During last night's SMU vs TCU ITA men's match, the officials had a discussion about the ITA rules. We would be interested in your ruling...
SCENARIO: In a men's ITA dual match, can only the receiver stop the server from serving or can either the receiver or his partner stop the server?
Send us your thoughts and comments real soon as we have a difference of opinion among the learned...
15 comments:
There needs to be more information before a correct ruling can be made. What was the reason for the delay?
As far as I know, the FAC makes no stipulation on who may or may not hold up the server. If the reason is because of a stray ball coming onto the court, ANY player may stop play. Code 29 states "If a player attempts to return a serve (even if it a "quick" serve), then the Receiver (or Receiving Team) is presumed to be ready." One could make the assumption that extrapolating this scenario to fit this issue, either player on the receiving team could stop play.
If the reason for the delay is because the receiver's partner is not ready for play, then it's the responsibility of the receiver to hold up play. Although you won't find this in the FAC.
either player
I assume you mean that the partner is not "ready" and therefore asks the server to stop? I would say "Yes" because he/she may need to go back to the baseline, or move up to the net or whatever. AND if this is within the 20 seconds between points, the team gets 20 seconds not just the receiver.
The easiest way to prevent a problem is for the receiver to be aware of what his/her partner is doing.
Now of course, if the partner sees a ball rolling from another court he/she certainly can ask the server to stop.
I would like to hear the other side of this issue because I can't think of a reason why the partner could not ask the server to wait.
Come on RM... State the question correctly.. SMU has an "injured" player lets just say COMPOUND fracture of the left tibula. Is is OK for the opponents COACH or partner to halt play and call a committee meeting to have the match nullified?
I do love the creative minds of some of our bloggers...
Awwww, come on Randy! Tell the bloglodytes who came up with this question and how long (unsuccessfully I might add) that individual spent trying to find justification for why the receiver's partner couldn't stop the server from serving. Last time I looked, the individual was writing a new rule to cover the situation.
Hmmm,
I'm trying to figure out who was working the match last night for such a silly question to arise.
If receiver is ready, then his partner is deemed ready. If the receiver has indicated that he is ready and the server serves an ace, the receiver’s partner cannot claim a let because he was not ready. The receiver’s indication of being ready is tantamount to indicating that his team is ready. Straight from the book ITA rules IC6. If it was just a claim that the net person was not ready. Sorry.
SEE PAGE 247. ITA
TAYLOR
Now for the REVELATION...
The official who said only the receiver could stop the server is our infamous and beloved Herbert Taylor. He does somewhat have a propensity toward rewriting the rule book from time to time but we love him...
RM: now wait a minute, I thought you said you had a "difference of opinion among the learned..." Where does Herb fit in?
Herb is self learned......
why is this even in question?
Of course the parnter can stop the server.
I would just run away.
Ref anonymous's inquiry, "why is this even in question?". See Randy's prior "Revelation" posting. That explainms everything. It was either Herb's propensity for rewriting the rule book, or it was a slow day in bloggoville.
Post a Comment