Friday, April 06, 2012

How Would You Rule? MTO

SCENARIO

During a Division I Men's Dual match player A receives a medical timeout for cramping and treatment. He had received a time violation warning the game before taking the medical time out. He then resumes play and plays four more points. He then begins to cramp again and takes 45 seconds before the chair umpire intervenes.

What would you do? Be sure to note that there are a lot of little twists and turns in this one.

A. Give him a time violation point penalty (since he had already received a time violation warning) and then a code violation if he does not resume play in 20 seconds.

B. Give him a code violation saying that the cramping reverts back to the previous medical time out.


6 comments:

GL said...

I would say A----he had a warning and the next time violation would be the point penalty. He didn't indicate that he wanted a medical time out. However the code would be involved if he didn't return to play withing the time violation penalty notice because of delay of game.

RM said...

Most of us say "A" but we heard that at Kalamazoo they said "B" because the delay reverts back to the previous MTO.

I know of no logical basis for that thought pattern.

Tennis God said...

In the situation described, the proper procedure is to issue a code violation for delay of game. Remember, if a player has already received a medical timeout for cramping, and then begins to cramp later in the match (which is OBVIOUS), a code violation must be issued without a preceding time violation.

Wally said...

Being overly fair would be to go with A. time violation--point penalty. Because if indeed it is cramping coming on (again), it won't be long before a code violation--delay of game penalty would be forthcoming too.

This prevents you from being 'sued' for being unfair to little johnny.

RM said...

The answer is found on page 121 of the Friend at Court and the answer is B.

And Myron, Vickie, and I were all wrong on this one...

Anonymous said...

The real danger in this rule (answer B) is that it calls for the umpire to make a medical judgment. I can see where I would issue a code for cramping only to have the limping player say that they sprained their ankle. Now what do I do?