Have you ever had a dispute with a fellow player over a call on the court that you couldn’t settle? Or have you ever wondered why a certain ruling was made during a match you were watching? Maybe you’re just curious about how some scenarios, from the common to the ridiculous, are resolved.
The USTA constantly receives these types of questions from players and fans, so we figured it’s about time we provided a forum in which queries about rules can be answered. Thus, we present to you a new regular feature -- The Final Word.
Readers can send their burning questions about rules to finalword@USTA.com. Each week, we will select submissions and supply the definitive rulings though a Q&A with USTA Director of Officials Richard Kaufman.
Without further ado, on to our first batch of questions, which all have to do with doubles this week.
From Ken H: During a mixed doubles match a ground stroke from our opponents landed just long of our baseline. My partner instinctively returned the ball inside the doubles lines of our opponents. However, just after her racket made contact with the ball, I called out and quickly checked the mark (in the clay) to verify the ball was out. Our opponents returned the ball for a winner and tried to claim the point stating my partner returned the ball, despite my out call. What is the correct way to handle this dispute? My partner and I both agreed the ball was long and stopped play.KAUFMAN: If the call was made immediately just after the shot was hit, and you stopped playing the point, then that is fine and the call stands. In addition, on clay courts one understands that a player may need a moment to verify the mark, but the call still needs to be made ASAP. If the call came after the opponents hit the winner off of your return, then it is too late to call that shot out.
From Bruce B. (Minneapolis, MN): During a long rally in a doubles match, a player loses his shoe. The rally continues, in spite of the fact that the shoe is in the middle of the court. Is the opposing team entitled to call a let when the shoe comes off? In an officiated match, should the chair umpire call a let?
KAUFMAN: Without an umpire, the opposing team may call a let for the misplaced shoe of their opponents if they do so immediately. The team that lost the shoe cannot call a let since they cannot create their own hindrance, even if it is accidental. With an umpire the chair would have stopped play and replayed the point.
From Bernadette M. (Plymouth Meeting, PA): My opponent lobbed over my partner’s head. My partner shouted, “Oh, no” loudly. I ran and returned the lob. Our opponents had stopped playing because they heard “no.” Whose point is it?KAUFMAN: First, despite what some people think, there is nothing that says you cannot communicate with your partner, especially when the ball is coming in your direction. And because such communication in your case occurred well before the ball bounced, the claim that the sound your partner made could be mistaken for a line call or hindered your opponents is not really legitimate.
The only time confusion could occur is the case when a player says "out" or another form of communication to his/her partner standing at the baseline at the time when the ball bounced. In that case, saying "leave it" or "NO" would be preferable to saying "out." However, any word used when the ball lands on the ground or close to the ground when your partner hit the ball could be construed as a call. If a player yells "out” at the moment or close to the moment their partner played the ball, I think that does hinder your opponents.
Looking back at your situation, it really depends how loudly your partner yelled. Communication should not be done in a screaming voice. The ball was not headed in the direction of your opponents at the time of the communication so unless it was shouted so loud that 10 courts away could hear it, I am not sure why your opponents would stop play and claim a hindrance.
You are a doubles team. You and your partner disagree on a line call. One partner calls the ball out and the other partner disagrees with the out call. How do you proceed in an unofficiated match?
KAUFMAN: Because there is disagreement, the benefit must go to the opposing team and the shot is considered good.
1. If you acknowledge that your return shot on any serve or during a rally is a "weak sitter" (or in other words it was or would have been an easy put away for the opposing team) the point should go to your opponents.
2. If your return shot on any serve or during a rally lands out, or in the net, or you had no play on the ball, or you did not play the ball, the point goes to your opponents. An out call made by one of the players on a team cannot be considered a hindrance to their partner on their returned shot.
3. If you determine that your return shot on any serve or during a rally is not a “weak sitter” (or in other words it would NOT have been an easy put away for the opposing team) AND the shot did land or would have landed in the court, replay the ENTIRE point; first serve.
4. The team in disagreement on a line call can never win the point as a result of their return, even if it was a winner. In addition, the result of any shot made by your opponents off of your questioned returned shot is irrelevant. The out call made by one of the players on your team stopped play.
Have a question? Send it to finalword@USTA.com.
Past Articles:
Since 1997, Richard Kaufman has served as Director of Officials for the USTA and Chief Umpire of the US Open. He's an ITF Certified Gold Badge Chief Umpire and an ITF Certified Silver Badge Referee, and has been a USTA Certified Official since 1977. Kaufman has also worked as the Chair Umpire for the US Open men's final (1983, 1987, 1996), US Open women's final (1988, 1995), the Australian Open men's final (1987), the Wimbledon men's doubles final (1987), the French Open men's doubles final (1988), and the Masters Cup final (1985-96). |
| The Final Word - Past Articles |
|