Last Sunday, I shared the observation that the USTA League Regulations do not assign authority for the assessment of suspension points in the same way the USTA Friend at Court does for tournaments. As we start examining the USTA League Suspension Point System today, one of my first observations is how that resource sidesteps the question of authority by asserting applicability.
“The USTA League Suspension Point System applies to sanctioned USTA League competition” is the first statement in the document codifying the suspension point system. This first section is all about applicability. It also explicitly specifies that unsportsmanlike conduct is included under that umbrella.
Unsportsmanlike conduct – any player participating in a USTA League match consents to being penalized under the Point Penalty System (officiated matches) and the League Suspension Point System (officiated matches, and/or unofficiated matches when suspension points are assessed under the grievance process) for any unsportsmanlike conduct, including conduct by a person associated with the player. Persons who are unsportsmanlike may be asked by any member of a Championship Committee or any official representative of the League program to desist and/or to leave the match or Championship site, and must comply.
USTA League Regulations 2024, Regulation 1.d.iii
The Regulations in section 1 of the USTA League Suspension Point System essentially establish that anyone participating in USTA League consents to being penalized for misconduct. That explicitly includes unsportsmanlike actions.
We are in the midst of breaking down an episode that occurred earlier this year at the Tom Fey Tri-Level National Invitational Championships. It culminated with two players ultimately receiving suspension points. However, National Invitational Championships are actually not a part of the USTA League program. The USTA League National Regulations define all formats of play, and Tri-Level simply isn’t a part of it as it is not among the official formats listed in USTA League Regulation 1.04A.
Regardless of anything else that occurred in this episode, there is a strong argument that the suspension points levied against the two players never should have happened. When I was first told of the events at Tri-Level, my expectation was that the suspension points the players were told they had received would not complete processing to ever appear on their records. At some point along the way, I believed that someone would recognize that levying suspension points for a National Invitational outside the USTA League program violates the USTA League Regulations. Unfortunately, the suspension points made it through and indeed appear on the records of both players.
As long as we’re on the topic of the USTA taking liberties with its own regulations, there is also a case to be made that only one of the players penalized should have received suspension points.
When a Sportsmanship violation occurs that involves a doubles team, suspension points shall normally be assessed only to the doubles player who was responsible for the violation (Exceptions may be made if both players are responsible for such violation, or for a playing Captain who was the partner of the violating party.)
USTA League Regulations 2024, Regulation 1.d.i
When one partner must retire from a match due to injury, the other partner is surely not responsible for that. However, both players on the doubles team were penalized.
A fundamental incongruity underpins the entire episode. The Championship Committee decided that retiring from a match was flagrant unsportsmanlike conduct. However, no other source of USTA rules, regulations, or standards of conduct provides any precedence for that. The Championship Committee is arguably allowed to do that because National Invitational Championships are not a part of the USTA League Program. Once that premise is accepted, then they logically cannot be authorized to turn around and assess suspension points under the USTA League Program for violations of that rule that they just made up.
Going forward, the USTA needs to make a fundamental decision on the precise relationship between the National Invitational Championships and the USTA League Program. The gray area that created much of the controversy in this incident could be eliminated by the stroke of a pen to prevent similar episodes in the future. This is one of those cases where it is more important to make a clear decision rather than which option is ultimately taken.
This Friday, May 17, we will resume this thread by examining what the USTA League Suspension Point System says about reporting misconduct at Championship Events. I plan to wrap up the weekend with a Saturday post examining the sportsmanship aspects of retiring from a match. That will be followed by a capstone summary on Sunday. That will take us past the point of considering this part of the USTA governance framework through the lens of this specific incident. However, I still have quite a few general follow-on posts that have been sparked by this journey of discovery.
- USTA Tri-Level National Invitational Welcome Page, USTA SoCal Hosted Informational Page, last viewed April 6, 2024.
- 2024 USTA League National Regulations, USTA Resource Document, March 14, 2024.
- Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2024
- USTA Adult and Family Tournament, Ranking, & Sanctioning Regulations, USTA Regulation, as amended December 14, 2023.
- USTA League Suspension Point System Calculation Tables, USTA Resource Document, February 6, 2024.
- USTA League Suspension Point System 2024, USTA Resource Document, February 6, 2024.
- USTA League Suspension Point System Frequently Asked Questions, USTA Resource Document, March 23, 2023.
