Displaying 1 - 3 of 3

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
428June 10, 2022Tom

I disagree with this suggestion. What we have is not perfect, and yes sometime difficult to spot, but it's the best we have and elimination of this requirement would make things worse.

428July 6, 2022Beth

I think the rules that were in place for many years, prior to COVID, should remain in place. The height of the ball being volley-served can be just below the waist level when struck whereas the height of the ball being drop-served is closer to knee height when struck. This difference in height (along with the toss) allows for a much different swing at the ball. Allowing the paddle to be above the wrist makes a tennis-like slice possible.

428July 15, 2022Kevin

There have been a number of changes in the serving rules over the last few years. Can't start the serving motion before the score is called => Changed to can't strike the serve until the score is called, addition of the drop serve, modification of the drop serve, development and elimination of the chainsaw serve etc. These changes were implemented to protect the integrity of the game and to insure fair play. Unfortunately, along the way there have been a number of unintended consequences. Strict interpretation of the "Can't start the serving motion" rule as an example led to a lot of "gotcha" referee decisions. There have also been a number of rule change reversals that cause players to lose faith in the rule making process.

I would recommend that the rules committee develop a methodology to test rule changes prior to implementation. Example: if you have a selection of serving videos train a number of referees to utilize the new language and test the consistency of that performance against the current language. If the "Paddle Above the Wrist" rule is difficult to determine at game speeds is there a different way to control excess top spin that makes it easier to train referees and educate player or that referees will at least be able to enforce more consistently? Our system to date has been to change the rules, hope for a better outcome and then change them again when our new wording creates new problems.

In an ideal world we could do something like baseball is doing where they will test rule changes at the minor league level before implementing in the majors. That particular model won't work in pickleball but an approach that says we don't make significant rule changes without significant testing seems to be an achievable and admirable goal..

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment