returning faults?

#1
Question...

I play with a guy that uses my fault serves as a chance to practice his returns.

He also calls fault as he’s swinging. Sometimes I cant tell if it’s a grunt or not.

Over time, if my serve is close, I often cannot tell if he’s called a fault or not and Im left guessing or assuming he didnt. It’s a mental distraction.

I dont hit the hardest serve. So it’s not like he’s returning simply because he’s physically commited and cant get the words out fast enough. He’s literally using the opportunity to practice & stay in a rhythm. Even on super obvious faults.

Is this taboo? What are the official rules on this sort of behavior?
 
#2
I just assume every ball that is returned to my side of the court is live and I need to play it (unless it's obvious).

If my opponent tells me he called the serve "out" after I play it, so be it. But that's much better than not getting prepared.

Remember, your serve is your opponents call. Makes no difference if you clearly saw your serve out. If he plays it, it's a live ball.
 
Last edited:
#3
The code specifically states that opponents are not to return "obvious faults". What's obvious? There's the wiggle room. I think if I can see it clearly out from where I'm standing as a server, its pretty obvious.

Just be thankful he makes a noise. Then when there is a disagreement, you can say i thought you said "out" and replay the point. The silent assassins that just return every serve without saying anything are the worst. If you return their return they say "it was out sorry". If you grab the ball to serve again, they say, "Hey i called that good"
 
#4
The code specifically states that opponents are not to return "obvious faults". What's obvious? There's the wiggle room. I think if I can see it clearly out from where I'm standing as a server, its pretty obvious.

Just be thankful he makes a noise. Then when there is a disagreement, you can say i thought you said "out" and replay the point. The silent assassins that just return every serve without saying anything are the worst. If you return their return they say "it was out sorry". If you grab the ball to serve again, they say, "Hey i called that good"
yes you have to tell them -- oh sorry, my hearing's a little bad (in here, because im old, whatever)...could you please say it louder so i dont blast one at you? thanks! usually solves the issue.

now for the hitter guy...if he keeps blasting out balls back at you, then practice yourself and hit it right back. "hey i called that out!" oh -- it looked like you played it so i played it too.'''

most people get the hint to knock it off.
 
#5
yes you have to tell them -- oh sorry, my hearing's a little bad (in here, because im old, whatever)...could you please say it louder so i dont blast one at you? thanks! usually solves the issue.

now for the hitter guy...if he keeps blasting out balls back at you, then practice yourself and hit it right back. "hey i called that out!" oh -- it looked like you played it so i played it too.'''

most people get the hint to knock it off.
That’s a good suggestion.

But it does take me out of my rhythm of serving. And it’s a waste of energy chssing down his blast.

It’s weird the little stuff that’s begun to annoy me as I’ve played more.

One of my old playing partners used to call out the score right before I’d serve. It drove me nuts.

Whereas on a basketball court it would never bother me. Calling out the score by anyone is encouraged so there are no discrepancies.
 

kevrol

Professional
#7
It violates the Code. So ask him to be courteous and stop, please.
Actually it doesn't. The code actually assumes you're going to try and hit the ball.

"17. Prompt calls eliminate two chance option. A player shall make all calls promptly. A call shall be made either before the player’s return shot has gone out of play or before an opponent has had an opportunity to play the return shot"

Now if the ball is 5 feet past the service line you shouldn't return it but if it's close I'm sorry I can't stop my swing and make a call. I'm focused on returning the ball and fully committed to hitting it. I'll make my call as I swing but sorry I can't stop the swing.
 
#8
Actually it doesn't. The code actually assumes you're going to try and hit the ball.

"17. Prompt calls eliminate two chance option. A player shall make all calls promptly. A call shall be made either before the player’s return shot has gone out of play or before an opponent has had an opportunity to play the return shot"

Now if the ball is 5 feet past the service line you shouldn't return it but if it's close I'm sorry I can't stop my swing and make a call. I'm focused on returning the ball and fully committed to hitting it. I'll make my call as I swing but sorry I can't stop the swing.
It doesn't violate the code but it is a unsportsman like conduct
 
#9
A friend of mine does that on every fricken serve. I don't like it even when we are partners playing doubles. He claims he can't stop his swing, but yes, you can for a normal 70 mph rec serve.

Personally, I think he does it to mess with the server. Breaks their rhythm. Not cool.
 
#10
Welp. Im the a-hole.

I just played a match against a new partner. About halfway into the first set I started taking note that I return every fault serve that is close. I manage to yell out FAULT as Im swinging but by that point Im already hitting the ball.

I tried stopping but everything is happening so fast.

I definitely dont do it on the obvious balls like my friend does. But I think I’ll give him a bigger benefit of the doubt going forward.
 
#11
Okay this is another one of these "today i learned" posts, so I need to observe my own tendencies...

If the incoming serve is out and out of my reach, I will let it go, call it out, not attempt any sort of return. I think I usually let all first serves go past me if it's not in.

But if the incoming second serve is out and well within my reach, or near my body, I think there are times when I will call out, hopefully loudly enough, and try to weakly punch or float the ball back at the server or somewhere in the middle of the court to give him his ball back. I haven't had a situation yet where someone continued play from this because I led him to believe the serve was in, but seems like I should just let these balls go past me, and then pick it up to get it back to him?
 

sredna42

Hall of Fame
#12
Wait til you play the server who claims he heard you call a fault every 2nd time you hit a clean ROS winner. Or servers that quickserve you. Or servers that claim an ace if you let an obvious 4ft out serve sail by without screaming fault loud enough for the southern hemisphere to hear.

Dont know why they bother playing.
 
#14
When the serve is long, rather than stop my swing, I still hit the ball, but aim my return toward the ground in front of the net. This makes it quite obvious to my opponent what my intent was, and doesn't require any special dexterity to hold up my swing. I am generally a conservative returner, blocking back most returns deep in singles. So any shot into the bottom of the net is unmistakably intentional. Once my opponent understands that this is what I do, the verbal 'no' call becomes less important.
 
#15
When the serve is long, rather than stop my swing, I still hit the ball, but aim my return toward the ground in front of the net. This makes it quite obvious to my opponent what my intent was, and doesn't require any special dexterity to hold up my swing. I am generally a conservative returner, blocking back most returns deep in singles. So any shot into the bottom of the net is unmistakably intentional. Once my opponent understands that this is what I do, the verbal 'no' call becomes less important.
I was going to post somewhat the same.

Most of the time it is pretty simple to hit the out serve into the net. Sure, sometimes it is close and you swing away as you call "out", but really, unless you are facing really heavy pace, you have enough reaction time to either not swing or swing in a way that the ball goes intentionally into the net.
 
#17
Actually it doesn't. The code actually assumes you're going to try and hit the ball.

"17. Prompt calls eliminate two chance option. A player shall make all calls promptly. A call shall be made either before the player’s return shot has gone out of play or before an opponent has had an opportunity to play the return shot"

Now if the ball is 5 feet past the service line you shouldn't return it but if it's close I'm sorry I can't stop my swing and make a call. I'm focused on returning the ball and fully committed to hitting it. I'll make my call as I swing but sorry I can't stop the swing.
**Obvious Faults.**

Not "close."

**Obvious Faults. **
 
#18
If you catch or otherwise control the ball, you can send it back to the server when she is ready.

If you have the control to send the obviously out serve directly and gently back to the server, you have to control to stop it with your racket and then send it back to the server.

Hitting obviously out serves becomes a bad habit that is dangerous and rude in doubles.
 
#19
As long as you hit it anywhere towards me, I don't really care. I have a big serve and understand you're not going to have time to stop your return swing motion. Just please don't hit it to the other court so I have to go walk a distance to retrieve it.
So, serious question. You've got a big serve and understand if opponent cannot hold back and hits a fault back.
So do you then play against opponents who also have big serves and do you also return all faults back (or rather, take full swings at them), or are you able to modulate your swing to control a fault into the net?

Which then makes me wonder (this is not directed at you red rook), do the people who hit the faults back...maybe they do it because they don't want the first serve ball on their side of the net in the court, OR they don't want to retrieve the ball back at their own back fence after the point? Anyone admit to this??
 

kevrol

Professional
#20
Wait til you play the server who claims he heard you call a fault every 2nd time you hit a clean ROS winner. Or servers that quickserve you. Or servers that claim an ace if you let an obvious 4ft out serve sail by without screaming fault loud enough for the southern hemisphere to hear.

Dont know why they bother playing.
Pretty easy to take the point in both scenarios. Server might not like it but neither are their call.
 
#21
best way to handle this is as follows:

1. use the returned out serve as an opportunity to work on your first volley and volley it back for a winner. OR
2. If he blasts the return and it is rolling around, take the opportunity to chase it down and get it out of the way, safety first, ya' know.
THEN PLAY ANOTHER FIRST SERVE AS A LET.
HE CAUSED A LET BY MAKING THE BALL BOUNCE AROUND YOUR SIDE OF THE COURT AS YOU WERE READYING FOR YOUR SECOND SERVE.

When he objects (and if he is a gamesman, you know he will) just casually note that he caused the delay by smacking the serve into you rather than

a. catching it and sticking it in his pocket,
b. deflectiing it so that it rolls up to the bottom if the net out of play or
c. letting it go by and rattle around the back of HIS side of the court and be a distraction for him
 
#23
For those wondering watch a college match on YT and see how it works, men's and women's.
Give me the spoiler... how does it work?

I know they play net cords on serve, and there aren't ball boys/girls. Are there a lot of disputes about line calls or hooking (since they don't have line judges, right? Is there a roving ref, or do the respective coaches act as roving refs?)
 
#24
best way to handle this is as follows:

1. use the returned out serve as an opportunity to work on your first volley and volley it back for a winner. OR
2. If he blasts the return and it is rolling around, take the opportunity to chase it down and get it out of the way, safety first, ya' know.
THEN PLAY ANOTHER FIRST SERVE AS A LET.
HE CAUSED A LET BY MAKING THE BALL BOUNCE AROUND YOUR SIDE OF THE COURT AS YOU WERE READYING FOR YOUR SECOND SERVE.

When he objects (and if he is a gamesman, you know he will) just casually note that he caused the delay by smacking the serve into you rather than

a. catching it and sticking it in his pocket,
b. deflectiing it so that it rolls up to the bottom if the net out of play or
c. letting it go by and rattle around the back of HIS side of the court and be a distraction for him
I think I am going to do this next singles match. I hate it when out serves are blasted back .... if I then am having to corral the ball it is a hindrance and one that I did not cause and is creating undue delay between serves .... wonder how that will go over in League Land
 
#25
I "return" most faults, but I'm not blasting them down the line. Usually I just hit it back to the server to prevent having to chase down balls after every point. In 15+ years of playing nobody has ever complained, occasionally there's a bit of confusion if it's a close call but a verbal and hand signal typically avoids that. If it's way out or out of my reach, then I'll let it go to the back fence or pocket it. In doubles I'll try to hit it to the net person so they can pocket it. If somebody ever did indicate they didn't like it, I'd stop without discussion.

If this is the most annoying thing you encounter on the courts, consider yourself very lucky.
 
#26
The general goal is not disrupt the server. You can hit it back to the server so they can throw it behind them or put it in their pocket. Or in singles you can just hit it into the net. In doubles hit it into the net where your partner can quickly grab it, or hit to the opposing net guy so he can put it in his pocket. Basically just try to not mess up the server by making them move much or take too much time. The only time I have been frustrated with out returns was a doubles match this winter. One opponent would always return out serves as slice lobs over the net player. So, if he hit it hard enough to roll to the fence, it took forever to stop rolling since it was a lob. If he hit it softly, it would die towards the baseline and I had to go move the ball. We were winning pretty easily, so I actually just started hitting second serves to him to speed up the match.
 
#27
Before I get into the specifics, I'll define a "return". I consider that to be an actual hit, and I would almost never do that. Sometimes it can be hard to judge whether it's going in, but it's exceptionally rare that I'd have to go all the way through the swing before realizing it... I'm not even sure how the mechanics of you watching the ball and line would work there.

If it's a casual doubles match though, I usually tap the ball back to the server's partner. The vast majority of the time I'm going to put it in the net. It's easier to retrieve there, and with a bit of practice you can keep it from rolling back, or as boilerfan said your partner can grab it. There's a chance I might hit the ball back to the server if it's singles, or if I know them well in doubles (and believe it to be their preference).

In a "competitive" match, I would never even dink out serves back to the server. I don't recall ever playing someone who did it regularly to me, and on occasion someone will hit a ball back I just watch it go by. If I just missed the serve I want to stay focused on whatever adjustment I need to make for the second.

As has been stated, the idea here is to not disrupt the server. If I'm hitting them the ball regularly, I doubt it'll be with perfect precision. We'll end up waiting while they have to catch balls or wait for the balls to stop rolling. There's only one person on the court who has something to do at that moment, and it seems like hitting them the ball would always only slow down play.

Edit: All of this only applies to first serve faults, of course.
 
#28
OK, no. Just no.

Everyone tries to explain why *their* method of hitting obviously out serves over the net -- in violation of an explicit Code provision -- is OK. Oh, they are all ever-so-gently lifting the ball directly to the waiting hand of the server while at the same time saying they could not possibly stop their swing for an obviously out fault. Come on.

I mean, what the heck? "Hit it to the opposing net guy so he can put it in his pocket"? The opposing net guy does not expect yo to hit an obviously out serve right at him and may have dropped his racket. Just *follow the Code* rather than make up your own protocol.

As for the idea that no one has complained about your Code-breaking protocol? That's because those of us who follow the Code and don't want you to hit our obviously out serves back to us or our partners have become exhausted trying to educate every one of you Code-breakers one at a time.

Can you just please try to follow the Code on this? Please?
 
#29
Since no one has quoted the 2019 version of the Code on this, here it is:

"28. Obvious faults. A player shall not put into play or hit over the net an obvious fault. To do so constitutes rudeness and may even be a form of gamesmanship. On the other hand, if a player does not call a serve a fault and gives the opponent the benefit of a close call, the server is not entitled to replay the point "

That applies to first serves and second serves. It applies to a big 'ol swing or any form of hitting the ball over the net.
 
#31
That’s a good suggestion.

But it does take me out of my rhythm of serving. And it’s a waste of energy chasing down his blast.
understood, but remember, you should only have to do this once. after that, it's "hey dude, i've asked you once to knock it off. If you do it again i'm taking the point, but i dont want it to get to that, so could you please stop blasting my out balls back at me? thanks."

progressive escalation. like dealing with little children, some adults need 2-3 steps to get the freakin message...
 
#32
Since no one has quoted the 2019 version of the Code on this, here it is:

"28. Obvious faults. A player shall not put into play or hit over the net an obvious fault. To do so constitutes rudeness and may even be a form of gamesmanship. On the other hand, if a player does not call a serve a fault and gives the opponent the benefit of a close call, the server is not entitled to replay the point "

That applies to first serves and second serves. It applies to a big 'ol swing or any form of hitting the ball over the net.
I agree with everything you are saying ... with very very rare exception (doubles returning male big serve sometimes there is prayer involved and by the time I process my partner's call it is too late) I either stop the ball and pocket it, or let it go behind me to the fence.

However, on a second serve the point is over and the server needs the ball ... I pop that fault back over as gently as possible ... if I cannot pop it nicely, I retrieve it but at no point do I "return" it as in a point.
 
#34
I think we had this discussion earlier with the "bunt" back to the server as an option. You are nothing else if not consistent, Cindysphynx. ( and I mean that as a compliment)
 
#35
That applies to first serves and second serves. It applies to a big 'ol swing or any form of hitting the ball over the net.
I agree with basically everything else, but I think we're getting into phrasing here. If the second serve is out, do you catch it and throw it back over then?

For me, on a second serve fault that's easily reached, I'll essentially "deflect" that ball to the server (singles) or the net player (doubles). It's clearly not a return, so there's no confusion possible, and it keeps the game moving. I would classify any "shot" as being inappropriate though because that's hitting the ball away from me - delaying the game.
 
#36
I don't send balls to my opponents if they might not be ready to receive them. Sometimes net players drop their rackets or their gaze when they see a serve is way out; sometimes they turn to walk toward their partner or send them a ball.

That said, if someone really just pushes a ball gently back over the net after an obviously out second serve . . . it's not a huge deal.

From my experience, however, that is not what happens a lot of the time. Returners chirp, "Out!" and then return it cross-court with some pace, with the server may be ready to receive it and may be not. Rude.
 
#37
Doesn't it have to be obvious to call it a fault in the first place?
No.

The Code talks about calling balls in or out in terms of "certainty." You must be 100% certain it was out to call it out.

You can be 100% certain a serve was out even if it was not "obviously" out. That will be the situation where the serve came in hot and you couldn't stop your swing because it was close. No one will fault you for that, or at least, I won't.

Code:

7. Ball touching any part of line is good. If any part of a ball touches a line, the ball is good. A ball 99% out is still 100% good. A player shall not call a ball out unless the player clearly sees space between where the ball hits and a line.

8. Ball that cannot be called out is good. Any ball that cannot be called out is considered to be good. A player may not claim a let on the basis of not seeing a ball. One of tennis’ more infuriating moments occurs after a long hard rally when a player makes a clean placement and an opponent says:“I’m not sure if itwas good or out. Let’s play a let.” Remember, it is each player’s responsibility to call all balls landing on, or aimed at, the player’s side of the net. If a ball cannot be called out with certainty, it is good. When a player says an opponent’s shot was really out but offers to replay the point to give the opponent a break, it seems clear that the player actually doubted that the ball was out.
 
#38
OK, no. Just no.

Everyone tries to explain why *their* method of hitting obviously out serves over the net -- in violation of an explicit Code provision -- is OK. Oh, they are all ever-so-gently lifting the ball directly to the waiting hand of the server while at the same time saying they could not possibly stop their swing for an obviously out fault. Come on.

I mean, what the heck? "Hit it to the opposing net guy so he can put it in his pocket"? The opposing net guy does not expect yo to hit an obviously out serve right at him and may have dropped his racket. Just *follow the Code* rather than make up your own protocol.

As for the idea that no one has complained about your Code-breaking protocol? That's because those of us who follow the Code and don't want you to hit our obviously out serves back to us or our partners have become exhausted trying to educate every one of you Code-breakers one at a time.

Can you just please try to follow the Code on this? Please?
I let every obvious out ball go. I have no interest in going for it. Mentally it’s just not conducive either.

But if it’s close, i dont know it’s out until Im already physically & mentally committed to my return. I see the ball out by 2” but Im already in my swinging motion. I follow thru because I have too. And yes, it’s a real return. Too late to check up.

I make sure I yell FAULT extremely loud tho. There is no confusion on the servers part. They arent chasing down my return while wondering if their serve was in or not. No mental commitment on their part. No loss of rhythm.

If I could check up I would. If I knew it was out I’d never care about giving them the ball back and risk them claiming my bunt was a return.

My problem was with my opponent that doesnt clearly communicate faults, uses even the obvious ones to practice winners, and even returns lets as if they were legal serves. I dont find out he called a let until AFTER he doesnt chase down my return of his return.

I feel he’s taking advantage of the situation. But Im also going to ease up on my frustration of the situation because it’s very well that he could be doing all of this inadvertently.
 
#39
You may have missed where I (and most others) said I don't hit serves that are way out back

OK, no. Just no.

Everyone tries to explain why *their* method of hitting obviously out serves over the net -- in violation of an explicit Code provision -- is OK. Oh, they are all ever-so-gently lifting the ball directly to the waiting hand of the server while at the same time saying they could not possibly stop their swing for an obviously out fault. Come on.

I mean, what the heck? "Hit it to the opposing net guy so he can put it in his pocket"? The opposing net guy does not expect yo to hit an obviously out serve right at him and may have dropped his racket. Just *follow the Code* rather than make up your own protocol.

As for the idea that no one has complained about your Code-breaking protocol? That's because those of us who follow the Code and don't want you to hit our obviously out serves back to us or our partners have become exhausted trying to educate every one of you Code-breakers one at a time.

Can you just please try to follow the Code on this? Please?
 
#40
It is quite likely your friend is doing these Code violations out of ignorance. It is a difficult thing to correct when you see others doing it -- they probably have never once looked at the Code.

I think I mentioned here (but maybe I didn't) that I recently had to sub for one of my players because she was struck in the eye with a ball. It was doubles, and my lady was at the net. The opponent DF'd and sent Ball No. 1 over the net to my player. While she was grabbing that ball, she did not see Ball No. 2 coming at her fast. She had to see an eye doctor because it disturbed her vision. Diagnosis: A tear in the jelly in her eye (whatever that is called). The lady claimed it was an accident, although it may have been ball abuse. But if it really was an accident, it demonstrates that it doesn't take much to hurt someone, so sending obvious faults back over to be "helpful" is probably not a great idea.

I emailed my team and told them what happened and to be careful when sending balls over. I also advised them about not returning obvious faults, as it is clear when you watch most of them play that they are completely unaware of the Code on this issue.

Well, at least 18 women now know the Code.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
#42
No.

The Code talks about calling balls in or out in terms of "certainty." You must be 100% certain it was out to call it out.

You can be 100% certain a serve was out even if it was not "obviously" out. That will be the situation where the serve came in hot and you couldn't stop your swing because it was close. No one will fault you for that, or at least, I won't.

Code:

7. Ball touching any part of line is good. If any part of a ball touches a line, the ball is good. A ball 99% out is still 100% good. A player shall not call a ball out unless the player clearly sees space between where the ball hits and a line.

8. Ball that cannot be called out is good. Any ball that cannot be called out is considered to be good. A player may not claim a let on the basis of not seeing a ball. One of tennis’ more infuriating moments occurs after a long hard rally when a player makes a clean placement and an opponent says:“I’m not sure if itwas good or out. Let’s play a let.” Remember, it is each player’s responsibility to call all balls landing on, or aimed at, the player’s side of the net. If a ball cannot be called out with certainty, it is good. When a player says an opponent’s shot was really out but offers to replay the point to give the opponent a break, it seems clear that the player actually doubted that the ball was out.
The Code:

9. A player who claims to abide by 7 and 8 is actually lying unless he is calling most clearly out balls in, because no human can do anything in 7 and 8 with any degree of certainty. That is why HE and RB exist, despite there being line judges and a chair.
 
#43
By the way, I think one reason what I am saying sounds so weird is because many of you fellas serve very fast to one another. The ball is moving, and it has to be very far out to be obviously out.

I live in 3.5 ladies land. There are many slow or arcing serves, and not many have tricky spin. You often know the serve is going to be out before it hits the ground. Yet people return these serves.

Or they will return for two hours in a match and return every single fault. Dead giveaway that they are not even trying.

Those are the folks who are ignoring the Code, are ignorant of the Code, or enjoy a bit of gamesmanship.
 
#45
If you catch or otherwise control the ball, you can send it back to the server when she is ready.

If you have the control to send the obviously out serve directly and gently back to the server, you have to control to stop it with your racket and then send it back to the server.

Hitting obviously out serves becomes a bad habit that is dangerous and rude in doubles.
Yeah, so I am in the awkward position of a) agreeing with Cindy here, and b) also being an offender of this rule.

To be clear, the reason I "return" obvious faults is because that's what everyone seems to do... I probably ought to just change my habits in this regard. I can literally count on one hand the number of matches I've been in where people just either let "obvious faults" go to the back fence, picked them up themselves, or scooted them off of the court... the overwhelming vast majority of the time, my partners and opponents hit back "obvious" faults (albeit gently).

I am guessing that people do this mostly to make sure that they as the receiving team don't have to mess around with that ball on their side of the court or in their pocket... but I've never asked why they do it. They just do, and for me, it's a "when in Rome..." situation.

I have also experienced an opponent hitting back an obvious fault of my own, but made such a mess of it, hitting it wildly so that it bounced around and onto my court and forced me to chase it around to get it cleared resulting in such a delay that they just said "Take a first serve, sorry about that!". Most of the time, my "obvious" faults are not returnable though, so I haven't had much of an issue as the server in this regard. I have also given an opponent a first serve when I returned an obvious fault and made a mess of it... with that said, none of my rationalizations are necessarily valid. It's a bad habit, and I should stop doing it. I'll have to keep this in mind for my next match.
 
Last edited:

sureshs

Bionic Poster
#46
I saw a Miami match a couple of days ago (forget which) in which the linesman called the ball out and the umpire agreed when the player looked up at him, and then the player challenged and the ball was in. If seeing the space between the ball and the line was as easy as mentioned in the Code, such situations would never occur. Granted that the balls have more pace and spin than club balls, but the line judge and umpire are also similarly much more adept at calling lines, and what is more, they are properly positioned and not moving like the players. The Code was written to address a problem for which there is no human solution. It is like asking someone to spot a supernova a million light years away with the naked eye and demanding that he show confidence in his answer.

Basically, when you are pleased with your opponent's line calls, it doesn't mean that he is good or honest. It just means he reinforces your view and disagrees with you with a probability that is lower than your threshold of getting angry.
 

sureshs

Bionic Poster
#47
The most classic situation is this: You hit a down the line shot with direct visibility of the line, or a sideways volley from close to the net, and clearly see the ball in. Your opponent is on the opposite side of the court (the reason why you chose that particular shot) and just cannot make a determination, and may even have been running or looking the other way. The Code demands that he make a determination. The requirement to clearly see space between ball and line is moot when you cannot see the ball or line clearly, or even be turned to look in that direction. In such cases, the Code requires the opponent to call the ball in. However, I see no problem in the opponent saying: I could not see the ball, did you see it in? and go with that decision. Sometimes I have called my own ball out as the opponent was in no position to judge, but the Code does not allow that! Sometimes I myself have hesitated, and when my opponent asked how I saw it, I would say, it was close but I am not sure, let us call it out. These are the truthful ways of addressing such problems, acknowledging the reality of who can better see the ball and establishing mutual trust and respect, instead of harping on the Code.
 
N

Nashvegas

Guest
#48
It is like asking someone to spot a supernova a million light years away with the naked eye and demanding that he show confidence in his answer.
There was a guy in Australia who could do this. Wonder if he’s still around. His talent was described as akin to noticing the removal of a single grain of salt after a shaker full had been dumped on a table.
 
#49
If someone does this when you're at net when your partner is serving and it comes at you - catch it with your racket and stare at 'em for a couple seconds. Gotten in a couple people's heads that way.
 
#50
I did it today!!!

Opponent kept hitting long first serves back and I might add, no where near me or my partner. Asked nicely if she wouldn't do so as I now have to deal with that ball before my 2nd. Next time, did it again on a really obviously long serve .... Announced that I was taking a first serve ... she squawked her partner then said ... yeah it is in the code not to return an obvious fault .... best part, my repeat 1st serve was unreturnable.
 
Top