Displaying 1 - 50 of 582

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
103June 26, 2021Aimee

I disagree vehemently. The drop serve should stay. It is easy to learn, is legal and a good way for beginners to learn a serve. It also is a strategic skill for ace serves! IMO It stays!!!!

40June 26, 2021Aimee

Disagree. You already get a second serve by your partner serving again.

11June 20, 2021Alan

Introducing the word "start" into the score call cadence will only result in more confusion I feel. As a new player, the understanding that you call a 1 or a 2 to denote if they are the 1st or 2nd server after each team's score is knowledge they should learn as they first start playing.

8June 20, 2021Alan

I agree with the idea of TW/TF resulting in the removal (or additional in some cases) of points. I would add to this that we remove the verbal warning though. You have 3 strikes and then a game or match forfeit.

16June 20, 2021Alan

Switching sides in every game would create a bigger issue with the overall time in a match. Adding and additional 2 mins in every best 2 of 3 match will add up quickly based on the number of matches there are in the bigger tournaments.

27June 20, 2021Alan

I think we need to look at removing the spin as an advantage in the serve in steps rather than trying to jump to little/no spin only. A good first step might be no aided spin allowed. This would eliminate spinning the ball off the paddle or off another body part. A server could still flick the ball in their hand to generate some spin, but this does not create as much of an advantage.

31June 20, 2021Alan

A referee can and should be able to stop play to issues a TW or TF. If a player hits a ball causing it to pop up for an easy overhead winner and the just throw there paddle towards the net, that would be an instance where a referee could stop play and issue the TW/TF. This could be looked at as the referee stopping play for a distraction also and then issuing the TW/TF. There are circumstances where stopping play and issuing a TW/TF do occur though, so I feel that taking that wording out would bring up more confusion.

32June 20, 2021Alan

If you remove the phrase "after the serve" and leave in "while the ball is live/in-play", you still have the same rule though. Taking this out and calling a fault for flicking a ball off the paddle for a serve would also introduce the side effect of having a fault called while the ball is no live/in-play which was changed in 2021 to simply when faults were called.

40June 20, 2021Alan

I feel implementing this change would have two consequential side effects that I would argue against implementing this rule.

1) A second serve has the potential to extend the time required to complete a game.

2) It introduces the ability to be really aggressive on a first serve which goes against the idea of the rally being where the point should be earned and not the serve. The receiving team/player in pickleball should have the advantage at the start and not the serving team.

52June 21, 2021Alan

I like this change and how it allows the referee a little leeway in getting the game back going. If this is not the desired result, maybe move the warning back to 20 seconds to allow players more time to get back to the court. On hot long days, it tends to take players a little longer to get back on the court.

273May 10, 2022Aleta

Agree with Rick. Most players I know do not want rally scoring.

29June 22, 2021Andrew

Just like to say I agree with this rule change! I can tell you in other sports with more mature rule books this is the case.

26June 22, 2021Andrew

Would have to consider players who are hard of hearing and wear hearing aids for legitimate reason.

513June 23, 2022Anthony

Are large group had tried rally scoring and, with the exception of 2 people with physical limitations, do not how rally scoring changes the game. We are asking that the USAP keep side out scoring as the official recommended scoring methodology with rally scoring as an alternate methodology.

For empirical data sake: In the recent past, portions of our group were watching MLP. The matches were even being discussed with some excitement. After trying rally scoring, our viewership of MLP seems to have stopped, and there are no longer any discussions of the matches when we meet.

Truthfully, I believe that many would abandon the USAP for, either another standards group, or would use it own set of rules as we plan our future tournaments.

With the current Mrs caused by the various pro tours and the IFP, this is something that should be handled very carefully.

283July 14, 2022Anthony

The rule should remain unchanged.

275July 11, 2022Armando

Ridiculous. Does not make sense.

When an opponent hits an overhead to me, I crouch very low, with paddle in front of my face, to play defense.

If I get hit: is that the smasher's fault?
PLEASE!!!

275April 29, 2022Barbara

Love this idea. Absolutely a must.

275April 29, 2022Barbara

This comment is AFTER reading most of the comments so far. People need to act like adults and stop being poor sports. Most sports do not allow head targeting. Point being: yes, sometimes you will accidentally hit someone in the head. Too bad. The point is to help you learn to be more accurate. And, as far as the cheating to 'move their head to get hit' well, that's pretty ignorant but you have a point. Some people don't have sportsmanship and will do anything to win.

273May 10, 2022Bennie

I am against Rally Scoring. I agree with Rick and Aleta's comments. Let's keep pickleball unique.

369July 6, 2022Beth

The rules implemented for 2022 are sufficient regarding spin serves. Players impart spin on the serve with their paddle that makes their serve difficult to return. Spin imparted with a single (unaltered, unassisted) hand isn't any more difficult to return than a paddle-spun ball. Although some players are developing one-handed spin serves (and posting how-to videos on how they execute such) rarely, in my experience is the one-handed spin any more effective than a good paddle-spin. Additionally, as cited by the rules committee when implementing the 2022 changes, there is always some spin when a ball is dropped from the hand; how much is spin is too much? Adding this rule will require a referee to determine a player's intent to spin and whether the spin is more than 'normal' spin. For these reasons, the current rules regarding one-handed spin should not be changed.

521July 6, 2022Beth

Players are, more and more, wearing colors that match the color of the ball. Some players are even bringing multiple shirts (orange, yellow, etc.) to a tournament for this purpose. It is unsportsmanlike conduct. The rulebook should allow referees to require a player to change clothing (particularly shirts and shorts) if the clothing is found to be a distraction -- rather than leaving this up to the TD.

572July 6, 2022Beth

Agree with this suggestion. A short description of officiated play and referee roles/responsibilities would be a good add to the 'overview' section of the rulebook.

275July 6, 2022Beth

This change should not be implemented. Players should not target player's above the shoulders (and should apologize when they do so unintentionally, imo) However, any type of rule to prevent such would be difficult to enforce and easy to abuse. Additionally, I have yet to witness intentional head shots.

286July 6, 2022Beth

Although it is important for players to call the score loudly enough for opponents to hear, this is an unnecessary change. Just as in officiated play, if a player is having difficulty hearing the score call they should ask their opponents to adjust either the volume or how they call the score (e.g. using hand signals rather than just verbal signals).

266July 6, 2022Beth

Unnecessary rule change. Several rules already address NVZ infractions and timing (e.g. 8.E and 9.C).

342July 6, 2022Beth

Rule is fine as written it applies only to hands that are in contact with the paddle at the time the ball is struck and correctly defines hand as the portion below the wrist. The wrist is not part of the hand it is a joint that connects connects the hand to the forearm ... the words "excluding the wrist" opens the door for other interpretations.

219July 6, 2022Beth

The recommended change regarding the definition of "promptly" being redundant is true.

However, the wording of this rule needs further clarification. 1) The word "or" is subject to interpretation..."or before the ball becomes dead" could be several hits later which SHOULD NOT be allowed. 2) If a player hits an overhead that bounces close to the sideline near the NVZ and the receiver runs and "promptly" (in one second) hits the ball into the net, he may not have time to get the word "out" out of his mouth before the ball is dead...the out call in this case SHOULD BE allowed.

389July 6, 2022Beth

Because player's perspective is rarely ever perfect (a view down the outside edge of the line) requiring they clearly see space between the line and the ball keeps them from guessing. The rule should stand, as-is

501July 6, 2022Beth

I disagree. A player's perspective is rarely a perfect view of the outside of the line (as it is for correctly placed line judges). The rule requiring the player clearly see space between the line and the ball is the best way to keep players honest and not guessing whether the bottom of the ball touched the line

561July 6, 2022Beth

No need to change the rule impacting all players when it is just a few that struggle with understanding it. The receivers should be watching their opponents when they're about to hit the ball. They should know whether "out" was a line call or player communication. They should never stop play if they're not sure.

582July 6, 2022Beth

Reasonable request but the new language should clarify that the chosen ball shall be a ball provided by the TD (assuming this rule change was not intended for non tournament play).

404July 6, 2022Beth

Many times the losing team does not stick around to sign the scoresheet.

502July 6, 2022beth

This doesn't happen often enough to warrant a rule change. This would impact a lot of other rules that are based on the serve being the strike of the ball (correct receiver/server, correct position, score, timeout).

386July 6, 2022Beth

Agree that the rule should address how to handle play stoppage when a player is out of position based on a wrong score called.

550July 6, 2022Beth

Agree with this recommendation. Additional reasoning...since the server now can begin their motion while the score is being called, the receiver often has no time to stop play for a wrong score before the ball is struck.

291July 6, 2022Beth

New players do have to learn how to call the score but most 'get it' rather quickly. No need to change the rule and make all of ever-growing number of experienced players change their game. As with any sport, those new to the game need to learn the rules. 0-0-2 is a pickleball "brand"

392July 6, 2022Beth

Agree there is some merit in adding only "or their opponents in non-officiated play" to the rule. The other words are not necessary.

581July 6, 2022Beth

I agree that players should be able to ask "Am I good?"

Today, players often ask "Correct server/correct side?" all in one question but, referees can only respond "No" if only one part of the question is wrong - which just leads to more questioning and confusion and frustration on the part of the players. Referees should be able to respond to both scenarios ... to satisfy what they know the player is asking.

Agree with adding verbiage to 4.B.8 for non-officiated play (allowing players to ask their opponents the same questions).

4.B.9 is fine as written but should include verbiage for non-officiated play.

517July 6, 2022Beth

Agree with this change.

334July 6, 2022Beth

Disagree with this proposed change. Although it may be true that referees give the benefit of the doubt when serves are borderline illegal, allowing a replay shouldn't change their call (if they didn't see a fault, they shouldn't call for a replay.)

The existing service rules should not be eliminated and a fault should be called when they are violated. Replays slow the game down.

524July 6, 2022Beth

I agree with the Marsha's 6/29 comment.

295July 6, 2022Beth

I don't disagree with the intent of this change but, if a player steps outside the imaginary extension of the sidelines and centerlines they are not stepping onto the Court, based on the definition:

3.A.3. Court – The area inside the outer dimensions of the baselines and sidelines.

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.

326July 6, 2022Beth

I agree with Tom, no need to change the term. People are hindered by balls, flying insects, officials, etc. and they will still call them hinders regardless what the rulebook says.

540July 6, 2022Beth

Disagree. If a player wears apparel that is inappropriate or a distraction and has to be asked to change, it should come as no surprise to them. They should have to use their own timeout to change.

526July 6, 2022Beth

I think referees should have the authority to make a player change apparel if they deem the apparel distracting. Some TDs don't like to get involved and more players are wearing shirts, shorts, shoes the color of the ball.

568July 6, 2022Beth

I disagree. I think a rule should be added to allow referees to require players to change apparel that they deem is distracting. Shirts/shorts the color of the ball is distracting.

545July 6, 2022Beth

There are equipment standards and paddles are sent for testing/approval before they begin manufacturing them. USA Pickleball defines the standards for all pickleball equipment -- this does not belong in the rulebook.

438July 6, 2022Beth

Disagree. Pickleball in not every other sport. The NVZ line is IN the defined 7' Non Volley Zone area. The proposal would require re-lining every court and players would be allowed to step on the NVZ line when volleying. Unless the court size is changed the NVZ would then become 2" shorter which would not be a good thing unless you're one of the 7' players that can nearly reach the net from the NVZ line already.

323July 6, 2022Beth

I disagree with this suggested change. After speaking to the on-court referee and the player, the head ref should be able to make a decision that he/she deems is in the best interest of both players and the game given his/her assessment of the situation.

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment