| Q: At my first referee's course - many, many years ago - one of the first, crucial parts of a marker's duty was emphasised - IT IS A CARDINAL SIN TO KEEP THE PLAYERS WAITING WHILE YOU CALL THE SCORE.
I still notice so many markers waiting until the receiver is ready before calling and going so far as to stop rallies to remind the sever to wait until the score is called.
I was taught that the score should be called immediately a rally finishes and that it is the server's responsibility to ensure that the receiver is ready.
Is this still the case? If it is I suggest it is a point worth emphasising.
Andy Gilks |
| A: Your instruction at your earlier course was absolutely correct – the score should be called immediately after calling the result of the rally ie. "Not up – hand out – 4/3".
The game must be continuous and it is the markers duty to ensure that the game “flows” – it is also very irritating and off putting if the markers timing is out of “sync” with the game.
If the receiver continues to be not ready when the score has been called, you should have no hesitation in warning the player for time wasting, and if it persists move on to heavier penalties if thought necessary.
In practice there are times where it is quite sensible to delay the calling of the score after the result of the rally has been called, and that is where there is a potential delay for, say, a minor injury, or where a player asks for time to change a racket.
Also the marker should show consistency in this “timing” area and not be drawn into upping the pace of the calls when a player tries to “hassle” the marker by racing to prepare to serve before the score is called. I use a three part system that works well
–……not up (slight pause to check score sheet for next call)
– hand out (pause to write score down)
– 4/3…..
And finally …… never never call the score whilst writing down the score – this I’m afraid also happens perhaps too often! Hope this helps and clears up any misunderstanding.
|
| |
| Q: What do I do when a player PERSISTS IN ARGUING with me? |
| A: This is a question that I have put to me often and can be the cause of so much bad feeling – in simple terms we all want the game to continue so start there - “PLAY ON” - those two little words that can often work wonders.
If however this doesn’t work, WARN the player that “if he/she persists in arguing it will be deemed as time wasting and will be penalised accordingly”.
This is what I euphemistically call “warn before the warn” and tend to use when the arguing first starts and is not at too strong a level. If however the arguing gets beyond this you can go straight to “warning , time wasting Jones”.
If the arguing/ time wasting still persists you can either issue another conduct warning or if becoming more serious proceed down the game/match stages.
I hope this helps. By using the correct terminology the players will then realise that you know what you are doing and will think twice before incurring possibly match losing penalties. |
| |
| Q: I seem to miss FOOT FAULTS, any tips? |
| A:
Yes, two, firstly get into a routine of watching FEET then the BALL on the front wall – so many think that it all happens at the same time and get lost in the mechanics of what is actually happening.
Second, and this might sound strange, have the words “FOOT FAULT” ready to call – I say this as once again the “mechanics” of calling those two words are not natural to us as they are formed by the teeth outside the lower lip – try it. It does work without looking “goofy” – honest!
|
| |
| Q: Now that BALL BOUNCING can be considered as TIME WASTING, how many bounces do you feel should be permitted before you warn? |
| A:
Another interesting question, on a subject that few outside our courses are aware of – what we must guard against here is appearing to be “over officious” which is a criticism often made when players learn of a new rule and especially where they have been “ball bouncing” for years.
At the same time, and more importantly, we must apply the rules in a “Fair And Accurate Way” for the benefit of both players. We have all been the victim of the serial ball bouncer, who in the past not only give themselves time to get their breath back, but can also in the process mesmerise the opponent with, say, 10 bounces of the ball after the score has been called – clearly unfair and the rules have been adapted accordingly.
So, as a general guidance, 5 or more bounces is starting to get excessive and a gentle “WARN BEFORE THE WARN” usually works – even bringing it to the person’s attention between early games as a “word in the ear” could also be appropriate.
So that there is no confusion, “timing wise” we are talking about after the score has been called – quite a lot of players ball bounce at the end of the rally moving back to the service box which is generally acceptable, if not used to prolong the calling of the score.
Be prepared for a few strange looks, this part of the TIME WASTING rule is taking some time to get to the players.
Finally, remember, ball bouncing prior to service is deemed to be time wasting it does not constitute serving the hand-out.
|
| |
| Q: When a player shapes (but doesn't have a go) to play, say, a backhand and then changes to play forehand and has NOT turned (or mentally turned i.e. let the ball pass behind them), and then the opponent runs across in front, is it a stroke or a let? Is it relevant if the ball has hit the backwall after a player shapes to play first time? I reckon it is a stroke as per Rule 12..... |
| A: A good question and full of potential traps for the unwary! You are quite correct with your conclusion of a stroke, since the player has not "turned". What you must be careful to observe is whether the player made an attempt to play the ball and then made a second attempt, when of course it would have been a "let".
The backwall does not come into your consideration of the facts as given, but may be relevant factor if you felt that a second attempt occurred if the player attempted to play before it came off the back wall. |
| |