This weekend, we have been focusing on the unwritten rules and etiquette about returning stray balls to neighboring courts. Today’s final topic is an aspect of Principle 42 within “The Code” of the USTA’s Friend at Court. I would be willing to wager that most players neither understand nor follow the fine details of this rule.
The last sentence of Principle 42 indicates that balls should not be returned to the adjacent court until any point in progress is over. Additionally, it includes a preferential directive to return the ball to the server.
Retrieving stray balls. Each player is responsible for removing stray balls and other objects from the player’s end of the court. Whenever a ball is not in play, a player must honor an opponent’s request to remove a ball from the court or from an area outside the court that is reasonably close to the lines. A player shall not go behind an adjacent court to retrieve a ball or ask a player on an adjacent court to return a ball while a point is in play. When a player returns a ball from an adjacent court, the player must wait until the point is over on the court where the ball is being returned and then return it directly to one of the players, preferably the server.
Principle 42 from “The Code”, USTA Friend at Court
I do not always wait until the point on the adjacent court is over before returning the ball. Usually, I wait a couple of shots to see if termination is imminent. When it appears that the point may go on for an extended duration, I find a place to put the ball in an unobtrusive area. Unless it is really windy, a good location is at the back fence between the two adjacent courts. That placement typically allows for retrieval without disruption on either court.
Show me a person who intractably believes that you always have to wait for the point on the adjacent court to conclude before returning the ball, and I will show you a person who never played next to two moonballers who consistently play five-minute points. Ain’t nobody got time for that. Sometimes, it simply isn’t practical to wait for the point to end.
I am curious how many players know that the behavioral norms of tennis outlined in Principle 42 express a preference that wayward balls be returned to the server. A small number apparently do, as evidenced by occasionally hearing the adjacent court ask who is serving before sending the ball back.
This rule has prompted me to think through my own decision tree when returning balls to the neighboring court. If the ball can be played with a one-touch deflection and the player on my side is nearby and expecting the ball, I send it there without regard to who is serving. Doing the most expedient thing feels like the right thing to do.
In those situations where the ball’s return isn’t immediate, I generally pause while looking for an indication of which player on the adjacent court wants it. In doubles, that is frequently the returner’s partner. I will certainly not delay the return of the ball to quiz the players about who is serving. Nor do I think it is reasonable to expect accurate tracking of who is serving on adjacent courts.
Is there anyone who fastidiously follows the letter of the law on this rule? I certainly don’t.
Sometimes, the errant ball is a first serve. I retrieve it and try to indicate that I’ll hold it until the point is over. Usually, the players look at me like I’m nuts and say, “No, just send it back now.” I do, and then they grudgingly (by their tone of voice) say to the server, “Well, all right, I guess you want another first serve now. OK, then, take it.” Sheesh. I tried.