Tennis rules hinderance (rule 26) or lost point (24) or let?

[Arjuntino]

Very odd situation. Was playing doubles, Ball was framed in a volley and bounced with back spin back.

It bounced on opponents side, and was coming back over to my side, they tried to reach over to hit it, but hit my racket.

We just played a let. But is there a technically correct decision?

Based in ITF rules, would it be a hinderance on myside for stopping him from hitting it (even though it was on my side of the net)?
Or my point because he touched me? Rules say opponent shouldn't touch the court in my side, but do i/my racket count as part if the court?

 

[Chalkdust]

Very odd situation. Was playing doubles, Ball was framed in a volley and bounced with back spin back.

It bounced on opponents side, and was coming back over to my side, they tried to reach over to hit it, but hit my racket.

We just played a let. But is there a technically correct decision?

Based in ITF rules, would it be a hinderance on myside for stopping him from hitting it (even though it was on my side of the net)?
Or my point because he touched me? Rules say opponent shouldn't touch the court in my side, but do i/my racket count as part if the court?

Opponents point.
This is the only scenario where it is allowed to contact the ball on the opponent's side of the court - after it lands in the correct court but then bounces back over the next due to spin or wind.
Since opponent had a legal play on the ball, your obstruction of that play would be ruled as a hindrance and thus opponent's point.
As a side-note, you and your racquet are NOT considered part of the court.

 

[Arjuntino]

Opponents point.
This is the only scenario where it is allowed to contact the ball on the opponent's side of the court - after it lands in the correct court but then bounces back over the next due to spin or wind.
Since opponent had a legal play on the ball, your obstruction of that play would be ruled as a hindrance and thus opponent's point.
As a side-note, you and your racquet are NOT considered part of the court.

Got it, thanks. I doubt it will ever happen again, but good to know, in case I get the opportunity

 

[dkshifty]

Wow would have never thought of this exact scenario. I thought I've seen it all. Thanks for the info!

 

[WYK]

Wow would have never thought of this exact scenario. I thought I've seen it all. Thanks for the info!

How about the scenario where the ball is volleyed into a net cord, flies up on to your side whilst still in the air having not touched the court, then the spin and the wind take it back to the opponents side as you swing over the net into their side of the court to contact the ball on the opponents side of the net?

Though it is unnecessary to hit the ball after the net cord in the aforementioned case since the point is going to be yours, I have seen this happen twice in my life in doubles play. Once was me, and since I wasn't sure the ball was going to fall on to their side, I actually just stabbed at it with the top of my hoop like a pool cue since the ball was so close to the net and was actually dancing and spinning. If I swing at it, I would have likely hit the net. I definitely contacted it on the other side of the net by the time my racquet got to it. They gave me the point, mostly for style I suspect.

 

[stapletonj]

Interesting, WYK. I imagine that once any part of the ball crosses the plane of the net, it is fair game for you to hit. It is in play until it makes contact on your side of the court or outside the court with the ground or a fixture.

Think of an around the post shot that has crossed the plane but is clearly not going to land in. You could volley that shot (although why would you want to, but reflexes are reflexes).

Your opponent has hit the ball into your field of play, you may chase it down however you will, except for the prohibitions on touching the inside the lines portion of your opponents court, I imagine.

 

[J_R_B]

How about the scenario where the ball is volleyed into a net cord, flies up on to your side whilst still in the air having not touched the court, then the spin and the wind take it back to the opponents side as you swing over the net into their side of the court to contact the ball on the opponents side of the net?

Though it is unnecessary to hit the ball after the net cord in the aforementioned case since the point is going to be yours, I have seen this happen twice in my life in doubles play. Once was me, and since I wasn't sure the ball was going to fall on to their side, I actually just stabbed at it with the top of my hoop like a pool cue since the ball was so close to the net and was actually dancing and spinning. If I swing at it, I would have likely hit the net. I definitely contacted it on the other side of the net by the time my racquet got to it. They gave me the point, mostly for style I suspect.

Technically, you lost the point since you hit it on their side before it bounced, but in that situation, there's no way I would try to claim a point like that since it would be impossible to determine for sure which side of the net contact was made (and because it would have been your point anyway...).

 

[WYK]

Technically, you lost the point since you hit it on their side before it bounced, but in that situation, there's no way I would try to claim a point like that since it would be impossible to determine for sure which side of the net contact was made (and because it would have been your point anyway...).

Which rule states this? The only aspect I see regarding this in the ITF rules is it states you lose the point IF you hit the ball before it crosses the net. Since the ball did cross the net, this wouldn't count.
If it had hit the net and bounced up well onto my side of the court instead of travelling both ways, it obviously would have been a good ball to hit, right?

 

[onehandbh]

After you hit a shot that crosses the net and is live and still in play, I do not believe that you are allowed to hit or touch it.

 

[esgee48]

If you hit the ball and the ball hits the net and goes straight up, the receiving team or player cannot really touch the ball until they determined that the ball has crossed the net. That means they must wait until it is clear that the ball has come over; which implies a bounce on their side. Or the ball lands on the net and drops to the court. They cannot hit it out of the air while it is hovering unless they can see from the side that the ball has crossed. They can’t really do that because it would be an invasion violation. You as the last hitter can’t do anything such as try to hit it again or be in the way so that they are hindered. You can only be a spectator far enough from the net so as not to be creating a hindrance.

Anything done before the ball lands is probably illegal cuz there is no determination that the ball has legally gone over the net. This is very different from OP.

 

[muddlehead]

Very odd situation. Was playing doubles, Ball was framed in a volley and bounced with back spin back.

It bounced on opponents side, and was coming back over to my side, they tried to reach over to hit it, but hit my racket.

We just played a let. But is there a technically correct decision?

Based in ITF rules, would it be a hinderance on myside for stopping him from hitting it (even though it was on my side of the net)?
Or my point because he touched me? Rules say opponent shouldn't touch the court in my side, but do i/my racket count as part if the court?

Interesting
Curious, where we you standing to get your racket hit?

 

[Arjuntino]

Interesting
Curious, where we you standing to get your racket hit?

At the Net on the ad side. I had tried to poach the cross court shot and framed it. Then just put racket up, to try and block anything since i was out of position.

 

[jered]

If you hit the ball and the ball hits the net and goes straight up, the receiving team or player cannot really touch the ball until they determined that the ball has crossed the net. That means they must wait until it is clear that the ball has come over; which implies a bounce on their side. Or the ball lands on the net and drops to the court. They cannot hit it out of the air while it is hovering unless they can see from the side that the ball has crossed. They can’t really do that because it would be an invasion violation. You as the last hitter can’t do anything such as try to hit it again or be in the way so that they are hindered. You can only be a spectator far enough from the net so as not to be creating a hindrance.

Anything done before the ball lands is probably illegal cuz there is no determination that the ball has legally gone over the net. This is very different from OP.

I’m not sure this entirely correct. From what I understand, any part of the ball crossing the net is playable. i.e. if the ball is hovering in the plane of the net it is hittable. The hit must initiate from the hitters side but can follow through into the opponents court. Volleyball has a similar rule and this happens quite a lot.

In a practical sense, without an umpire or cameras it will be hard to call and the hitting player would have to call it on themselves anyway.

 

[muddlehead]

At the Net on the ad side. I had tried to poach the cross court shot and framed it. Then just put racket up, to try and block anything since i was out of position.

Yup.
The old racket up defense.
Sometimes used w/head down in a crouch.
You can do it w/o causing a hindrance if you don't wave the racket around.