Today’s post takes us through an unanticipated detour on our ongoing journey through the USTA rules that was sparked by an incident earlier this year at the Tom Fey Tri-Level National Invitational Championships. I believe that a seemingly inconsequential change in the 2024 USTA League Regulations opens an unintended can of worms.
We originally started down this path from a statement on the Tri-Level informational page that the “USTA Rules and League Regulations and Friend at Court will be enforced during championships.” [sic] When I first shared that excerpt, I observed that it simply cannot be true. There are two separate rulebooks that govern the two predominant forms of USTA competition. Part 3 of the USTA Friend at Court contains USTA Regulations that are specific to tournament play. The separate USTA League Regulations contain alternative rules for USTA League Play. I do not believe the two rulebooks were originally structured with the intention that they would be simultaneously applied.
With apologies to Ghostbusters, the Tri-Level informational page isn’t alone in clumsily “crossing the streams.” An update to the governance section of the 2024 USTA League Regulations claims that “any other USTA regulations” apply to USTA League play unless modified by USTA League Regulations.
The USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS shall apply to the USTA League Program (USTA League). The FRIEND AT COURT – The USTA Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, including Wheelchair Rules of Tennis; or any other USTA regulations; shall apply to all matches played in the USTA League (unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS). In all matches played without officials, the USTA official publication, THE CODE, shall be observed. The USTA Point Penalty System shall be used at all championship levels.
2024 USTA League Regulation 1.0.2 Governance
There are two possible interpretations of what “any other USTA regulations” means within the USTA League rules. One is that the USTA League National Committee, or perhaps even local USTA League administrators, can selectively choose rules from other sources, such as Part 3 of the Friend at Court, to impose on players. The alternate interpretation is that every other rule from that source applies.
I lean toward the latter because it isn’t equitable to players for USTA League administration to selectively enforce regulations from other sources. If that is allowed, then players should equally have the right to expect that provisions in the alternate rulebooks that place responsibilities and governance requirements on event administration will also be enforced. Zzzzzzz… perhaps an example would help.
Part 3 of the Friend at Court places a requirement on tournament organizers to have a tournament committee. The USTA League Regulations explicitly contain a requirement for a Championship Committee. That would be an example of the “unless modified by these USTA LEAGUE REGULATIONS” parenthetical statement in 1.0.2 Governance excerpted above.
1.04B(5) Championships Committees. A Championship Committee, one of whom may be a USTA Certified Referee or Umpire, shall govern each championship. At least one member of the Championship Committee shall be in attendance at all times during play. The Championships Committees, except for the National Championships, shall be appointed by the Sectional and District/Area Associations at their respective championships. The Chair of the USTA League Committee shall appoint the Championship Committees for the National Championships.
2024 USTA League Regulation 1.04B(5) Championships Committees
One key difference between the two respective committee structures is that USTA Tournaments require a certified Referee on the tournament committee. For the USTA League, the language is much softer, allowing that a USTA-certified referee or Umpire may be on the Championships Committee, but clearly not as a requirement.
Another key difference is that Part 3 of the USTA Friend at Court also defines a Tournament Appeals Committee to decide player protests of the Referee’s disqualification or unilateral default of a player. The USTA League Regulations does not have that provision. That would be an example of a rule that is not modified. A player who is defaulted or disqualified from a USTA League Competition has no defined process for appealing that decision.
I didn’t cherry-pick this example as it is the first significant divergence between the USTA tournament Regulations in Part 3 of the USTA Friend at Court and the USTA League Regulations. However, it is somewhat pertinent to what transpired at the Tom Fey Tri-Level National Invitational Championships earlier this year.
I have yet to provide a complete synopsis of the sequence of events that occurred that day, but an initial disqualification of two players was eventually transformed into suspension points. That full accounting is left as a topic for another day.
This is important context to understand as we delve into the potential application of the USTA Regulations in Part 3 of the USTA Friend at Court to USTA League or National Invitational Events. We will confine that initial examination to what that source says specifically about retired matches. That will be the topic for next Wednesday, April 24.
- 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.
