An engineer overthinks tennis in a daily journal.
A clip of Denis Shapovalov yelling at the Italian Open crowd to “Shut the f*** up!” went viral last week. The incident occurred in his first round match against Lorenzo Sonego following a call that didn’t go his way after the umpire inspected a ball mark. The episode revealed that Shapovalov didn’t understand one of the fundamental rules of tennis.
3 responses
Last week I wrote about an unusual point where a ball in play bounced off one of the sensors used by the FoxTenn line calling system. It happened at Estoril during the semifinal match between Sebastian Korda and Francis Tiafoe. After a week of overthinking that occurrence, I want to revisit this rules interpretation and implications. Additionally, the Estoril tournament posted a video of it in the interim and this gives me the perfect chance to share out that clip.
Last weekend in a semi-final match in Estoril, a ball struck one of the on-court sensors used by the FoxTenn line calling system. Sebastian Korda hit a ball that tipped the net cord and went almost straight up. Before the ball struck the ground it came into contact with one of the black boxes installed at the bottom of the net that houses the sensors/cameras. That unlikely occurrence presents an interesting case study of the rules.
2 responses
Sometimes two players disagree on the current score during a tennis match played without an on-court official. The correct procedure to resolve the dispute is to roll back the score until they reach agreement on the score at a previous point in the match. Play is resumed from there. In fact, if a roving official is summoned to the court that is usually how resolution is achieved. If the score was previously announced by one player without objection from the other, that is generally regarded as a point of agreement.
The “Role of Court Officials” section of the ITF Rules of Tennis contained in the USTA Friend at Court describes the roles and authority that various officials have during a USTA officiated match. The rules are clear that questions of fact, such as whether a ball was in or out, can only be ruled on by an official based on direct observation. However, the rules surrounding overrules also reveal that sometimes officials with direct observation disagree on the correct call.
Last week a highly regarded junior tennis coach responded to my post on twitter about asking for the referee. Brian Notis of the Austin Tennis Academy observed that at the grassroots level players will encounter roving officials who do not understand subtle aspects of the Rules of Tennis. All players should be aware that they have the right to call for the referee if they disagree with an umpires interpretation of tennis law.
In officiated matches, tennis players have the right to call the referee to court if they disagree with the umpire’s interpretation of tennis law. Unless the referee is sitting on-court, the chair umpire has the final decision authority on questions of fact that might arise during the match. The referee may only rule on interpretation of tennis law when summoned to a court.
The ATP is having a bad run of on-court reckless behavior involving multiple players. The men’s professional tour has been criticized by some in the media for not taking more decisive action to penalize the individuals involved. Some are starting to wonder if the ATP actually wants to discourage that behavior.
There are provisions interspersed throughout the ITF Rules of Tennis and the USTA Friend at Court for suspending play when demanded by external conditions. In officiated matches, the decision on when to suspend play is at the discretion of the chair umpire or the referee. The rules are somewhat vague in defining the conditions under which a match may be suspended.
1 response
Today I was astonished to discover that I haven’t written directly about a rule that appears in the USTA Friend at Court since November of last year. It is high time we resumed our (apparently no so) steady march through the Rules of Tennis. We are currently in the “Role of Court Officials” section and this week will turn our attention to the line umpire.