A Rare Fault

Recently while waiting on a court to free up for a USTA League match, I witnessed a rare rules situation. A serve clipped off theRead More The post A Rare Fault appeared first on Fiend At Court.

A Rare Fault

Recently while waiting on a court to free up for a USTA League match, I witnessed a rare rules situation. A serve clipped off the racquet of the server’s partner but still landed in the service box. The deflection was visually and audibly apparent from where I was standing on the side at mid-court. Apparently it was more subtle for the players involved. The ball took an unusual bounce and the receiving team netted the return.

What ensued was significantly less dramatic than I expected. The receiving team questioned whether the ball had clipped the net player’s racquet. In an apparent fit of neuropathy, the net player denied that it had. Maybe she was distracted by the whistling sound that the ball must have made passing in close proximity to her ear. In any case, they played on without further debate or discussion.

This scenario raises one very easy question and another where there is some ambiguity. First, per the ITF Rules of Tennis, the serve was definitely a fault.

19. SERVICE FAULT. The service is a fault if


The ball served touches the server or server’s partner, or anything the server or server’s partner is wearing or carrying.

ITF Rules of Tennis, 19.d

A far more interesting question is who makes the final call in an un-officiated match. The scenario I witnessed isn’t explicitly in the ITF Rules of Tennis or the USTA Friend at Court. However, “The Code” contains broad guidance on who can make a call in general.

Player makes calls on own side of net. A player calls all shots landing on, or aimed at, the player’s side of the net.

“The Code”, USTA Friend at Court 2022, Principle 5

If you only read the first sentence, the responsibility to make the call belongs to the net player and the server rather than the receiving team. The contact in question occurred (or not) on their side of the net.

However, there is a little bit of an ambiguity because the second sentence of the principle says that the player makes all calls aimed at the player’s side of the net. That would seem to put responsibility for the call with the receiving team.

A similar scenario is if the return is drilled at the net player and it tips her racquet before sailing out as she contorts her body trying to avoid it. In that case, it is the net player’s call because that ball was aimed at her side of the net. The principle from “The Code” is explicitly clear in that situation.

The player best able to make a determination of whether a ball struck them (including anything they are wearing or carrying) is arguably that player herself. That would mean going with the first sentence of principle 5 and ignoring the second in this very specific situation.

I was satisfied with that solution until considering the scenario of a ball that might have clipped a scoreboard attached to the net post. Per USTA comment 13.1, the team who delivered that shot loses the point. The authority to make that call is the receiving team because it was aimed at their side of the court.

If I had to commit to an answer, I think the authority to make the call in the scenario I witnessed belongs to the serving team. I am not confident that is the right answer, however.

This is an example where I initially thought the interpretation of tennis law was straight forward. On further review, it is a fun little ambiguity. Overthinking such things is what this site is here for.


  1. Friend at Court: The Handbook of Tennis Rules and Regulations, USTA, 2022

The post A Rare Fault appeared first on Fiend At Court.

What's Your Reaction?

like

dislike

love

funny

angry

sad

wow

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.