Rules Question: Hindrance

[blindsquirrel]

MY doubles partner is serving 5-3, 30-40. Hits first serve in, and the return pulls him off court between ours and the next court. A similar thing is happening on that court (player is pulled wide). My partner in attempting to hit his reply has to pull up to avoid colliding and barely avoids running into the player on the next court so only weakly gets a racquet on the ball and thus dumps it into bottom of the net. We of course lose the game and then the next 3 games to lose the set and match. We believed we were entitled to a let but they balked and we let it go. Is this a let call?

 

[Turbo-87]

In every similar situation I have been in, the point was replayed. Just my experience. Most of the time, the opponent will ask if that bothered me/us and it's up to us to answer honestly. I ask the same.

 

[lobman]

If you called a let when the obstruction occurred it should have been granted. (But, obviously, not after the ball had been played). If there is an unavoidable obstruction, as in your case, a let is allowable.

 

[tennis tom]

If your partner kept playing I don't think you have a case. What if his ball had gone over, landed at your opponent's feet for a difficult shot, that your opponent hits into the net, would you have awarded them a hinder?

 

[esgee48]

Your partner should have called a let as soon as he sees that a player from the other court is going to interfere with his shot. He should stop immediately. If he attempts to complete the shot, there is no let. This assumes that he had a play on the ball. If not, then he should not call a let. This happens a lot at Golden Gate Park where the courts are laid out about 6-8 feet apart. Lots of let calls during league play from rolling balls and extra players on the courts.

 

[Alchemy-Z]

did the other court play a let?

 

[blakesq]

Was the tennis bag on the bench?

 

[JLyon]

well who invaded whose court?
Did your partner invade the other court or did the other court invade your court?
The obvious thing is that a let probably should have been called immediately, but not sure this one point caused your team to lose 3 straight games.

 

[beernutz]

If you are hindered by something that is out of your control and is not a permanent part of the court you can immediately call a let. For whatever reason your team did not do that and so you forfeited the option for a let call.

 

[McLovin]

If you are hindered by something that is out of your control and is not a permanent part of the court you can immediately call a let. For whatever reason your team did not do that and so you forfeited the option for a let call.

Correct. The Code says:

36. Let due to unintentional hindrance. A player who is hindered by an opponent’s unintentional act or by something else outside the player’s control is entitled to a let only if the player could have made the shot had the player not been hindered. A let is not authorized for a hindrance caused by something within a player’s control. For example, a request for a let because a player tripped over the player’s own hat should be denied.

 

[Govnor]

You gotta call it when it happens!!!

 

[Mr.Lob]

I'm returning serve in doubles. As I hit opponent's serve, his teammate yells out "Let". Another courts tennis ball had rolled on our side of the net, behind our baseline. My return would have been a winner. My thought was if a "let" was going to be called, it should have been from my side of the net. What would you have done? Guess they could say they were afraid someone would break an ankle, but really shouldn't hinder them.

 

[JLyon]

I'm returning serve in doubles. As I hit opponent's serve, his teammate yells out "Let". Another courts tennis ball had rolled on our side of the net, behind our baseline. My return would have been a winner. My thought was if a "let" was going to be called, it should have been from my side of the net. What would you have done? Guess they could say they were afraid someone would break an ankle, but really shouldn't hinder them.

If he called it immediately it is allowed regardless of side, can be viewed as a distraction as the ball is rolling at the back. Very common let call. Unfortunate for your team though.

 

[SGM1980]

Is the "easy sitter" rule still a thing?

My husband was going up for an easy overhead that he would smash down and then up over the back fence - he'd already done it a few times, so the opponents knew what was coming. A ball rolled into our side of the court and the man on the other side called a let. My husband finished his shot - which was unreturnable.

Things got a bit dicey and but I told my husband that they were allowed to call lets on either side of the court - but now I'm thinking that in that case a let shouldn't have been played?

 

[Govnor]

Is the "easy sitter" rule still a thing?

My husband was going up for an easy overhead that he would smash down and then up over the back fence - he'd already done it a few times, so the opponents knew what was coming. A ball rolled into our side of the court and the man on the other side called a let. My husband finished his shot - which was unreturnable.

Things got a bit dicey and but I told my husband that they were allowed to call lets on either side of the court - but now I'm thinking that in that case a let shouldn't have been played?

If a fair let is called, it doesn't matter at what stage of the point it happens IMO. Yes, the timing can suck, but it can happen both ways.

 

[Govnor]

I'm returning serve in doubles. As I hit opponent's serve, his teammate yells out "Let". Another courts tennis ball had rolled on our side of the net, behind our baseline. My return would have been a winner. My thought was if a "let" was going to be called, it should have been from my side of the net. What would you have done? Guess they could say they were afraid someone would break an ankle, but really shouldn't hinder them.

Totally normal to do this. I wouldn't have had any issue with it.

 

[tennis tom]

If you call a let every time a ball rolls toward or onto your court, especially where courts are close to each other and don't have fences, it'll take all the momentum out of a match. I knew an tight ***'ed engineer, who would call a let if there was a tennis ball rolling anywhere on the planet--he had a lot of other quirks too. If you're a good player, you can track an errant ball, judge whether it's a danger to your partner or opponents and keep playing the point. Your opponents should be watching out for you too, so don't be cheaten' 'em or they might be happy to have you step on a ball and win the match on a DNF.

 

[SGM1980]

I'm pretty cautious on the court - I've had three knee surgeries and don't particularly want a fourth - but overzealous let calls drive me crazy. A ball wandering over a foot away from the back fence doesn't bother me, and I hate it when people call a let on a good point for something like that. Anything within the lines of the court I will call from either side. Between "in the court" and "a foot from the back fence" is a gray area, but I feel like I'm a fair let caller.

Played two older ladies once who called EVERYTHING moving on the court within 20 feet of us a let. They called stuff that they *thought* might end up on our court. I can't even remember how many times we had this exact conversation:

them: LET!
me, looking around the court and then at my partner in confusion: What! Where?
them: over there (points to a ball still on the other court) it looked like it was coming onto our court
me: mmmmkay...

 

[OrangePower]

Is the "easy sitter" rule still a thing?

My husband was going up for an easy overhead that he would smash down and then up over the back fence - he'd already done it a few times, so the opponents knew what was coming. A ball rolled into our side of the court and the man on the other side called a let. My husband finished his shot - which was unreturnable.

Things got a bit dicey and but I told my husband that they were allowed to call lets on either side of the court - but now I'm thinking that in that case a let shouldn't have been played?

It's legit for the opponents to call a let for the ball rolling on your side. Imagine the ball was right behind your husband as he was stepping back to set up for the overhead - wouldn't you want him to be warned before he breaks his ankle?

Once the let is called, the point is replayed - no 'easy sitter' rule in play.

Of course the intent is that best judgement be used by all parties when calling the let. It should only have been called if the opponents felt the ball posed a danger to your team, or they were legitimately distracted by seeing it rolling about.

Unfortunately though, fair play goes out the window for some people when playing a match. Win at all costs, right?

If I were in your opponents position, I would call the let if I thought there was any chance at all your husband might step on the ball. Subsequently if your husband still made the shot, I would concede the point if there was no way I would have had a play on it anyway.

However there is nothing in the rules that requires that. So your opponents were within their rights as per the letter of the rule, although they took unsporting advantage of it.

 

[SGM1980]

However there is nothing in the rules that requires that. So your opponents were within their rights as per the letter of the rule, although they took unsporting advantage of it.

That's how I felt - that it was within their rights - and that's why I told my husband not to argue. I did think it was unsporting, though.

The point was clearly going to be over as soon as my husband touched the ball, and he was up at the net on the deuce side, I was at the baseline on the ad side, and the ball ended up in the doubles alley on the ad side about a foot away from the net. So pretty much as far away from both of us as it could physically be.

We got over it, though! But still annoying.

 

[mmk]

I'm returning serve in doubles. As I hit opponent's serve, his teammate yells out "Let". Another courts tennis ball had rolled on our side of the net, behind our baseline. My return would have been a winner. My thought was if a "let" was going to be called, it should have been from my side of the net. What would you have done? Guess they could say they were afraid someone would break an ankle, but really shouldn't hinder them.

You should thank them, that is precisely why a let should be called in that instance.

 

[GatorTennis]

I'm returning serve in doubles. As I hit opponent's serve, his teammate yells out "Let". Another courts tennis ball had rolled on our side of the net, behind our baseline. My return would have been a winner. My thought was if a "let" was going to be called, it should have been from my side of the net. What would you have done? Guess they could say they were afraid someone would break an ankle, but really shouldn't hinder them.

Depending on what level you are, some players can read shots very well, and some players telegraph everything if you pay attention. So you may or may not have hit a winner, but it obviously distracted your opponent. Of course we could wait for you or your partner to break an ankle an then ask why they didn't call a let

 

[Chelsie1]

If you call a let every time a ball rolls toward or onto your court, especially where courts are close to each other and don't have fences, it'll take all the momentum out of a match. I knew an tight ***'ed engineer, who would call a let if there was a tennis ball rolling anywhere on the planet--he had a lot of other quirks too. If you're a good player, you can track an errant ball, judge whether it's a danger to your partner or opponents and keep playing the point. Your opponents should be watching out for you too, so don't be cheaten' 'em or they might be happy to have you step on a ball and win the match on a DNF.

Wow. Track errant ball, judge danger, track actual ball, try to win point. If the ball rolls across, behind, beside, or flies over the court, I'm calling a let.

 

[Mr.Lob]

If you call a let every time a ball rolls toward or onto your court, especially where courts are close to each other and don't have fences, it'll take all the momentum out of a match. I knew an tight ***'ed engineer, who would call a let if there was a tennis ball rolling anywhere on the planet--he had a lot of other quirks too. If you're a good player, you can track an errant ball, judge whether it's a danger to your partner or opponents and keep playing the point. Your opponents should be watching out for you too, so don't be cheaten' 'em or they might be happy to have you step on a ball and win the match on a DNF.

I'm with you on that. I've picked up errant balls that have rolled near my feet, and tossed them off the court, during points before. I don't feel right calling a let, on a errant ball 4 feet behind the baseline, when the opponent has the upper hand during a point.

 

[Chelsie1]

Depending on what level you are, some players can read shots very well, and some players telegraph everything if you pay attention. So you may or may not have hit a winner, but it obviously distracted your opponent. Of course we could wait for you or your partner to break an ankle an then ask why they didn't call a let

Worth repeating.

The point is not over until it has been won. Sitters often end up as netted. Also, if you leave a ball laying around, some people-me included-- will try to get you as close to that ball as they can. Call a let. Pickup the ball. Prolong your season.

 

[Mr.Lob]

Depending on what level you are, some players can read shots very well, and some players telegraph everything if you pay attention. So you may or may not have hit a winner, but it obviously distracted your opponent. Of course we could wait for you or your partner to break an ankle an then ask why they didn't call a let

True. Better safe than sorry. The guy that called the let was a neurologist, so maybe he's a little more safety conscious.

We are a 3.5 doubles league. A few 4.0's sub in every once in awhile. The danger on that particular let call had to be almost zero. The call was more puzzling than annoying.

 

[Mr.Lob]

Is the "easy sitter" rule still a thing?

My husband was going up for an easy overhead that he would smash down and then up over the back fence - he'd already done it a few times, so the opponents knew what was coming. A ball rolled into our side of the court and the man on the other side called a let. My husband finished his shot - which was unreturnable.

Things got a bit dicey and but I told my husband that they were allowed to call lets on either side of the court - but now I'm thinking that in that case a let shouldn't have been played?

To me that is borderline cheating, and is about as classless as one could get in a match. Yes, within the rules, but come on... their gonna sink so low as to call a let on something like that.

Myself, and others in my league, have made similar let calls on points you've described. Then we all have a good laugh and play the next point.

 

[Chelsie1]

So who was it- Novak Djokovic vs Tsonga/US Open-when Novak (or was it Tsonga?) hit that sitter( when he was about 2 feet from the net) clear into the bottom of the net? I don't get how you choose to play by the rules of tennis you want to, but get upset when others do the same. Are we talking league, tournament, or social matches? I may let balls roll a bit during a social match, but not during league or tournaments where you expect that everyone has a grasp of the rules.

 

[OrangePower]

I don't get how you choose to play by the rules of tennis you want to, but get upset when others do the same. Are we talking league, tournament, or social matches? I may let balls roll a bit during a social match, but not during league or tournaments where you expect that everyone has a grasp of the rules.

I think the distinction is that while you are allowed per the rules to call a let when a ball rolls onto the court, you are not required to. So there is an element of judgement involved.

Everyone would agree that if the ball on court poses *any* physical risk to any of the players, or is a genuine distraction, then a let should be called.

However when the ball is *clearly* of no danger or distraction to anyone, then calling a let is just taking undue advantage of the situation. Especially when a player establishes a pattern of calling the let when behind in the point, but not when ahead in the point.

Even though it's within the rules, people will rightfully call it out for what it is.

As for making a distinction between league and social matches, I can't agree. Either the ball is posing a danger and/or is a distraction, or it is not. If it is, call a let, whether a league match or a social match. If it is not, no let. Calling a let in a league match where you would not call the let in the exact same scenario in a social match means you are just trying to leverage the situation to your advantage.

 

[tennis tom]

Wow. Track errant ball, judge danger, track actual ball, try to win point. If the ball rolls across, behind, beside, or flies over the court, I'm calling a let.

Thank you, multi-tasking is a good thing!

 

[Chelsie1]

I think the distinction is that while you are allowed per the rules to call a let when a ball rolls onto the court, you are not required to. So there is an element of judgement involved.

Everyone would agree that if the ball on court poses *any* physical risk to any of the players, or is a genuine distraction, then a let should be called.

However when the ball is *clearly* of no danger or distraction to anyone, then calling a let is just taking undue advantage of the situation. Especially when a player establishes a pattern of calling the let when behind in the point, but not when ahead in the point.

Even though it's within the rules, people will rightfully call it out for what it is.

As for making a distinction between league and social matches, I can't agree. Either the ball is posing a danger and/or is a distraction, or it is not. If it is, call a let, whether a league match or a social match. If it is not, no let. Calling a let in a league match where you would not call the let in the exact same scenario in a social match means you are just trying to leverage the situation to your advantage.

Understood-however-I said I might let a few balls roll around a bit in a social match-that usually being a match with my friends. In any match, I do not use calling lets to gain an advantage. I don't usually play with stray balls on the court and I consider any balls that I can see rolling around my court a distraction and a possible hazard depending on where it is. So who gets to determine if it's a distraction? The distracted. And since I call practically all lets, I'm not picking and choosing. That's just how I roll. (Sorry, couldn't resist! LOL!!!) So to be clear-- during a social match, I'm calling all lets-and those are usually safety issues. I'll let them roll the ball up to the net on a fault, but that's it. And that's what I was referring to when I said I might let a few balls roll around. So during a friendly match at the park, if the ball rolls behind the court during the point and I can see it I'm calling a let. I'd hope they would do the same for me. I like my bones intact.
Hopefully, playing tomorrow. Calling all East Coast lets!!! Peace, but no love! (Tee, hee!)

 

[OrangePower]

Understood-however-I said I might let a few balls roll around a bit in a social match-that usually being a match with my friends. In any match, I do not use calling lets to gain an advantage. I don't usually play with stray balls on the court and I consider any balls that I can see rolling around my court a distraction and a possible hazard depending on where it is. So who gets to determine if it's a distraction? The distracted. And since I call practically all lets, I'm not picking and choosing. That's just how I roll. (Sorry, couldn't resist! LOL!!!) So to be clear-- during a social match, I'm calling all lets-and those are usually safety issues. I'll let them roll the ball up to the net on a fault, but that's it. And that's what I was referring to when I said I might let a few balls roll around. So during a friendly match at the park, if the ball rolls behind the court during the point and I can see it I'm calling a let. I'd hope they would do the same for me. I like my bones intact.
Hopefully, playing tomorrow. Calling all East Coast lets!!! Peace, but no love! (Tee, hee!)

Completely agree that the distracted gets to decide if it's a distraction! So as long as there is no picking and choosing, I'm good with that. Consistency is key. But if there is a pattern of calling the let only in an advantageous situation, or only in a 'competitive' match, then this I have no respect for.

Good luck tomorrow. 'Let' the force be with you!

 

[Mr.Lob]

Couldn't help but think of this thread during my doubles match today. My teammate serving, opponents hit an easy floater to me at the net, as I'm about to crush it, a errant ball bounces on opponents side, and my partner yells out, "Let!". I crush the ball for a winner. Then my partner realizes his blunder, and asks opponent's if they're going to give us that point, or do they want to replay it. Of course they want to replay it. Which is fine. We go from being up 4-3, 30-0 on our serve, to losing the set 6-4. World's worst blunder? To me it was. Some may think my partner trying to prevent innury. No way. His expression showed me he knew he screwed up.

 

[Gut4Tennis]

Was the tennis bag on the bench?

yes along with a portable cooler and a backpack, the bench was so full of gear you had to remove something to find a seat to sit

 

[woodrow1029]

By USTA regulations, you are NOT entitled to a let if you are hindered by something or someone on ANOTHER court. If you were in the area between the two courts, you could call a let. But, you have to call it immediately. Once the ball is hit, it's too late.

2015 Friend at Court (page 19-20)
USTA Comment 26.7: If a player leaves the playing area to return a ball and is unable to make a play on the ball because of something or someone on an adjacent court (for example, a ball, chair, or person), is the player entitled to replay the point based on hindrance? No. Hindrance does not apply outside the playing area. The playing area is the area inside the fences or backstop. When there is a row of courts, the playing area includes the area between courts, but does not include any of the adjacent court or its doubles alley. Note that players’ bags and chairs located between courts are always permanent fixtures and no player on any court is entiled to a hindrance when encountering these objects.

 

[mucat]

woodrow answered it.

OP, you cannot hit a shot and found out you didn't make a good shot then go back to call a let, you are creating 2 chances for yourself. You have to call the let before you hit.