Displaying 51 - 100 of 139

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment
168July 4, 2021Don

Push-off faults are some of the hardest to call because the ref must watch the feet reestablish while listening for the "pop" of the ball. IMO all other NVZ faults are easier to call because once the swing starts (for me it is the movement of the paddle arm) all I need to watch is if the zone is touched at any point until the player regains bodily control. This requirement to make all NVZ faults basically the same as a push-off fault makes the ref's job much, much harder.

156July 4, 2021Don

In the suggested rule change, who exactly is the player calling "out" on the wide serve? If it is the serving team calling "out" before the ball bounces in the opponent's court, that would undoubtedly be a distraction fault against the serving team. If it was the receiving team yelling "out", they are completely within their rights to do so while the ball is in the air.

138July 4, 2021Don

This rule was changed specifically in a global effort to remove many of the "gotcha" faults that occurred before the ball was served. The starting server form of identification (Band) is the key. As long as the "band" player starts serving and receiving (assuming a 0-0 score) the actual players and player's names are irrelevant for fault calling purposes. The scoresheet is NOT the key as this is only an aid for the referee to keep track of who is supposed to be serving and receiving. The game is about the players; not the referee.

123July 4, 2021Don

For clarity, I (Don Stanley) stated that as a referee, I would blame myself for not removing all balls as this is now a safety issue. I would call for a replay in this situation based on referee error.
Also, the wording of the new rule NOW OPENS the door for players to claim they have a right to carry spare balls. For safety and to keep down arguments, all balls should be removed from the playing area specifically to avoid these situations. Nothing good can come from having another ball on the court during a match.

123July 4, 2021Don

With this rule change, we are now allowing players to carry balls on their person and in the event that a ball falls out and the opponents stop play for hinder or safety concerns, we now have to call a fault on them? What if one of the opponents did not see the ball fall out of a pocket and out of habit calls "ball on". Are they now supposed to be faulted for being "habitually safe"? No good can come from allowing players to carry balls on the court.

112July 4, 2021Don

So nothing was mentioned about how the receiving team would "line up". I assume they would still line up according to their score? So after a side out, the serving team has 4 and the receiving team has 5. So the starting server (band) player would serve from the left court to the banded player on the receiving team. I can see the merit on making it easier on the ref for the serving team, but it seems like more thought is going to be needed to ensure the receiving team's correct receiver.

7July 5, 2021Don

1. Why have a rule if it has no teeth? (Disagreement equals replay).
2. Guideline is inconsistent with broken/cracked ball rule. For a broken/cracked ball if all players don't agree, rally stands. With 13D1b, if all players don't agree, then replay. Inconsistent.

93July 5, 2021Don

I have believed for over a year now that only allowing 1 verbal warning per match gives an unfair "help" to the team getting close to crossing the line. If you have one team using profanity and then the ref gives a global VW, all the ref did was help ONE TEAM to not get close to getting a TW/TF. This is unbalanced. The ability to give each team a verbal warning (for whatever reason) is a GREAT game management tool the refs can implement.

86July 5, 2021Don

Why should my opponent have more rights to my court space than I do? Under certain conditions (hitting the ball then crossing, following the ball back over after backspin) it is reasonable to allow a player to cross into my court space. BUT, this does not mean that I need to concede any space on my side of the net. You play on your side and I'll play on mine.

85July 5, 2021Don

Completely disagree with this entire concept. The current plane of the net rules allow for understandable crossing of the plane with certain limitations. A hard question is this: Why should a player be allowed to use the opponent's court space to aid in their shot? Stay on your side until you comply with the current rules of when you can cross. Crossing the plane rules are not hard to enforce especially when you have a straight line visual aid being the net as a guide. If these rules are removed, this will open a pandora's box of arguments concerning distractions.

52July 5, 2021Don

A referee has many tools to use when getting players back playing. The same guidelines for getting them back playing after a time-out are used after every single rally; call the score when players should be ready. This is ALL you need to control the pace and flow of the game. Remove the handcuffs and let the referees control the flow of the game. This overly punitive and embarrassing for the sport rule needs to be corrected. It is an embarrassment to everyone involved and unnecessary.

31July 5, 2021Don

A referee can always call a TW/TF after the rally has completed and this prevents a referee from inserting themselves before the rally has ended. No rush needed.

29July 8, 2021Don

If the Ref waits until the ball is dead before calling a TF, then 2 scenarios can occur:

1. Player A (serving side) commits a TF event and opposing Player B hits the ball into the net. Player B loses the point, and Player A also loses a point so the score remains the same.

2. Player A (serving side) commits a TF event and Player B hits a winning shot. Player A loses the rally and Player A also loses a point for the TF.

Too complex.
When a TF should be called, then play should be halted immediately. If a Ref is slow in calling the TF, then when he calls the TF, it should take precedence over that play, and the Rally should not count.

20June 26, 2021Ed

I am inclined to agree with the previous comment.

48June 26, 2021Ed

This editorial change makes sense and helps everyone remember that the NVZ line is part and parcel of the NVZ.

35June 25, 2021Jameson

Agree. Post is part of the net. With the change in Let rules last year a fixed part of the net should be ok to hit if the ball lands in.

103June 25, 2021Jameson

Beginners do not “need” to learn more than one serve. I know many seniors that seem to prefer drop serves so they should be allowed to continue. People can pick a serve and do what they like.

I learned 002 when I was a beginner and I didn’t find it confusing. I find it less confusing than 00start. Rule book should allow both.

100June 25, 2021Jameson

An opponent calling a line fault could be an opportunity for a redo. Having had to call an opponent on a line fall before, I do feel like I need the power to call an opponent on it. I’m also OK just having it be a redo of the serve. It was a pretty close line fault, and I watched it happen for three service before I called them on it.

The other option could be some kind of warning system, first warning second warning, fault.

The more I think about this rule the more complicated it feels, I can see avenues for gamin the system on both sides

97June 25, 2021Jameson

There should be conditions on which retirement is acceptable versus forfeit. Injury, time, weather, etc.

63June 25, 2021Jameson

I’ve only tried rally point scoring once, in a king of the court type of scenario. Players found it confusing to who is serving and how people switch sides, also adding points to the score of the side that was not serving but won the rally.

I like the idea of rally points scoring, as the OP suggests it makes a more consistent time for games, and adds excitement and speed. I do however think it needs careful simulation and refinement on how serving and scoring works in the rally scenario. One advantage in side out scoring is that everyone gets a chance to serve fairly consistently, and it’s fairly easy to track who’s service it is.

I think clarity in the rules should be around who serves after a side out, which side do they serve from, how do players change sides, do sides get second serves. Best of three games, rotate after each game.

109July 18, 2021Jan

I agree that the rule that the paddle must be below the wrist is way to confusing to implement and will lead to arguments that could not be resolved on court. The game has evolved and less restrictions should be placed on the serve. The below the hip is all we need.

103June 26, 2021Janet

I’m an Ambassador, give weekly lessons.
please consider KEEPING the DROP SERVE.
Most of my beginner students find it easier.
It’s also an immediate confidence builder for new players.
We want people to become ‘addicted’…have fun fast, this drop serve helps!

103June 26, 2021Jeff

I believe the drop serve is a good option to have especially for beginners and juniors who are new to the game, its important to look at the bigger picture not the sport is growing internationally, so there is not much issue with 0-0-2 or 0-0-start it is just how it is explained to the individual.

23June 26, 2021jeff

Its my believe that the no let serve rule was a positive change to the game, it promotes a better flow of the game and it cancels out false net calls, there is a lot of noise about this rule change because people resist change.

20July 6, 2021Jim

I fully support the rule 'changes' as itemized. I am the Ambassador for Port Orange, Florida. I / We have held a 'beginner's skills and drills' training session every week for more than 4 years (as practical). We have worked with more than 250 beginners over that time period. The single skill that causes the most difficulty for beginners - especially those whom have had no or minimal previous experience with hand-eye-coordination sports - is the serve. We have found that, using the 'drop serve' technique, 3 of 4 beginners are able to make 3 of 4 serves after one lesson-session, Additionally, as a 72 year old player who suddenly got a serious case of the 'yips', I have found the 'drop serve' to be a very useful technique to regain confidence and expedite the game.

In summary, by greatly increasing the percentage of serves most players can execute properly, the 'drop serve' technique makes the game more enjoyable for all players who need the alternative approach, and for those whom are playing in games with someone who 'needs' the technique to get their serves in!

Regards,
Jim Pawela

53June 25, 2021joe

The " Wheelchair Rules Committee" (of which I am a member) under the guidance of Jim Loving and Sharon Mackenzie has fostered parity among pickleball players by limiting rules which may lead to exclusion rather than inclusion of physically challenged/adaptive players. Simply stated our mandate is to eventually have all players play by the same rules. That is to limit distinguishing definitions and rules which set players apart. At the moment we are very satisfied with the two bounce RULE and "foot fault" definitions that are in the 2021 rule book. If organizations/government agencies suggest or request specific rules/definition changes applicable to "adaptive" players I request that before these are acted upon by the USAP that they be circulated to the aforementioned committee for consideration and recommendation.

34June 25, 2021joe

In/Out line calls stimulate the most controversy I've experienced in matches. I believe that is true because the present rule book is unclear. Most players play under the "suggested" rule that if an opponent calls a ball out it is out and not just a matter of good sportsmanship to remain silent even if there is disagreement between the calling team members. I believe the USAP rule book should clearly state what is a rule and what is recommended to encourage sportsmanship and harmonious play. Do overs are not generally part of the game and could become intolerable if used to resolve all the disputes that may arise if every action can be disputed. However; few beginners and many long time players do not pay attention to the point of contact when calling balls in or out and instead rely exclusively on visual observation, even from across the court or worse that the ball must have been out because it was unreachable.

27June 11, 2021Jordan

Instead of "no spin" on serve, I think just outlawing creating spin with both hands would be sufficient.. In other words, one hand only for the toss, one hand to hit with the paddle..

I agree that outlawing the crazy amount of spin that can be accumulated with 2 hands is a good thing for the game long term..

186July 8, 2021judy

Rule 186 hit wrong number can’t change it

Drop or regular
Two rules:
1) upward motion
2) contact below waist

Why? You can spin it anyway without the below the wrist rule.

For refs, the above the waist rule is almost impossible to call. Even slow mo demos are not clear.

Regular serves can provide as much spin as the drop. Trust me on that one.

Keep drop and regular. Remove third requirement about the wrist.

77June 25, 2021Ken

These proposed changes make sense. One must weigh potential (and likely very rare) abuse of the proposed medical time out rules versus safety of the players. Player safety shouid take priority. Also, as stated in the reasoning for the rule changes, referees and tournament directors may not be qualified to render on the spot decisions about the validity/severity of a medical issue.

94June 25, 2021Kevin

I concur with the suggested rule change. Giving players the opportunity to ask questions after the score is called is (and will be used as money grows) to disrupt the game. If referred matches the referee looks to both teams to ensure they are ready and at the same time is giving each team/player the opportunity to raise their hand above their head (halting the game) and then asking the score.

86June 25, 2021Kevin

Disagree. No player should be required to yield their side of the net. In fact, if were going to change the rule I would make it a fault to reach over the net in an attempt to play the ball that has backspin and has traveled back over the net without player contact. That's just a great shot.

63June 25, 2021Kevin

No, No, No, No and No.

As a former volleyball player that played before and after the change to rally scoring this dramatically changes the game. Pickleball is a game of momentum. Scoring only when a team serves preserves the ability for the comeback. Rally scoring essentially removes momentum and largely lead changes. With rally scoring (games to 11 or 15) when one team gets up by 3 or 4 points the game is essentially over as it is extremely hard using rally score to come back. If rally score is implemented there will be no more teams that come back from being down 1-9 or 2-8.

If rally score were to ever be implemented the minimum game should be to at least 25 to allow for momentum shifts and it would be even better if it were played to 31. Rally score should never be "win by 1" as that allows a tie game to win on a serve receive.

52June 25, 2021Kevin

Disagree with this proposed rule change as stated. Other rules have been changed to take judgement of the referee out of the game yet this rule brings back that judgement. I realize it was an embarrassing event in a recent tournament when a person served to a paddle laying on the ground but trust me, that was a warning to all players. No player will let this happen again and they will respect the 60 seconds and the 15 second warning.

The proposed new rule will be abused. It won't happen every time but when money is on the line one team will try to take advantage and delay the return to the court. If even by 5 or 10 seconds this is 5 or 10 seconds of rest you have stolen from the team who returned to play within the designated time period. If my team is the one who returns in the allotted time (60 seconds) and the other team does not then that's additional time I must stand in the sun for obeying the rules while they rest (and possibly ice our team's server).

If this rule change gains momentum I would propose 2 alternatives.
1. Keep the rule as is but increase the time out period to 90 seconds and give a 30 second warning, 15 second warning, and 5 second warning.
2. If the rule is changed then make it a mandatory technical warning (technical fault if warning already issued) for any player who does not have a paddle in their hand and ready to play when the timeout expires. This will keep the referees judgement/discretion out of the equation but still keeps the penalty reasonable for not returning at the correct time. If a team does it once then (assuming they have not already received a warning) then this is a slap on the wrist but has teeth for someone who is abuse the system.

40June 25, 2021Kevin

Disagree. 1 serve is all that is needed.

27June 25, 2021Kevin

I don't personally have a problem with the spin/chainsaw/zane/morgan serving. That said, it should be all or nothing. The other comment suggesting "some" spin be allowed brings judgement as to what is too much or how the spin was generated.

25June 25, 2021Kevin

Disagree. Leave court as is.

7June 25, 2021Kevin

Agree

127June 30, 2021Kevin

I agree in principle. However as it relates to the paddle this could be challenging. 10% is a tight tolerance. If your edge guard or over grip is the same color you're basically at that limit. Add this to the problem that not every tournament may use the yellow ball. So buy a pink paddle and a tournament decides to use the pink Franklin and you either don't play or buy a new paddle. You buy an orange paddle and the next tournament decides to use the Orange Dura (another new paddle). I like the limitation on the clothing as it relates to shirts and shorts. Paddles and shoes are expensive so I would remove this restriction unless USAP wants to designate a ball color as the only allowed ball color (e.g. Yellow) in which case players can plan ahead when purchasing paddles and shoes.

40June 30, 2021Kevin

0-0-Start or 0-0-2 makes no big difference to me but I would not suggest the team serving first get 2 serves. It's like grade school when you pick teams. Do you want first pick or next two. This lessens the advantage of the team that serves first. If the first team were to get 2 serves it gives a bigger advantage to them.

168July 12, 2021Kevin

Under the Proposed Rule if my paddle were to touch in the NVZ prior to striking the ball it would not be a fault, assuming my feet are on the ground outside of the kitchen. My paddle touches the kitchen as I start my swing and I reestablish my position outside of the NVZ between the time my paddle lifts off the surface and before I hit the ball.

The intent of the proposed rule change has merit but I don't think the wording is quite right.

146July 12, 2021Kevin

Player officiated rather than Self Officiated

13July 12, 2021Kevin

Research indicates that the ball is only in contact with the paddle for 2-3 milliseconds. Humans are unable to process visual images in that time frame. The problem with the "Paddle above the wrist" rule is that it for many side arm servers it is pretty much impossible to distinguish between a barely legal serve and a barely illegal serve. It simply happens too fast. Even if you do a slow motion video of some of these servers it can be hard to distinguish with certainty.

The tradeoff here is that it is really hard to hit the ball significantly above your waist and keep the the paddle head below your waist. (Exception: Lob serve) If you try to hit the ball above your waist and your paddle head below your wrist you will end up with an awkward "chicken wing" serve.

39June 2, 2021Mark

Non-volley zone is grammatically incorrect. The 'No-volley' zone more accurately describes what a player may not do; no volley's are allowed without penalty. The term no-volley was introduced in the Alternate Rulebook.

20June 25, 2021Mark

I concur with leaving the drop serve as it is now. I am a new pickle ball player and have to play against higher rated players and having several types of serves, from the drop option gives me somewhat of an edge in certain situations. Mixing up the serve, straight across, spin to the left or right keeps the other players "on their toes".

40June 21, 2021Marsha

Disagree. This is pickleball, not tennis. A second serve is not necessary since players can accurately serve the ball the vast majority of the time.

39June 21, 2021Marsha

Agree. “Non-volley zone” is a misnomer.

63June 22, 2021Marsha

The traditional method of scoring is one of the features that makes pickleball unique and perfectly challenging, It may take some players more time to grasp the method than others, but it is does not prevent them from immediately enjoying the game and they eventually learn the system. There is nothing wrong with the traditional scoring method so I don't see a need to change it. However, when time is of the essence, rally scoring can be used as a variation.

7June 22, 2021Marsha

I agree with the wording change.

18June 24, 2021Marsha

I agree with this change. No loss or gain of points occurs when the wrong score is called. If an incorrect score is not noted before the ball is served, the rally should not be interrupted; the score should be corrected after the rally is completed.

 Rule Change ID Submitted From Comment