Would you call them on it?

T

Tennislover70

New User
Played a match the other day at 3.0 level. Won the first set 6-1. Won the first two games in the second set and then the opponents switched sides mid-set. Partner and I decided not to say anything (didn't want to seem *****y). We won the set 6-0, so no harm, no foul. But what if they would have come back and beat us with their new positions? Should we have called them on it right away? How seriously do you enforce USTA rules in league?
 
You sure that the other team didn't switch sides in the first game of the new set and you just didn't notice? But yeah- I'd say something if the other team was receiving on the wrong side.
 
At the 3.0 level you'd be surprised at how many people either forget what side they're receiving on or just plain don't know that you can't switch in mid-set.

I would definitely call them on it, but politely and with the assumption that it was an honest mistake rather than a deliberate attempt at cheating.
 
I think I'd only call them on it if it was a competitive match AND your team has a reasonable chance of advancing to playoffs/states.

Otherwise to me it's more about having a good time at that level.

Now in a tournament (not a round robin) I might call them on it because if you lose you dont get to keep playing.

But in any situation like a pervious poster said do it in a way that implies it was just an honest mistake by them.
 
Oh, dear.

You should call your opponents on it immediately if they switch sides mid-set. No need to be nasty; most of the time it is an honest mistake.

The reason is that if they "discover" this later, they are allowed to fix it. I do not know the exact rules of when it can be fixed. All I know is I *so* don't want to go there.

The rule is not intuitive for me at all, so I would have to look it up (or ask Woodrow!). Maybe you fix the error immediately, but not between first and second serve. Or maybe you fix it at deuce but not after the first point. Or maybe you can't fix it in a set tiebreak. I dunno.

Better is to call them on it immediately so nothing needs to be fixed later.
 
Tennislover70 said:
Played a match the other day at 3.0 level. Won the first set 6-1. Won the first two games in the second set and then the opponents switched sides mid-set. Partner and I decided not to say anything (didn't want to seem *****y). We won the set 6-0, so no harm, no foul. But what if they would have come back and beat us with their new positions? Should we have called them on it right away? How seriously do you enforce USTA rules in league?
Click to expand...

Yeah, definitely call them on it. Not allowed.
 
Cindysphinx said:
The reason is that if they "discover" this later, they are allowed to fix it. I do not know the exact rules of when it can be fixed. All I know is I *so* don't want to go there.

The rule is not intuitive for me at all, so I would have to look it up (or ask Woodrow!). Maybe you fix the error immediately, but not between first and second serve. Or maybe you fix it at deuce but not after the first point. Or maybe you can't fix it in a set tiebreak. I dunno.
Click to expand...

If you notice it in the middle of a game, they remain in their altered positions for the remainder of that game, then at the next receiving game, they go back to their original positions.
 
oii, you bloody wankers. what the h3ll do you think you're doing. get back to your sides you cheating b@stards.

but that's just me
 
woodrow1029 said:
If you notice it in the middle of a game, they remain in their altered positions for the remainder of that game, then at the next receiving game, they go back to their original positions.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the clarification Woodrow. I've been spouting "Points played in good faith stand, and as soon as the error is discovered players assume their proper positions." So, it's on the next receiving game they make the correction.
 
Better you call them on it nicely than their next opponent doing it nastily. Consider it a learning moment.
 
tennis tom said:
Thanks for the clarification Woodrow. I've been spouting "Points played in good faith stand, and as soon as the error is discovered players assume their proper positions." So, it's on the next receiving game they make the correction.
Click to expand...

This is about the only error you don't correct immediately. The logic is that you don't want the same person receiving serve 2 times in a row. So, it avoids the possibility of having the wrong player "accidentally" receiving on one side (when they may be the better returner) then to realize, "OOPS, I forgot I receive on this side", so they can't then go and receive two times in a row.
 
Thanks for the responses. Not sure if it was intentional or not, but they did have a little conference before switching. I served the first game, so I know they didn't switch at the beginning of the set. Anyway, they seemed like nice ladies, but if it were to happen again, I would point it out nicely.
 
kylebarendrick said:
Q: "Weren't you guys receiving on the other sides?"

A: "yeah, you're right - sorry about that"
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd definitely say something, and this is very likely to be the extent of it. Also agree that at this level, it is often not even intentional, either not realizing the rule or not even realizing that they switched sides.
 
Last edited:
woodrow1029 said:
This is about the only error you don't correct immediately. The logic is that you don't want the same person receiving serve 2 times in a row. So, it avoids the possibility of having the wrong player "accidentally" receiving on one side (when they may be the better returner) then to realize, "OOPS, I forgot I receive on this side", so they can't then go and receive two times in a row.
Click to expand...

What do you do if the error is discovered between first and second? Doesn't it get complicated when it is a service order mistake?

Are there any other exceptions to fixing errors immediately? Maybe if I just memorize the exceptions . . .
 
Cindysphinx said:
What do you do if the error is discovered between first and second? Doesn't it get complicated when it is a service order mistake?

Are there any other exceptions to fixing errors immediately? Maybe if I just memorize the exceptions . . .
Click to expand...

If you discover the error between first and second serve, the point is started, so you would remain as altered for that game, then correct for the next receiving game. However, if the players all agree that they can change immediately, I would say fine, but the server should get a first serve. That's not in the rules, but it would seem to me to be an acceptable solution.

Service order mistake: If you discover it in the middle of a game, correct immediately. If you discover it after a game is completed, the order remains as altered. In a tiebreak, if you discover it after an even point, correct immediately, if you discover it after an odd point, the order remains as altered for the remainder of the tiebreak.

Error on end of the court, correct immediately.
 
Ok.

So in a tiebreak, I step up to serve at 5-4. It is not my turn to serve; my partner should be serving. Shouldn't we fix that immediately?

I think that whole rule should be discarded on the grounds that players cannot understand it or remember it.

A better rule would be "if a team makes an error on receiving side or service order, the opponents shall decide whether the error should be fixed immediately or whether the opponents shall finish the set with the new receiving sides/service order. All points played in good faith stand."

We could call it the "You snooze you lose" rule.

As it stands, folks don't know the rule so they wind up searching for a "fair" solution anyway. Why not just write the rule that way.
 
Cindysphinx said:
Ok.

So in a tiebreak, I step up to serve at 5-4. It is not my turn to serve; my partner should be serving. Shouldn't we fix that immediately?
Click to expand...

Cindy, you are making it harder to understand than it actually is. If you step up to serve, but don't actually serve, and then you realize it, then of course fix it.

If you serve the 5-4 point, then it becomes 5-5 or 6-4, and then you realize it's her serve, then you correct it for her to serve the next point.

If you don't realize it until 6-5, then you keep the order as altered for the remainder of the tiebreak, so that nobody serves 4 consecutive points.
 
Cindysphinx said:
Um . . Yeah. . :)

Seriously, though, don't folks get these issues wrong on your rules quizzes?
Click to expand...

Probably, which is even more amazing since the annual test is just a take home test in which you have to reference the page number in the Friend at Court in which you got the answer from.
 
woodrow1029 said:
Probably, which is even more amazing since the annual test is just a take home test in which you have to reference the page number in the Friend at Court in which you got the answer from.
Click to expand...

I meant the quizzes you personally do on TT.

Even on the open book official exam, it is tough. It is a very, very long and detailed rule.
 
mebbe a bit harsh. but never understood y ppl wanna b tennis umpires. u learn all those technical rules n then 99% of the actual job is basically glorified scorekeeper

much more challenging/interesting to be referee in football, basketball, soccer etc.
 
TeflonTom said:
mebbe a bit harsh. but never understood y ppl wanna b tennis umpires. u learn all those technical rules n then 99% of the actual job is basically glorified scorekeeper

much more challenging/interesting to be referee in football, basketball, soccer etc.
Click to expand...

And what experience are you basing your ignorant opinion on?
 
involvement of ump in actual matchplay brah. overrule or warnin once in a blue moon, otherwise game pretty much runs itself. pretty minimal compared 2 other sports officials

i kno u prolly get all huffy bout the big responsibility o managin linesppl n ballkids n stuff but it just busywork. compared 2 (say) soccer ref, ump not req to make anywhere near as many judgement calls affectin the match, or do as much player management

not ur fault u pretty redundant most o teh time brah. tennis runs itself w/o interference much better thn other sports
 
TeflonTom said:
involvement of ump in actual matchplay brah. overrule or warnin once in a blue moon, otherwise game pretty much runs itself. pretty minimal compared 2 other sports officials

i kno u prolly get all huffy bout the big responsibility o managin linesppl n ballkids n stuff but it just busywork. compared 2 (say) soccer ref, ump not req to make anywhere near as many judgement calls affectin the match, or do as much player management

not ur fault u pretty redundant most o teh time brah. tennis runs itself w/o interference much better thn other sports
Click to expand...
Ahh ok. Now I know you really are just ignorant and posting just to "hear yourself talk".
 
woodrow1029 said:
Ahh ok. Now I know you really are just ignorant and posting just to "hear yourself talk".
Click to expand...
brah, lets get serious for a sec. i kno atp umps n i kno fifa referees. if u think the job o the former is newhere near as challengin as the job o the latter u sorely deluded

yeah umps do important job. yeah tennis rule r technical. yeah, job can be high pressure at times n u do a lot of really important stuff behind scenes that normal ppl dont see. but simple reality - they have nowhere near as much impact on actual matchplay as officials in other sports. far more match irrelevant

theres a reason 95% of competitive tennis matches in the world r played without umps, but pretty much every soccer match has a ref
 
Cindysphinx said:
The rule is not intuitive for me at all, so I would have to look it up (or ask Woodrow!).
Click to expand...
Maybe this will make it seem more sensible?

In a baseball double-header, if the lead-off hitter makes the last out, can he be the first up to bat for the next game? Sure he can, even though this would have him hitting back-to-back.

The same with tennis. A new set is like a new match in a sense, everything starts over. The better server will serve next, not the next in rotation, also, the receiving team can change their rotation as well.
 
easy 2 call ppl who disagree with u a troll

serious, u wanna compare the jobs of umpires n other referees point by point we can do that. u may not like my opinion but it has good basis
 
TeflonTom said:
easy 2 call ppl who disagree with u a troll

serious, u wanna compare the jobs of umpires n other referees point by point we can do that. u may not like my opinion but it has good basis
Click to expand...

Can anyone actually decipher what this guy is saying? :confused:
 
Steady Eddy said:
Maybe this will make it seem more sensible?

In a baseball double-header, if the lead-off hitter makes the last out, can he be the first up to bat for the next game? Sure he can, even though this would have him hitting back-to-back.

The same with tennis. A new set is like a new match in a sense, everything starts over. The better server will serve next, not the next in rotation, also, the receiving team can change their rotation as well.
Click to expand...

Huh?

What does that have to do with fixing errors in service order or receiving side in the middle of a set or game?
 
TeflonTom said:
brah, lets get serious for a sec. i kno atp umps n i kno fifa referees. if u think the job o the former is newhere near as challengin as the job o the latter u sorely deluded

yeah umps do important job. yeah tennis rule r technical. yeah, job can be high pressure at times n u do a lot of really important stuff behind scenes that normal ppl dont see. but simple reality - they have nowhere near as much impact on actual matchplay as officials in other sports. far more match irrelevant

theres a reason 95% of competitive tennis matches in the world r played without umps, but pretty much every soccer match has a ref
Click to expand...

woodrow1029 said:
Ahh ok. Now I know you really are just ignorant and posting just to "hear yourself talk".
Click to expand...

I have a ton of respect for umpires and lines people, but Teflon is right. The job is fairly pedestrian compared to football, basketball, hockey or soccer refs. I don't think this is a knock on tennis umpires, but just a fact. Even volleyball, with a similar setup to tennis, is quite a bit more difficult to officiate.
 
My head hurts just from the rules which I'll never remember and hurts even more reading TeflonTom's Twitter shorthand where sentences in a forum post should be the norm norm...
 
I think you should call them on it if the match counts, because even if they didn't do it on purpose - it's just wrong and might give them an advantage. If strictly a friendly game and nobody cares, then whatever. We overlook a lot of rules in those kinds of games.
 
TeflonTom said:
prejudice!
Click to expand...

Just read some of the previous... funny!
Tef-T, you may be a bit too hip for the self-important fossils on this message board. I predict you will tire of their ho-hum before they all put you on their "ignore" lists.

As to your comments about umpires though - I don't agree. I think umpires and linesmen essentially complete the game at the pro level, and have an important job for so many reasons... Wish I had them at all of my matches, it would make for cooler heads and allow players to focus more on the game instead of getting emotional about their opponents' shennanigans. There you go - I'm apparently an old fart as well!
 
Cindysphinx said:
Huh?

What does that have to do with fixing errors in service order or receiving side in the middle of a set or game?
Click to expand...
To me it is this: it would be unfair to have your best server serve each game, or your best receiver receive each point. That's not being a team.

But a new game, or new set, means a new rotation! See? (Or maybe I should say 'nevermind'. :oops: )
 
jc4.0 said:
As to your comments about umpires though - I don't agree. I think umpires and linesmen essentially complete the game at the pro level, and have an important job for so many reasons... Wish I had them at all of my matches, it would make for cooler heads and allow players to focus more on the game instead of getting emotional about their opponents' shennanigans. There you go - I'm apparently an old fart as well!
Click to expand...
hey brah -all seriousness, agree with u100%. yeh they do important job.

just dont think it that hard compared to officials in other sportz. much tougher 2 referee soccer, football, basketball etc where, more crucial decisions, more judgement used, bigger impact on game. ya feel?

n ignore list is fine. neone so smallminded 2 wanna tick their fingers in ears n not interact prolly aint worth wastin time on neway. funny enuf, most ppl who say they put me on ignore list seem more in love with tellin other ppl what they think than discussin stuff neway. no great loss
 
Last edited:
Steady Eddy said:
To me it is this: it would be unfair to have your best server serve each game, or your best receiver receive each point. That's not being a team.

But a new game, or new set, means a new rotation! See? (Or maybe I should say 'nevermind'. :oops: )
Click to expand...

Um . . .

Somehow, for one brief shining moment, that made sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

McLovin
Timed Match: Who's responsibility is it to call 'time'?
Replies
18
Views
1K
Cindysphinx
Cindysphinx
OnTheLine
Disagreement on score AFTER a match, UGH.
Replies
23
Views
2K
J_R_B
J
M
When To Changeup?
Replies
1
Views
810
Caswell
C
Xisbum
What would YOU do?
Replies
28
Views
2K
cll30
C
M
USTA Times Match Scores
Replies
2
Views
280
Purestriker
Purestriker
Back
Top