| 2219 | May 19, 2025 | Michele | Seems every year someone tries to change the coaching rule to allow between rallies. I think this is a bad idea - likely to disrupt the flow of the game significantly, be very challenging for referees to identify if a "coaching" event occurred while ball was still like or just after dead while referee is focused on NVZ. And this rule could give unfair advantage to one team over another.
|
| 2219 | May 19, 2025 | Sandy | After having refereed a match with a Spanish speaking player, and a group of Spanish speaking friends watching and occasionally commenting at the end of rallies (I did understand Vamos! so I knew that one was allowed) I would be for coaching as outlined in this change.
|
| 2219 | May 21, 2025 | Ewa | I would support this change, perhaps with some moderation or amendment. Having refereed matches involving international teams that speak languages other than English, I have found it difficult to distinguish between illegal coaching and spectators simply cheering for their national team. This creates a disadvantage for English-speaking players - or those who speak the same language as the referee - especially when the referee does not understand any other languages. In such cases, I am able to issue verbal or technical warnings (VW/TW) if I detect illegal coaching in English or the other language I speak. In contrast, players on non-English-speaking teams may gain an unfair advantage if their teammates or coaches provide sideline coaching in a language the referee does not understand. These situations have been evident in international tournaments - for example, in Europe - where players and spectators can be heard speaking English, Hungarian, Italian, Spanish, Polish, French, German, Swedish, amongst others within the same event.
|
| 2219 | May 22, 2025 | Diane | I fully support this change. The reasons given are spot on.
|
| 2219 | May 22, 2025 | Stan | I support this proposal. Coaching is a positive thing. It helps all players. The current rule makes it difficult and awkward for a referee to judge if coaching occurred and which team is being coached, Many times it is just encouraging words from a friend or family member yelled out after a rally has been completed, In this case, both teams hear it and therefore no team has gained an advantage. If the referee has to stop the game to admonish a fan it embarrasses the fan, frustrates the players, interrupts the flow of the game, and weakens the credibility of the referee in the eyes of the players and spectators. Referees have more than enough issues that are subjective and require prudent judgement. Let’s ease up on the negative thoughts regarding coaching and allow the players to benefit from the encouraging words of fans and family.
|
| 2219 | May 26, 2025 | Irene | If this rule were to be adopted, there needs to be clear instruction on how long between rallies coaching would be allowed. "...as long as it does not interrupt the flow of the game" is vague. As referees, we are encouraged to not call the score until all players are ready or "should be ready." If coaching goes on too long, how long it too long? More clarification is needed for this change to work.
|
| 2219 | May 26, 2025 | Irene | If this rule were to be adopted, there needs to be clear instruction on how long between rallies coaching would be allowed. "...as long as it does not interrupt the flow of the game" is vague. As referees, we are encouraged to not call the score until all players are ready or "should be ready." If coaching goes on too long, how long it too long? More clarification is needed for this change to work.
|
| 2219 | May 26, 2025 | Stan | This proposed rule change provides a clear, practical approach to managing coaching during matches, aligning with the realities of modern competitive play, especially in team and international formats. By allowing coaching between rallies—as long as it doesn’t delay the game or interfere with line calls—the rule reduces the burden on referees to interpret language or intent and removes ambiguity around spontaneous coaching from spectators. It maintains the integrity of the rally by prohibiting coaching during play while promoting fairness and consistency in enforcement. This change also enhances the spectator experience and supports player development without compromising the pace or fairness of the game.
|
| 2219 | May 27, 2025 | Barbara | This rule change is very important and it should definitely be supported. The spirit of this change would be to allow a quick word of advice (ie. "paddle up" or "return deep") between rallies. The Referee can easily control that there are no long discussions between rallies, that's where a VW, TW or TF come into play. It could be beneficial for all four players if they hear "paddle up" which is a good reminder to all not just who it was intended for. With the many cultures that are enjoying pickleball, it's very difficult to distinguish a compliment for a good shot or strategic instruction when it's in a language other than English. This proposed change would add enjoyment for both players and spectators and could contain some educational value for all who love and play the sport.
|
| 2219 | June 12, 2025 | Marsha | I fully support this change. Allowing coaching between rallies:
1. Eliminates the advantage players have when communicating in a language not understood by the referee. This will reduce the opportunities for misinterpretation, confrontation, and perceived favoritism.
2. Removes the burden of monitoring and policing subtle coaching attempts, which can be difficult to detect and enforce consistently. The change will streamline match management and help referees focus on the game rather than potential coaching infractions.
3. Creates a more engaging atmosphere for spectators. Fans feel less constrained and more comfortable supporting players, which has become a feature for team events. A livelier atmosphere increases enthusiasm for the sport.
4. Can provide players with more encouragement and lead to more competitive and higher-quality play.
|