Displaying 1 - 5 of 5

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
1837May 15, 2024Don

I have read this proposed change three times and have no idea what the author is trying to accomplish with the rule as worded. It is already a fault if the returning team hits a ball into the net or out of bounds.

1837May 16, 2024Dennis

Under 4.B.9.a. the wrong player hitting the served ball into the net would not automatically result in a replay because the rally has "played out" and concluded when the ball went into the net or out of bounds. Any player must stop play before the rally ends whenever a wrong receiver has returned the serve. Really the only way this strategy would work is if the wrong player receives the serve and immediately calls out "Wrong player!" before the ball hits the net or goes out of bounds.

I don't think this rule is needed apart from 4.B.9.a, but I do think 4.B.9.a. needs to be amended to prevent the scenario where the receiver's partner intentionally intercepts the serve in order to prevent a bad return by the correct receiver.

1837May 16, 2024Michele

Understand authors concern of abuse of the use of replay required for receivers partner returning those short (but legal) serves. However, I recall an earlier rule proposal that would make the wrong receiver returning that short serve a fault - if the other rule is accepted, this one is not needed.

1837May 21, 2024jin

Rule change is not needed. Replay is only called for if the rally is stopped. If the receiving team hits the ball into the net or any action that results in a dead ball as described in the scenarios, the result of the rally stands, and the receiving team is at fault, server wins the point.

1837May 30, 2024Enrique

Referees are charged with calling rule violations taking into account the order in which they occur. For example, when a players steps into the NVZ and hits a hard overhead volley that lands out, the referee calls "foot fault" and the player looses the rally because they stepped into the NVZ; not because their shot landed out. It's no different in the case of an incorrect receiver intentionally hitting a ball. An example that could illustrate the issue better is if the incorrect receiver poaches a serve and hits the return very high. The referee is charged with calling the violation of the incorrect receiver first, and not wait to see if the ball comes down and lands out or does not go over the net. Hence, it is not the case that the referee waits for the rally to play out and then decides which violation(s) apply. And the issue is that the remedy for incorrect receiver is a replay and not that the referee can wait for the ball to land out... This issue needs to be addressed.

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment