call a line call if I didnt see it well, or overrule me on a call I may have missed, the opposing player can call something if he thinks he saw it. I am not talking about outcomes. The player simply witnessed the ball hit twice but called it before the ball came over the net. Irregardless of the outcome, he has absolute right to question it, give his opinion on it, and rule it. If the other team does not want to acknowledge it, they are either lying or telling the truth. If the player calling the halt in play listens to the argument and believes the other team then point goes to the opponents. But if there is disagreement on both sides - point is played over. Get it? Is that etiquette enough, Mr. Honesty?

Regarding your part (B), if there was being officiated, neither player makes a call. The official does it. With all the protests made by Mr. McEnroe during his career, I never saw an official over turn a call.

EXACTLY!!!!!! The official does! And if he saw a double hit, what would happen???????? PLAY STOPS!!!!!!!!! In this case we have ONE person ruling, and in this case a point will be awarded to whom he thinks is right.

BUT WITH NO OFFICIAL AND OPPOSING ARGUMENTS THAT ARE LEGITIMATE - POINT IS PLAYED OVER.

But at our level, we just keep on playing and trust our opponent or opponents to be as honest as we are.

If there is a disagreement in what happened in the point and their is reasonable doubt for both sides, and if the player that questioned it does it right away BEFORE the point ended. SORRY, with no official, the point should be played over. END OF STORY.

 

[oldguysrule]

Last night in a USTA league doubles match, a player on team A hit a crosscourt shot past a player on team B. That player looked at his partner for help making the call and got a not sure. He then asked team A if they saw the ball. Neither one of them had a clear view of where it landed but they both felt like the ball was in. However, they said they weren't sure. The player on team B then proceeded to call the ball out.

This is why knowing the rules is so important. First, Team B should have called the ball good. (proper, if you are not sure). Second, Team A should have said they thought it was good but it is your call to make. Team B should have then said the ball was good. The resulting out call caused team A to get upset and lost the next point for a service break.

If either one of the two teams had followed the Friend at Court and proper etiquette, the correct call would have been made and it would not have been fodder for post match discussion.

 

[oldguysrule]

...If there is a disagreement in what happened in the point and their is reasonable doubt for both sides, and if the player that questioned it does it right away BEFORE the point ended. SORRY, with no official, the point should be played over. END OF STORY.

BB, In this situation there was not reasonable doubt on both sides. The player said it did not touch his racquet. Therefore, it is his point. IF, there was reasonable doubt, ie, he was not sure if it hit his racquet or not, then the point goes to the other team.

Your contention that both teams have equal rights to make calls on both sides of the net is simply not supported by the rules, Friend at Court, or etiquette. Proper etiquette is following the rules and the rules do provide a way for a player to challenge a call. But the rules and etiquette do not provide a way for a player to call a let because he does not agree with his opponent's call.

Let me be clear about this. If you challenge one of my calls, and there is doubt in my mind, then you get the point. If I am sure of my call then the call stands. End of Story. That is what etiquette is.

Again, if you are totally sure of your position, if would help if you could refer us to the section of the rulebook or Friend at Court that supports this position.

 

[tennis-n-sc]

So if in the same situation it is obvious they had a double hit and the opponents do not call it still, he still loses the point? Are you out of your mind?

This means that the other team has to WAIT for their opponents to MAKE THE CALL! ITS AN UNOFFICATED MATCH!



Honesty? Are you kidding me? A player needs to stand passively hoping their opponents are honest? How many times is a let called without other players knowing it? How many times HAVE YOU BEEN DISHONEST WITH SOMETHING THAT HAS HAPPENED? Give me a break.

There our countless times players "think" something happened on BOTH sides. This was a questioned call. The opponents said they didnt, he said they did, POINT IS PLAYED OVER SINCE THE PLAYER DOES HAVE A RIGHT TO CALL A MISSED CALL. Too bad.



Exactly, and just as my partner can call a line call if I didnt see it well, or overrule me on a call I may have missed, the opposing player can call something if he thinks he saw it. I am not talking about outcomes. The player simply witnessed the ball hit twice but called it before the ball came over the net. Irregardless of the outcome, he has absolute right to question it, give his opinion on it, and rule it. If the other team does not want to acknowledge it, they are either lying or telling the truth. If the player calling the halt in play listens to the argument and believes the other team then point goes to the opponents. But if there is disagreement on both sides - point is played over. Get it? Is that etiquette enough, Mr. Honesty?



EXACTLY!!!!!! The official does! And if he saw a double hit, what would happen???????? PLAY STOPS!!!!!!!!! In this case we have ONE person ruling, and in this case a point will be awarded to whom he thinks is right.

BUT WITH NO OFFICIAL AND OPPOSING ARGUMENTS THAT ARE LEGITIMATE - POINT IS PLAYED OVER.



If there is a disagreement in what happened in the point and their is reasonable doubt for both sides, and if the player that questioned it does it right away BEFORE the point ended. SORRY, with no official, the point should be played over. END OF STORY.

My only comment is that they sure must play tennis different in Idaho.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

My only comment is that they sure must play tennis different in Idaho.

Well I just moved here so I dont know.

But in Southern California where I lived, we usually play the point over. That is simply the right thing to do in an unofficiated match - especially on a call like that one that rarely is ever called and was called in plenty of time.

 

[beernutz]

Are you intentionally ignoring what several posters have quoted from Friend at the Court and the Code?

I will address one thing you said specifically and that is the issue of honesty. Honesty is what this game depends on and without it, you just can't play tennis, period. I'm curious, since you seem to think you have more power on the court than the Code would infer, do you also overrule line calls made by your opponents?

So if in the same situation it is obvious they had a double hit and the opponents do not call it still, he still loses the point? Are you out of your mind?

This means that the other team has to WAIT for their opponents to MAKE THE CALL! ITS AN UNOFFICATED MATCH!



Honesty? Are you kidding me? A player needs to stand passively hoping their opponents are honest? How many times is a let called without other players knowing it? How many times HAVE YOU BEEN DISHONEST WITH SOMETHING THAT HAS HAPPENED? Give me a break.

There our countless times players "think" something happened on BOTH sides. This was a questioned call. The opponents said they didnt, he said they did, POINT IS PLAYED OVER SINCE THE PLAYER DOES HAVE A RIGHT TO CALL A MISSED CALL. Too bad.



Exactly, and just as my partner can call a line call if I didnt see it well, or overrule me on a call I may have missed, the opposing player can call something if he thinks he saw it. I am not talking about outcomes. The player simply witnessed the ball hit twice but called it before the ball came over the net. Irregardless of the outcome, he has absolute right to question it, give his opinion on it, and rule it. If the other team does not want to acknowledge it, they are either lying or telling the truth. If the player calling the halt in play listens to the argument and believes the other team then point goes to the opponents. But if there is disagreement on both sides - point is played over. Get it? Is that etiquette enough, Mr. Honesty?



EXACTLY!!!!!! The official does! And if he saw a double hit, what would happen???????? PLAY STOPS!!!!!!!!! In this case we have ONE person ruling, and in this case a point will be awarded to whom he thinks is right.

BUT WITH NO OFFICIAL AND OPPOSING ARGUMENTS THAT ARE LEGITIMATE - POINT IS PLAYED OVER.



If there is a disagreement in what happened in the point and their is reasonable doubt for both sides, and if the player that questioned it does it right away BEFORE the point ended. SORRY, with no official, the point should be played over. END OF STORY.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Are you intentionally ignoring what several posters have quoted from Friend at the Court and the Code?

I will address one thing you said specifically and that is the issue of honesty. Honesty is what this game depends on and without it, you just can't play tennis, period. I'm curious, since you seem to think you have more power on the court than the Code would imply, do you also overrule line calls made by your oppenents?

No I don't overrule line calls but I will argue them. My partner may overrule a line call I made. My opponent may try to convince me to overrule a line call. Haven't you before? Or are you living in a bubble? Have you ever played a point over? Or told someone to take two? If you haven't you are either a big fat liar, ignorant, or don't play tennis. Which is it?

So for the slower ones, I will try to make myself clear on my position.

So, as I said before, in an unofficiated match, with a call that is rarely ever called, with FOUR HONEST players, WITH THE CALL BEING MADE WELL BEFORE THE POINT ENDED, the point should have been played over. If the opponents argued and the player who called it ended up agreeing with them, the point is awarded to the opposing players. If the opposing player fessed up to the ball hitting him, the team making the call should have won the point. The trouble with this is if BOTH teams felt something happened or didnt happen - point should be played over.

Is that slow enough for you?

 

[beernutz]

Ok, you want to get personal about this? Fine with me.

No, I don't live in a bubble. I'm 47 and have played tennis since I was 10. When I started playing USTA league about 5 years ago I was given a copy of Friend at the Court and since then I've tried to follow its rules and guideance. So, since then, no, I don't play points over. A point is good or not good - there is no in between. A point is not good if the player on the side of the court where the ball is calls it not good. If they are not sure, that is, if they have any doubt, it is good. As you like to say, END OF STORY!!

Sure I tell people to 'take two' all the time when their first serve is a let. Unless you are the one living in the bubble so do you. But that is the only time I tell someone to take two. If you are suggesting that if someone hits a serve that you don't see it clearly in or out, and you make them serve again, you are a cheater. It is as simple as that. If you don't see it clearly OUT, it is good. For those you are too slow to grasp that simple concept I'll put it in ALL CAPS. IF YOU DON'T SEE IT CLEARLY OUT, IT IS GOOD. To quote Brad Hamilton, "Learn it. Know it. Live it."

No, I don't have people play points over. Once you explain the rules to most people they don't seem to have a problem following them. You seem to be the exception. Perhaps if you spent more time reading the rules and less time posting and arguing about them you'd be better off?

No I don't overrule line calls but I will argue them. My partner may overrule a line call I made. My opponent may try to convince me to overrule a line call. Haven't you before? Or are you living in a bubble? Have you ever played a point over? Or told someone to take two? If you haven't you are either a big fat liar, ignorant, or don't play tennis. Which is it?

So for the slower ones, I will try to make myself clear on my position.

So, as I said before, in an unofficiated match, with a call that is rarely ever called, with FOUR HONEST players, WITH THE CALL BEING MADE WELL BEFORE THE POINT ENDED, the point should have been played over. If the opponents argued and the player who called it ended up agreeing with them, the point is awarded to the opposing players. If the opposing player fessed up to the ball hitting him, the team making the call should have won the point. The trouble with this is if BOTH teams felt something happened or didnt happen - point should be played over.

Is that slow enough for you?

 

[Bungalo Bill]

Ok, you want to get personal about this? Fine with me.

No, I don't live in a bubble. I'm 47 and have played tennis since I was 10. When I started playing USTA league about 5 years ago I was given a copy of Friend at the Court and since then I've tried to follow its rules and guideance. So, since then, no, I don't play points over. A point is good or not good - there is no in between. A point is not good if the player on the side of the court where the ball is calls it not good. If they are not sure, that is, if they have any doubt, it is good. As you like to say, END OF STORY!!

Sure I tell people to 'take two' all the time when their first serve is a let. Unless you are the one living in the bubble so do you. But that is the only time I tell someone to take two. If you are suggesting that if someone hits a serve that you don't see it clearly in or out, and you make them serve again, you are a cheater. It is as simple as that. If you don't see it clearly OUT, it is good. For those you are too slow to grasp that simple concept I'll put it in ALL CAPS. IF YOU DON'T SEE IT CLEARLY OUT, IT IS GOOD. To quote Brad Hamilton, "Learn it. Know it. Live it."

No, I don't have people play points over. Once you explain the rules to most people they don't seem to have a problem following them. You seem to be the exception. Perhaps if you spent more time reading the rules and less time posting and arguing about them you'd be better off?

PERSONAL? I am not even getting close to being personal! You should have seen how many edits I made!!!

You are calling one person honest (the one who tipped the ball) and the one who made the call dishonest! Why can't we assume he did make a good call?????? He also made the call BEFORE the point was over.

My position stands with no one officiating - play the point over or come to agreement on who one the point. Period. End of story. It isn't the US OPEN for goodness sakes.

 

[oldguysrule]

PERSONAL? I am not even getting close to being personal! You should have seen how many edits I made!!!

You are calling one person honest (the one who tipped the ball) and the one who made the call dishonest! Why can't we assume he did make a good call?????? He also made the call BEFORE the point was over.

My position stands with no one officiating - play the point over or come to agreement on who one the point. Period. End of story. It isn't the US OPEN for goodness sakes.

As we say in Texas: Whoa there big feller. Nobody is calling anybody dishonest except for you. Beernutz simply says that he follows the rules, code, Friend at Court, etc. These rules specifically say who is responsible for making certain calls. If you don't accept my call when I assure you that I am sure of the call, then you are calling me dishonest. If you stop the point because you think I didn't call a double bounce you are calling me a liar. Once the point is over, you are free to question my call (or non-call) but you are not free to "play two" just because you think my call is wrong. If I am in doubt about the call (or non-call), we will not "play two", the point is yours.

If this is a friendly game between buddies, then fine, do whatever you want. But if this is a league or tournament or school match, then follow the rules. I don't see how you can argue with this.

 

[beernutz]

Ok, I'm pretty tenacious, so I'll keep trying.

I am not saying anything about the honesty of either player. I am saying that one person and one person only can make the call in question. That would be the player who tipped (or didn't tip) the ball. Only he has the right to make the call about whether a tip occurred or not.

I am NOT saying the other player is dishonest. I AM saying that other player has no right to stop the game and make the call. None. Zero. Zip. That is a clear distinction, and I am beginning to believe you just don't want to see it.

It is really a very simple concept, and takes very little work to implement. You don't have to be playing in the US Open to make it work. Just follow the rules.

PERSONAL? I am not even getting close to being personal! You should have seen how many edits I made!!!

You are calling one person honest (the one who tipped the ball) and the one who made the call dishonest! Why can't we assume he did make a good call?????? He also made the call BEFORE the point was over.

My position stands with no one officiating - play the point over or come to agreement on who one the point. Period. End of story. It isn't the US OPEN for goodness sakes.

 

[oldguysrule]

No I don't overrule line calls but I will argue them. My partner may overrule a line call I made. My opponent may try to convince me to overrule a line call. Haven't you before? Or are you living in a bubble? Have you ever played a point over? Or told someone to take two? If you haven't you are either a big fat liar, ignorant, or don't play tennis. Which is it?

So for the slower ones, I will try to make myself clear on my position.

So, as I said before, in an unofficiated match, with a call that is rarely ever called, with FOUR HONEST players, WITH THE CALL BEING MADE WELL BEFORE THE POINT ENDED, the point should have been played over. If the opponents argued and the player who called it ended up agreeing with them, the point is awarded to the opposing players. If the opposing player fessed up to the ball hitting him, the team making the call should have won the point. The trouble with this is if BOTH teams felt something happened or didnt happen - point should be played over.

Is that slow enough for you?

I agree with beernutz here. You play two on lets and outside hindrances. You don't play two on line calls, double bounces, double hits, etc.

If you have FOUR HONEST players, then the player that stopped the point should realize that he made a mistake. It was not his place to stop the point. It was not his call to make. If he persists in arguing this then he is either dishonest or ignorant of the rules. Games have no meaning if you only follow the rules you want to follow.

 

[beernutz]

I agree with beernutz here. You play two on lets and outside hindrances. You don't play two on line calls, double bounces, double hits, etc.

If you have FOUR HONEST players, then the player that stopped the point should realize that he made a mistake. It was not his place to stop the point. It was not his call to make. If he persists in arguing this then he is either dishonest or ignorant of the rules. Games have no meaning if you only follow the rules you want to follow.

Oldguysrule, thanks for keeping this discussion on a professional level. Sometimes I let myself get dragged into the dirt in these message board discussions/flame wars but you have taken the high road and remained objective and rational throughout.

I have read a lot of bill's previous posts and fully realize he knows infinitely more about tennis than I do, however, I am at a loss to see why in this case he persists in dragging out (and down) an argument where he is clearly wrong. I think I've said all I have to say on this topic, but I just wanted to thank you for your level-headed (and correct, IMO) responses.

 

[Bungalo Bill]

I agree with beernutz here. You play two on lets and outside hindrances. You don't play two on line calls, double bounces, double hits, etc.

If you have FOUR HONEST players, then the player that stopped the point should realize that he made a mistake. It was not his place to stop the point. It was not his call to make. If he persists in arguing this then he is either dishonest or ignorant of the rules. Games have no meaning if you only follow the rules you want to follow.

Well I disagree.

The player that made the called said something at the right time. Unless he reverses his call, the point should be played over. If all of the players are honest players then the player making the call ISN"T LYING!!!! IT MEANS THE BALL REALLY HIT THE RACQUET!!!!!

No one is saying things are being invented. So quit putting words in my mouth. It is stupid for you to do so and defintely the wrong way to go.

The player said something at the right time. If he wants to agree with the opposing players so be it, if he wants to stand ground and believes the other team hit the ball twice - play the point over. Period.

Based on what you said in your infinite wisdom, if this happens on my team (my teammate or I hits the ball twice) I am simply going to say WE DIDN'T DO IT and the point is mine no matter what because the OTHER TEAM can't say a thing about it. I just didn't see it. How stupid is that. Dumbest thing I have ever heard.

And by the way, games do have meaning, rules have meaning, and so does the benefit of the doubt if the player called it in time. For these kinds of things, players either come to agreement or play the point over. This is simply common sense and good etiquette.

If I were you I would give up, you will never change my mind on this because there is no official. With no official and this kind of call, you will never change my mind, so go fish.

 

[10ispro]

This would be equivalent to being pulled over by a Cop for speeding.

Driver--" Why did you pull me over"

Cop---"b/c I am pretty sure you were speeding"

Driver--" sorry but I was 10MPH under the speed limit, i definitely wasnt speeding"

Cop---"Well I am pretty sure, I really cant prove it b/c my radar gun wasnt on, but your car sure looked to be going faster than the speed limit"

Driver--"Sir I definitely was not speeding"

Cop---"Well just in case you were, I'm going to give you a ticket, but I wont put any points on it, just pay the $200 fine"

 

[Bungalo Bill]

This would be equivalent to being pulled over by a Cop for speeding.

Driver--" Why did you pull me over"

Cop---"b/c I am pretty sure you were speeding"

Driver--" sorry but I was 10MPH under the speed limit, i definitely wasnt speeding"

Cop---"Well I am pretty sure, I really cant prove it b/c my radar gun wasnt on, but your car sure looked to be going faster than the speed limit"

Driver--"Sir I definitely was not speeding"

Cop---"Well just in case you were, I'm going to give you a ticket, but I wont put any points on it, just pay the $200 fine"

But the ball hit your racquet, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did...

 

[10ispro]

For, you guys who think that you have a right to make calls on the other side of the net, it would be nice to see that in the rule book or the Friend at Court. I will be the first to say I am not an expert, so if I am wrong, let me know.

Actually an exception to this is foot faults. A player may warn an opponent about a flagrant foot fault and if the foot faulting continues may call flagrant foot faults.

Back on Topic--Jim Cummings pointed out a specific part of Friend at court Under the Code.
#16 Opponent's Call questioned
"When a Player genuinely doubts an opponents call, the player may ask " are you sure about your call". If the Opponent reaffirms thattheball was out, the call shall be accepted. If the opponent acknowledges uncertainty, the opponent loses the point. THERE SHALL BE NO FURTHER DELAY OR DISCUSSION."

He then Refered me back to #20 which I referenced earlier and said there is no grounds for a Let to be played unless its purely a Friendly Match, but in accordance to the Rules there is no reason to replay the point.

 

[10ispro]

But the ball hit your racquet, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did, no it didn't, yes it did...

I'll give you props just for typing that out..LOL:mrgreen: