Listed below is our topic for the day... I included one comment that we received from the person submitting the question. Let's hear your opinions...
SCENARIO: Player A wins a hard fought ITA singles match and, in his joy, intentionally launches the ball out of the court and into the stands. The ball doesn’t come close to hitting anyone. There are other singles matches in progress. Is this a carryover, code violation, Ball Abuse?
COMMENT: I bet you get a bunch of….”well, if it didn’t hit anyone” or ”if it wasn’t in anger or frustration” comments. I ask because I was told that for it to be ball abuse, the ball must be struck in “anger or frustration” prior to it leaving the court. But, that’s not what the book says. There’s nothing in the FAC about “anger or frustration.
QUOTE FROM FAC (PAGE 119):
Ball abuse. Deliberately hitting throwing, or kicking a ball that is not in play if the ball:
* leaves the playing area.
* hits or omes close to hitting any person, or
* could cause damage or harm.
16 comments:
No code. But I can't explain why not. So much of what we're taught to do has to do with judgment calls/decision.
In anticipation of the next question: If a player loses a hard played ITA singles match and after losing the final point hits a ball out of frustration into the stands that doesn't hit anyone is this a code carryover? Yes it is.
Judgment calls are individualized applications of the rules of tennis.
If you code a player for hitting a ball in celebration the REFEREE and coaches will be all over you. And you probably won't get invited to work any additional ITA matches for the rest of your life. Common sense had better prevail in these situations.
hmm. I would not be inclined to give a code violation, but I am sure some whiny coach or player will be bawling their eyes out.
Of course had an unusual code this past weekend where in the 12&U a player kicked his shoe across the net at the opponent.
Code Violation.
Under the case presented, then this is a carryover code--point-pentaly to the highest # player still playing.
If this was the last match to finish, then I would have a 'nothing.'
We train and train and train... and yet nobody can come up with consensus on what the appropriate ruling should be. Is this a reflection of poor training or a product of poorly written rules?
The rule used to say "when struck in anger or frustration." When in the hell did those words get removed?
Not sure when those words were deleted but they were... They probably should have left them in there because I'm not going to code a kid who just won a 3 set match and then hits the ball up in the air out of pure joy.
I guess I need to check with Roz Tuerk since she saves all her FAC's.
The rules used to state "in anger or frustration" but, as Randy pointed out in the posting, those words are no longer in the FAC. It seems the current FAC is very specific so, why would there be a difference between someone hitting a ball out of the court in joy, vs anger? And would not a coach whose team stood to benefit from a "call" have a legitimate "beef" with an umpire who did not make the call in the scenario described? If a "no call" occurs in favor of the home team, could there be a "home cooking" accusation made in this instance? And yes, as Slim Jim asks, is it poor training or poorly written rules that make the situation ambiguous? And Randy, hitting a ball up into the air is one thing, smacking a ball 50 feet out of the court in violation of the written rules of tennis, is another. Unless, of course, the rules are written only to be interpreted and enforced according to the whims of thousands of officials.
it should be a code.
Why pass it along to another official. If you win and curse
do we let that go too?
If, as Mr Worm implies, the coaches would be all over you for coding a player for hitting a ball out of the court in joy, perhaps the ITA coaches should be asked to clarify or modify this clearly written rule for application in ITA matches. Or maybe the officials should enforce the rule as it's written.
Is it really possible to write a rule for every possible situation that could come up on & off the court? Friend At Court would become Phone Book At Court! If everything possible is covered in the rule book, I guarantee that we will have more problems: more rules to enforce = more chances to make mistakes. At some point, common sense and reasonable judgment have to come into play.
you are talking about common sense, when you have the inmates.. I mean the coaches writing the rules for ITA. Nothing will be common sense.
Anonymous is correct, it isn't possible to write a rule for every situation but, in this case the rule couldn't be more clearly written. And, in case you haven't noticed, we already have the "phonebook at court".
Coaches know a hell of a lot more about the game than most officials. The last thing we need is rules clarified by a bunch of loonie officials. Based on comments posted here, you guys can't come to consensus on relatively easy rules. I would love to sit in a Rules Committee meeting and see what happens.
OMG
So why has nobody from the USTA Officials Committee responded to this situation? Shouldn't they weigh in and officially inform us peasant officials what the CORRECT response to such an incident be?
Good Point.
Randy, is there a way to bump this one up to the ITA for an "official ruling"?
Post a Comment