ITA Rules Updates
Effective January 1, 2012
Listed below are the ITA Rules updates as decided by the Operating Committee in December 2011.
Updated verbiage is in bold.
ITA Rule I.J.1 When coaching is allowed (Page 251)
1. When coaching is allowed. A coach may coach a player any time during the match so long as he does not interfere with play. Coaches shall be designated before the doubles matches and
may only be redesignated before the singles matches.
2. Electronic communication devices. Use of electronic communication devices (e.g. walkie-talkies and
cell phones) (i.e – cell phones, iPads, tablets, etc.) is prohibited; however, for Division I matches
only, use of such devices is permissible for texting and/or data tracking purposes (speaking,
listening or using any voice-activated features on such devices is not permitted).
If you are interested in referencing the website that spells it out in more detail, here is the site:
Note: There is also an "ITA Rules Updates" site listed under "Links" on the right side of the blog.
7 comments:
How is this rule going to be enforced?
I don't know many coaches in Texas who can type.
I'm pretty sure they all know how to text but they may do it in Aggie-talk or Sooner-language or Horn-verbiage.
From HAYMUNCHER:
This is much talk about nothing
It simply adds a provision for what Div 1 Coaches have been doing for years.
I have already had several officials who have attended schools state that they were told nothing about the rule relating to Div 1 Coaches only and were lead to believe it was about players.
The result of the way it seems to be presented in schools will be for ITA officials with low experience or skill levels to piss off a few Coaches for no reason.
A clarification is usually a good thing on any subject,but once again it seems that the USTA does not seem to understand the real world of ITA tennis
Personally, I have never seen a Division I coach texting during a match. I have seen high school coaches doing it from time to time but usually when they are walking from one court to another. I have also seen them receive texts so I give them a loving caution not to do it and its over.
Might be a rule that was birthed in optimism and utilized in nothingness.
I would venture to say to our most honored Haymuncher, that if that is the case, the fault lies with the instructors and not with the rule. Maybe one should place a call of inquiry to our Sectional Chairman to discover the truth behind the issue and then freedom will again reign supreme.
As I have ruminated a bit longer on this post, I would like to postulate the following:
* Perhaps the committee showed great foresight by writing a rule to allow coaches to be on the cutting edge of technology.
* Perhaps the reason we have never seen a Division I coach texting is because previously it was against the rule.
* Perhaps we shall see the validity of this new rule in the coming months. Coaches are notorious for changing the rules so if its not applicable, then I imagine it will disappear.
* Perhaps the rule is a good rule and will allow a new dimension to coaching.
Remember--we officials already use texting to allow us to communicate at a site and between courts so let's not be too quick to disallow this new rule.
Randy, Randy, Randy, how could you miss by so far the truly momnumental change made in the first revision? And no, I'm not talking about coaches using their fingers for more than picking nasal passages or other body orifi.
Please correct the blog posting to reflect the deletion of the word "he" from ITA Rule 1.J.1"When Coaching is Allowed".....It seems there is little more for the ITA to do than strike "he" and replace it with "the coach". Gotta be PC, don't ya see.
On the other hand, it does make sense to change the wording.
The Grape of Wrath
Post a Comment