A couple of days ago, I smugly observed that I had delayed discussion on jumping over the net in the middle of a point. That deferral was because I knew it was coming up in a future case ruling and I needed to leave myself something to write about. Today I am confronted by an ITF Case Decision that I have already covered fairly thoroughly. Oops.
Case 7. A ball that has just been served hits the receiver or in doubles the receiver’s partner before it touches the ground. Which player wins the point?
Decision. The server wins the point, unless it is a service let.
USTA Friend at Court, ITF Rules of Tennis, Section 24
Previously in “How to Lose a Tennis Point: Getting Pegged” I observed that getting hit by a serve, regardless of where the player or partner was standing, resulted in loss of the point. That post included one of my favorite WTA point clips of Ostapenko (almost) drilling Alize Cornet with a serve to win a point. As an administrative side note, points that culminate with an indignant Alize Cornet are fabulously entertaining.
The unique aspect introduced by this Case Decision is that the point is not lost if the serve has clipped the net. In that case it would be a let, and replayed. The service is not out of play until it strikes something. If that something is a receiving player, then the assumption cannot be made that the ball was heading out, regardless of where the receiving player is standing.
This case ruling does give me the opportunity to share a story that illustrates that tennis officials don’t always have a razor sharp understanding of the rules. In this case it was a Texas scholastic official rather than a USTA official. The UIL officials that I personally know are also USTA officials, but my social circles may be a little skewed toward more knowledgeable tennis people.
The umpire I gave birth to was playing a match in the high school team regional finals that decided which team advanced to the state tournament. In school team tennis, many of the rules and etiquette of tennis are not strictly observed. Scholastic and collegiate team tennis is a raucous experience. I love the atmosphere.
In any case, in my daughter’s doubles match, the other team’s players were crowding the center line of the service box to distract the server. Intentionally distracting behavior… is tolerated in team tennis. My daughter served an ace up the T that was called out. The coach immediately ran onto the court to protest, and spectators were booing or cheering in accordance with team affiliation.
The scholastic umpire who was on the court upheld the call observing that the ball was out because he thought it clipped the player crowding the center stripe before it bounced. As frustrating as it is to see an umpire miss a call… that goes up by an order of magnitude when the call is missed because the official does not understand the rules. Sometimes we all channel a little Alize Cornet.
The good news is we are almost done with section 24 “Player Loses Point.” There is only one ITF Case Decision and two USTA comments to dispense with.
- United States Tennis Association (2020) Friend at Court. White Plains, NY
